Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
New and experienced climbers over 50 #36
|
Also if they need money wouldn’t it be a better strategy to go after the people that have it? Ahh but the poor have always been with us. |
philip bone wrote: Yes, that is what it means. It means that the government needs to present a person in custody before a court. It is foundational going back to the Magna Carta. Really basic 5th grade social studies stuff, and I am floored that a former governor and a current DHS secretary is not familiar with it. |
Eric Engberg wrote: I tried to jump on Son of easy O in 2019 but there was a line for it so I did City Lights instead. I only make it up there every couple of years and the classics tend to be pretty busy. |
Frank Stein wrote: Competence is not a criteria in this administration's political appointments. Loyalty to the king is what matters. The emperor's new clothes.... |
|
She was a fucking governor…the top executive of a State. I assume she made it through middle school? This is not complicated or uncommon stuff. I used to teach 6th through 8th grades, and I’m pretty confident that most of my students knew what habeas is. |
Bb Cc wrote: I’m not sure that it was disregard in this instance. She was completely ignorant of what it was, claiming that it is a “law” allowing the president to deport people (paraphrase). |
|
Frank, thank you. Well yeah there’s that group. |
|
Just to follow up on what Frank wrote. During the hearing, while correcting Noem, Sen. Hassen described the right of habeas corpus as "foundational" for our country. This is underlined by the fact that, while most of what we (well, most of us) consider to be our fundamental rights are not included in the original 'body' of the Constitution ( they were added as amendments--The Bill of Rights, by the first Congress), the "Privilege of the writ of habeas corpus" is specifically included in the main body of the Constitution as part of Article I, Section 9. It is beyond terrifying, though not at all surprising, that someone in her position, let alone testifying before a Congressional committee, where the topic was very likely to be addressed, is so clearly both fundamentally ignorant and so unprepared for her testimony. |
Frank Stein wrote: I'm not at all surprised. They're PROUD of how ignorant they are. |
Brad Young wrote: The NY times poll on presidential approval ratings was telling on ignorance go figure, the folks not paying attention to any news at all really love the commander in chief ! Habeas what ? |
|
'When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun.' |
M M wrote: I am all for Habeus what. Do you actually think that the 3 million illegal aliens that were deported by the Obama administration got due process? Just axing. |
Ward Smith wrote: I bet they got something more than a one way ticket to El Salvador |
Ward Smith wrote: This would be a good topic for someone to look into, do some research. After the "stolen" election, I went to the secretary of state websites of the 7 (?8) states that some people had claimed ran rigged elections. Nevada had an info. sheet titled Fact - Myth, e,g,. "300,000 dead people voted for Biden! Fact - There were no ballots cast by deceased people." The other states, PA, and so on, essentially the same. Didn't take very long, wasn't difficult, and it was actually productive. |
|
Nobody has actually answered my question. I find myself in the position of supposedly “defending” Trump, which I am not. What I am saying is that you guys are slagging Trump, as you should, but turning a blind eye to your democratic heroes, who did essentially the same thing as Trump If not, show me the due process that Obama’s 3 million deportees received. I won’t hold my breath. |
|
Right there with you, Ward. Being in favor of something (or turning a blind eye) when one side does something and then being against it when the other side does something similar just doesn’t work. Another example: Tesla’s and electric cars were the darlings of the Left until Musk started hanging out with Trump… Now the left is setting them on fire. WTF. |
apogee wrote: Yes, we have entered bizarro world. Maybe I am naive, but why can’t we evaluate everything on its merits, rather than what party the idea belongs to? I am in an unusual position in that I think that both parties suck big time, so I am not bound to one “side” or the other. Frankly they both suck, and it seems to me that we are arguing about which side sucks less than the other. |
Ward Smith wrote: Sorry buddy. It's on you to prove that due process rights were denied EVER by any other president in the case of immigration issues which would be unconstitutional. Other presidents took their oath to the constitution seriously. They most certainly did not do the same thing with the probable exception of Al Qaeda detainees or other legitimate terrorists (that still eventually got their day in court to challenge their detention) due to the state of war. It's on you to prove something you want to claim as fact. I can just as easily demand that you prove that pink elephants can't fly or that monkeys don't fly out of Rump's generous keister. BTW, the people slagging Rump are the Supreme Court justices that are demanding he follow the constitution and provide due process of law to all persons in the USA. Get it? |
 Road trip from Fairbanks to Funny River. Spent a couple nights camping and riding in Portage Valley. Interestingly, spring is further along up north in Fairbanks than it is down here in south central.     |
apogee wrote: Oh nonsense. Liberals still love electric cars and the overall market for EV's is up. It's true Tesla sales are down. So what? If the CEO of a company pushes for policies that hurt his customers they have the right to go elsewhere. And now they can go elsewhere. Tesla used to be the only real player in the market but they have competition now. |
