Current events discussion

[ThxOne Premium Member]

New York was/is using FEMA money to house ILLEGAL immigrants. What New York calls Shelter and Services. Trump is doing the right thing by taking back this money so it can not be used to support those who entered this country illegally.

 

[stocker08 10+ year member]

That government overreach thing that republicans are often complaining about rings hollow when they started cheering on blatant fascism. "Unlawful challenge to the federal government"? Congratulations on electing a dictator, America.

 

[administrator]

Just a lot of tumbleweeds blowing around today in the car audio sections. Only the Mitchell Bot and CarAudio.com Bot posting in there today. How’s diyma going for everyone?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Just a lot of tumbleweeds blowing around today in the car audio sections. Only the Mitchell Bot and CarAudio.com Bot posting in there today. How’s diyma going for everyone?

I am still deciding if I want to go mount my mids and highs to my a-pillars.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nobody is making that claim.

You are. Trump is. His boss is.

Investigating is BEING done.

Then how can fraud be declared. That's a conclusion of an investigation.

Correct.

Let me set this box aside for you because it seems like you are trapped in it. It is highly possible they have the information to state there is fraud. This does not mean they have to turn around and tell you what it is. There may be legal prosecutions to arise from these investigations and nobody need to share evidence ahead of time. Relax Rob... I am sure when it is time for you to know, they will allow you to know.

"Legal prosecutions" for money that was legally spent with an approval through Congress?
The "legal prosecution" should be for Trump effing around with money when he doesn't have the legal authority to do so.

Do you go running your mouth to the public when you find fraud? Is that part of your job? To run around declaring this and that?

It happens in the form of press releases, reports to the sate and to the government, and public publishings of hearings and hearing decisions.

Stole? No. Appropriated for what?

Yes, STOLE. The money was already in the hands of the state, and they went in and pulled it back.
It was FEMA funding approved and paid out.

Better call the cops then.

I know lol. I keep reading how the left is freaking out that Trump could ruin this and that lol. If it is illegal then you all have nothing to worry about right?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You are. Trump is. His boss is.

Show me where then. Show me where anyone is saying receipts 1,000 times means fraud.

Then how can fraud be declared. That's a conclusion of an investigation.

Is it?

"Legal prosecutions" for money that was legally spent with an approval through Congress?
The "legal prosecution" should be for Trump effing around with money when he doesn't have the legal authority to do so.

Would that be illegal? What would make it illegal Rob?
I am asking you because if I give you a hypothetical example you will argue the example ignoring the fact that it is a hypothetical example. So, what would make it illegal?

It happens in the form of press releases, reports to the sate and to the government, and public publishings of hearings and hearing decisions.

So do YOU go running your mouth before you prosecute someone that you found fraud and give all the details?

Yes, STOLE. The money was already in the hands of the state, and they went in and pulled it back.
It was FEMA funding approved and paid out.

Better call the cops Rob... steeling is illegal.

Hey Rob, are ILLEGAL immigrants allowed to be in America?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

It's amazing how many idiots are out there, still listening to this idiot.

 

[administrator]

I am still deciding if I want to go mount my mids and highs to my a-pillars.

I’ve been insulating my attic

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Show me where then. Show me where anyone is saying receipts 1,000 times means fraud.

Comprehension. I said that repeating the word 1,000 times does not mean fraud.

Is it?

Yes, that is how investigations work.

Would that be illegal? What would make it illegal Rob?
I am asking you because if I give you a hypothetical example you will argue the example ignoring the fact that it is a hypothetical example. So, what would make it illegal?

What would make it illegal is that the CONSTITUTION outlines that Congress has the power of the purse, not the president.
What would make it illegal is that The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 clarifies and reinforces that the president does not have the power of the purse.
The POTUS must request changes be approved by Congress. He is not Supreme Leader who just decides he wants a change, and makes it.
"The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is the main legal mechanism for the President to seek to delay or permanently cancel federal funding once it has been enacted by Congress."
"Impoundment is only legal when the President adheres to the procedures and limitations in the ICA."

What is the Impoundment Control Act and What is GAO’s Role?

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is the main legal mechanism for the President to seek to delay or permanently cancel federal funding once it has been enacted by Congress.Today’s WatchBlog post looks at what an impoundment is and GAO’s role under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).

www.gao.gov

So do YOU go running your mouth before you prosecute someone that you found fraud and give all the details?

Did you misunderstand what I posted? Here, read it again:
"It happens in the form of press releases, reports to the sate and to the government, and public publishings of hearings and hearing decisions."
Not every case results in a prosecution.

Better call the cops Rob... steeling is illegal.

Oh? I do it every day when I wake up.

Hey Rob, are ILLEGAL immigrants allowed to be in America?

That depends. Are they incarcerated? Hospitalized? Pending a court hearing? Have a baby who is a citizen?

But yes, undocumented immigrants are allowed to be in the US.
There is no standing federal law that makes it a crime to be in the US without being documented.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Comprehension. I said that repeating the word 1,000 times does not mean fraud.

Nobody has repeated it 1,000 times yet. Well, maybe the left has.

Yes, that is how investigations work.

Is it? Is that what Google said?

What would make it illegal is that the CONSTITUTION outlines that Congress has the power of the purse, not the president.
What would make it illegal is that The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 clarifies and reinforces that the president does not have the power of the purse.
The POTUS must request changes be approved by Congress. He is not Supreme Leader who just decides he wants a change, and makes it.
"The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is the main legal mechanism for the President to seek to delay or permanently cancel federal funding once it has been enacted by Congress."
"Impoundment is only legal when the President adheres to the procedures and limitations in the ICA."

What is the Impoundment Control Act and What is GAO’s Role?

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is the main legal mechanism for the President to seek to delay or permanently cancel federal funding once it has been enacted by Congress.Today’s WatchBlog post looks at what an impoundment is and GAO’s role under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA).

www.gao.gov

This whole bit here just jumped right past the topic for which I was asking what would make it illegal. Maybe you did need the hypothetical example.

Did you misunderstand what I posted?

No, I understand what it means. What I don't understand is why you posted it as a response to my question asking if you go running your mouth when you find fraud.

Here, read it again:
"It happens in the form of press releases, reports to the sate and to the government, and public publishings of hearings and hearing decisions."
Not every case results in a prosecution.

That's right. Because not everyone is guilty of a crime.

There is no standing federal law that makes it a crime to be in the US without being documented.

Oh that's right. I forgot. I have to be direct with you so that you can't play word games.

If a non American person enters the United States ILLEGALLY, are they allowed to be here?
Oh and the law IS

8 U.S. Code § 1325​

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nobody has repeated it 1,000 times yet. Well, maybe the left has.

Is it? Is that what Google said?

When you are being deliberately obtuse, it's even more annoying than when you simply can't comprehend.

This whole bit here just jumped right past the topic for which I was asking what would make it illegal. Maybe you did need the hypothetical example.

So did you want to know what made it illegal, or not?
Did you ask but not want to know?

No, I understand what it means. What I don't understand is why you posted it as a response to my question asking if you go running your mouth when you find fraud.

Reporting my work to the public is not handled by me.

That's right. Because not everyone is guilty of a crime.

Thank you for sharing a piece of knowledge that most everyone should know by grade school?

Oh that's right. I forgot. I have to be direct with you so that you can't play word games.

If a non American person enters the United States ILLEGALLY, are they allowed to be here?
Oh and the law IS

8 U.S. Code § 1325​

Kudos on trying to find something factual to support your argument, but that law regards the illegal entry. It doesn't address your original question: "Hey Rob, are ILLEGAL immigrants allowed to be in America?"

And the answer to that question is still: "There is no standing federal law that makes it a crime to be in the US without being documented."

If you want to change the goalpoasts of your question to talk about the entry as opposed to "allowed to be here", then a person who enters illegally has broken the law against entering illegally. They can be prosecuted for that.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

When you are being deliberately obtuse, it's even more annoying than when you simply can't comprehend.

Obtuse like a crayon.

So did you want to know what made it illegal, or not?
Did you ask but not want to know?

No and I didn't ask anything about what you started rambling on about.

Reporting my work to the public is not handled by me.

Thank you for sharing a piece of knowledge that most everyone should know by grade school?

Kudos on trying to find something factual to support your argument, but that law regards the illegal entry. It doesn't address your original question: "Hey Rob, are ILLEGAL immigrants allowed to be in America?"

Yeah, I changed it so you wouldn't do that dumb shit you just did. Good job.

And the answer to that question is still: "There is no standing federal law that makes it a crime to be in the US without being documented."

Again, edited so you would stop doing this dumb shit.

If you want to change the goalpoasts of your question to talk about the entry as opposed to "allowed to be here", then a person who enters illegally has broken the law against entering illegally. They can be prosecuted for that.

It's not about changing goal post. It's about the left thinking it is ok for illegals to be here just to spite Trump. If you enter the country illegally then you are here illegally and as such are entitled to NO BENEFITS from this government. Including housing in New York.
I know that. Remember that when the left is crying about that $80M being used to house people here illegally.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Obtuse like a crayon.

No and I didn't ask anything about what you started rambling on about.

You very specifically did. It went like this:

Yeah, I changed it so you wouldn't do that dumb shit you just did. Good job.

Again, edited so you would stop doing this dumb shit.

It's not about changing goal post. It's about the left thinking it is ok for illegals to be here just to spite Trump. If you enter the country illegally then you are here illegally and as such are entitled to NO BENEFITS from this government. Including housing in New York.

You're spinning off on multiple tangents, and applying your personal beliefs, opinions, feelings, to a discussion of law.
The law doesn't care what your feelings, opinions, or beliefs are. When they contradict law, the law doesn't change. It is not affected in any way. They are valueless.

And that may be why you get so upset every time a conversation leads down the path of facts versus beliefs.
Unless you can let go of that attitude that your beliefs determine reality, you will invariably be wrong when the two contradict.

The fact is that even people here illegally are entitled to protections under the constitution, and under law.

As for the FEMA funding and NYC, can you reference where it was being used for illegal immigrants?
Can you reference where Congress approved it being recaptured by the Trump admin, after it was approved under the Biden admin?
Can you reference where the COTUS and the ICA of 1974 have been overturned, giving the POTUS the power of the purse?
Can you reference the law that allows you to decide what a city does with funds that FEMA has given to the city?

I know that. Remember that when the left is crying about that $80M being used to house people here illegally.

If a North Carolinan gets to decide what New York does with their money, then I guess a Minnesotan should be able to decide what North Carolina does with their money.
Moving forward, no more money is to be spent on people impacted by hurricanes. If they choose to live in a place where they can be impacted, then that's on them. Take the risk, take the loss.
Use the money to improve education. They're pretty low on the list for education in the US.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

He doesn't even know what he did yesterday.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

That government overreach thing that republicans are often complaining about rings hollow when they started cheering on blatant fascism. "Unlawful challenge to the federal government"? Congratulations on electing a dictator, America.

I do disagree with withholding funds if the Gov doesn't apologize.