You're being told a BIG LIE by the MSM again. It must be Tuesday. Again.

in #politics7 years ago (edited)

The MSM has their talking points agreed and aligned: Trump's decision on DACA is cruel and cowardly.

NBC News. Obama on DACA: Trump’s Decision to End Program ‘Cruel’ and ‘Wrong’

Business Insider. Mark Zuckerberg calls Trump ending DACA 'cruel'.

LA Times. Ending DACA was an act of pure cruelty by Trump.

Even Bernie the socialist weighed in and followed the script already agreed by the talking heads in MSM.

Bernie Sanders‏Verified account @SenSanders 

Trump's decision on DACA is the ugliest and most cruel decision ever made by a president of the U.S. in the modern history of this country. 

Except this story on a COWARDLY and CRUEL decision is a total fabrication. 

MSM has been caught spinning BS again.  

Will any of the public notice? 

Or will most of the public fall for this orchestrated attack by the MSM on the constitution, which is based on a lie?

Let's review the facts on the history of DACA.

By executive fiat, acting more like a dictator than a constitutional scholar, President Obama granted amnesty to many immigrants living illegally in the United States. It was an unconstitutional act.

Obama had previously admitted he had no constitutional authority to end deportations of illegal aliens when he said, “The notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true.”  Then he went about doing it anyway.  

Many of Obama's executive orders were consistent with the approach that a dictator would have followed. Unilateral decision making without regards to the constitution of the US. Just skip Congress and make laws by fiat, like a king or a dictator would do.

But what has Trump really done with DACA?

1) Recinded an Obama executive order that was not constitutional.

2) Given Congress six months to write a bill and pass a law targeted at the Dreamers, following a constitutional process.

3) Indicated that in his heart he supports the general thrust of the current DACA executive order, but he believes that the power of the Executive Branch needs to be curtailed.  President's need to follow the law, and he is holding himself to that standard.

All of today's DACA hysteria would make you think the world is ending.  

But if you take the MSM at face value that absolutely everything was wrong with the Trump DACA decision, the implication is the MSM is advocating all of the following:

1) Executive orders that make new law and by pass the constitution are OK, as long as MSM agrees with content of the executive orders.

2) Congress is not needed to write bills or pass laws.  MSM would prefer to skip that messy political process and just have a dictator of an Obama flavor issue executive orders, as long as the MSM agrees with the content of the executive orders

3) The power of President's and of the Executive Branch does NOT need to be checked.  As long as the President is issuing executive orders that MSM agrees with, they are OK with rule by fiat.

MSM are ugly hypocrites !!   And very dangerous to the future well-being of the republic.

The MSM never called Obama a dictator or accused him of acting like a dictator, and yet facts are that is what many of his Executive Orders were. Including his DACA executive order.

The MSM regularly accuse Trump of trying to govern like a dictator, but in this DACA case Trump is doing exactly the opposite.  Trump is saying that the power of the Executive Branch (President) needs to be curtailed.  Trump is deferring back to Congress to make a bill which can then pass into law.  This is what the constitution requires.

New Rules: no one is allowed to be a pundit for MSM until they have passed a basic civics class, OR been forced to listen for 10 straight hours to the following Sesame Street classic so they understand how laws are made in a country that does not have a king and does not have a dictator.


The Congress is supposed to write bills and pass laws.

The President is prohibited from writing laws.

Any President that tries to write laws is violating the Constitution.

If we allow any President to routinely violate the Constitution, we risk losing the Republic.

If you are in favor of a President routinely violating the Constitution, you are an Enemy of the Republic.

WAKE UP SHEEPLE !!!

This republic is worth saving.


STEEM On !!

DaveB

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/obama-daca-trump-s-decision-end-program-cruel-wrong-n798906

http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-response-trump-ending-daca-2017-9ruel-wrong-n798906

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/09/05/gregg-jarrett-president-trump-restores-constitutional-sanity-to-immigration-laws.html

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-trump-daca-sessions-congress-20170905-story.html

Sort:  

Well written piece again!! You nailed it. Everything is all good as long as the MSM agrees with it. It doesn't matter if it breaks the law or is unconstitutional. They will tell u what you should know. DAH HA HA HA. What a bunch of turds!!!

Full upvote. You nailed it.

Thanks 👍🏻👍🏻 Ya man isn't it nice to have the wool pulled off your eyes and see what's really happening. Keep pumpin it up!! Resteeming!!

The media of course is doing what they always do. Trump gives 1 million dollars to Hurricane Harvey fund, they bitch about it not being 2 million. They bitch about Melania wearing heels, but don't say anything when she gets off the plane in Texas wearing sneakers. They take their cheap shots and run for cover of not telling the whole story. Now, it's DACA. They will not mention that what President Obama did was unconstitutional, they will just bitch about what President Trump is doing to be cruel. They will not tell you they are here illegally, they will call them dreamers. It's lie, lie, lie from the media.

Full upvote.

MSM has become a branch of the Democratic Party.

They are willing to tell lies and regularly do tell lies in aid of their masters in the Democratic Party

Thanks.....love reading your stuff.

MSM sucks!!!

Great post as aways @davebrewer!

Upvoted and resteemed

Trump comes off as shrewd. Congress will have to no actually make immigration law. Only the safest of seats are dead certain of where they stand on immigration. Polling will be intense.

I agree. Very shrewd move by Trump.

But also 100% in line with what the Constitution says is supposed to happen. Congress is supposed to write laws. The President is prohibited from writing laws

Thanks for writing that Dave, I know too many legal immigrants in the US that can't believe the number of illegals that are here too. They're common reaction is "why did I put in all that time and effort to come here legally?"

Trump handing power back to Congress is far from cruel, but it is a bit of pass the hot potato to the House. Fine, make them work for a living.

Trump gave Congress more than a fair chance to handle this. 6 months. If they can't get something worked out, then they should be prepared for pressure at the ballot box

Trump is evil , he has broken families apart , he is destroying the nation, why are we letting him do that? Why do the people not have any rights ?

One of my very close friends were actually deported , it broke my heart , they have been living in the US for so long , is it really fair to do that ?

People are backing up Trump without understanding the ramifications of his actions because these people cannot relate because of how ignorant and privileged they are. This is what the US has become and it's unsurprising that the US seems to be getting worse. Hysteria about terrorism... Hysteria about immigration... Drug and crime hysteria. They need a scapegoat so they blame others, even their own people. That's how the government controls them. With fear.

Fear doesn't create a stronger government I feel like it destroys it

If the government can scare the uneducated masses with terrorism... Crime... And drugs.. then it's quite easy to control the masses. Trump is an example of this.

Damn Trump. Exaggerating the opioid epidemic that is hitting the US and killing tens of thousands.

Wish that Trump would stop exaggerating the impacts of illegal drugs on Americans.

https://steemit.com/steemit/@davebrewer/opioid-crisis-in-america-is-growing-exponentially-here-s-one-way-our-steemit-community-can-take-action

The opioid epidemic is caused by tainted drugs by US backed drug cartels and informants in US inner cities.

Fact of the matter, Portugal, Bolivia and similar countries have decriminalized drugs and it showed a massive drop in drug violence and even a drop in overdoses. The epidemic is completely exaggerated and its been proven that abolitionism causes more problems than less (just like the failure of US alcohol Prohibition).

you're either mistaken or lying.
I support trump.

Many supporters of trump , I am not one of them

Are you socialist?

Were the here illegally? If so then yes it's 1000% fair.

What about the people who are American born citizens doing illegal work ? Don't they deserve punishment ?

That is the entire point of rule of law. No one is above the law. If you are doing something illegally, and you are caught, you are subject to the appropriate punishment.

The alternative to "rule of law", is"rule of man", in which case the laws are only suggestions, and as long as you are friends with someone in a position of power or can afford to bribe someone in position of power to be your friend, you can do what you want.

The Constitution and rule of law are what keep the US from turning into a tyranny.

Sorry about your friend, but if they were deported that means somewhere in the past they broke a law.

If you "knew someone in power" who make an exception for your friend, would it be right to take that exception?

How far do the exceptions go? Who decides who gets the exceptions? Does everyone get the exceptions?

And you see how this slippery slope takes you to anarchy - a place where there are no laws.

When there are no laws, the gang with the biggest guns and the most ammunition will determine what "justice" is for that street corner.

Not the place you want to ever live

who has deported more and bombed more innocent? trump or obama

There are many long term benefits to all American citizens, if we have a President that follows the constitution.

There are many long term dangers to the Republic if we allow a President, ANY PRESIDENT, to make his own laws and circumvent the Constitution.

If we allow ANY PRESIDENT to circumvent the Constitution, we put ourselves on the path to becoming Cuba or Venzeula or Argentina or Russia or .......

I have never heard of DACA before in my life, 800,000 people? Holy shit, I remember actually Sargon of Akkad doing a piece about Mexican immigration and he of course pointed out that all this left wing press make it out that by sending these migrants back to Mexico they were sending them to their deaths or something.

In fact here, you're right, this is a very common trend with them, yet again they're doing everything they can to make Trump look like satan. I have to wonder about the 800,000 people on this program, here in the UK we have had a serious problem of blatant fraud going on with fake 'child refugees' and I kid you not they are all turning out to be people in their 20's or even older, completely grown adults.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/child-refugees-migrants-two-thirds-home-office-dental-teeth-david-davies-a7369186.html

When it comes to migration, for whatever reason the left have proven themselves to be utterly trustworthy in dealing with it responsibly.

If the UK wasn't supporting the dictatorships in the Middle East and backing Salafi terrorists you wouldn't have to worry so much about threats from refugees. UK and America fabricated these problems and now your own citizens get screwed over and decide to become more prejudice and promote discrimination laws against people either because of religion, culture, or national identity because of cowardly actions by your own military.

become more prejudice and promote discrimination laws against people either because of religion, culture, or national identity because of cowardly actions by your own military.

I am not the leader of the armed force in my country or the primeminister, no one is, these people have been acting entirely on their own when most people in the country would rather we get out of there entirely. As I have said, many of the migrants that actually cause problems and commit crimes in this country do not even qualify for asylum status, you're making shit up like a lot of people do who are for open border migration. The vice president of the EU has stated that the majority of these people do not qualify as refugees yet you insist on claiming they're fleeing war. Migration control is a protection to prevent any genuinely dangerous people from coming in and attacking us, to claim that is 'prejudice and discrimination' is extremely disingenuous.

I would like you to actually indicate which laws are discriminatory that have been put in place recently? Are you talking about the burka ban proposals for example? Arguments about the morality of is aside that is actually a legitimate security concern, even ISIS banned women from wearing the burka when they visit their bases to prevent people sneaking in and attacking them.

If you're talking about Trump's 'Muslim ban' that's also bullshit, it was actually a plan that was implemented originally by Obama and he simply enacted it. The countries listed are also from places where it is an active warzone which is actually quite right because it prevents any potential terrorists from getting in without proper checks. Muslims who are living in Europe for example or were born in Europe can travel to and from America freely though I would consider that quite a mistake because as has been reported there are terrorists who are using the free movement of people in the EU to get into any country of their choosing and hide amongst any genuine refugees.

I'm against dictatorships generally and supporting them, but to pretend this is purely down to the evil western imperialists is just fucking naive on your part.

I never stated you were the leader of the armed forces. I am making shit up? How so? What have I stated that is false? I never claimed they are fleeing from war. I didn't 'insist' on any such claim as that. Migration control is nothing but a reaction after decades of Western involvement and funding of Salafi terrorists in the middle east. Again, these are the results of the failure of the UK and the US.

I didn't even specify about Trump, I stated the US and the UK, regardless of political affiliations or a particular leader. These are the actions after the debates, after the bills have passed, the reality. "Freely travel", passports disprove such a ridiculous statement.

These terrorists are Fabrications of the state, they are the result of apathy by the citizens of these countries and the absolute infantile ignorance of grown adults of the actions of their own countries. The failure of citizens to react, creates these atrocities. You support more regulations?

You carry an Anarcho-Capitalist flag shield as your profile, yet you whine like a statist.

It isn't isolated to just Western imperialism, hence why I mentioned salafists. Pay attention and educate yourself on what it means.

I assume the last sentence was tongue in cheek.

Estimates for total illegal immigrants in the US range from approx 10 million up to approx 30 million. 800,000 is just the number of children who were brought illegally by their parents, through no fault of their own doing.

I have sympathy for that, but it doesn't change the fact the whole situation is retarded and people shouldn't be defending that level of mass migration.

Mass migration is fine if it is legal and the country where folks are immigrating to is allowing all the immigrants in with legal process.

That is not how the US ended up with 10 to 30 million illegals. They are called "illegal immigrants" because they came illegally

Not a Trump fan myself. I believe him to be nothing more than a puppet like the rest of the other puppets-in-chief that preceded him. Still a good post and I definitely distrust mainstream media.

As a curiosity, who do you think he is a puppet of? I think there are many valid criticisms of Trump. He is often boorish, he is at times crude, he is egotistical and narcissistic, he seems impulsive and sometimes has limited self control. All concerning points in a President.

But it never occurred to me that being a "puppet" was one of the dangers we face with him.

Who exactly do you think is controlling Trump? Do you think they are doing a good job? LOL

It's just that I am so distrusting of the current political climate it's hard to determine who is real and who is not. I will be honest, I preferred Trump over Hilary for sure. But he seems to be following the same plan that has always been going on in America. Wars. NWO. Israel. It's the same thing all over again.

Like I said this is also due to the fact that politics in this country has been a game for so long that it isn't too far off to believe this way.

I guess time will tell what will happen down the line. I guess it is more of a prove to me that you are working against the powers that be.

We still have a Federal Reserve. He still never launched the investigation into Hilary Clinton and her e-mails. Granted it may be a while IF he is still launching it. But I haven't seen the signs that he is doing that.

Just my two cents. Thanks for the reply!

The reason people claim he is a 'puppet' is because they think he's too stupid to make his own decisions about anything, it's the classic arrogance of people who are so against Trump they'll literally come up with conspiracy theories in order to try and oust him.

Obama knew that future presidents could do this, so he should have had it go through congress in the first place. Dems had control of the congress and senate , they blew it.

Or the Democrats didn't have the votes needed to change the law even when they controlled Congress.

Or they didn't have the courage to all vote for a law change, with enough numbers to make a new law.

In either case, doesn't that give you the suspicion that Americans may not really approve of DACA, with the numbers needed to write DACA into law?

In a democracy, you need to have the votes to change the law.

Yes it is suspicious 😒

i still don't understand what trump want to achieve doing all these non sense :(

He wanted a legal process for changing the immigration laws. The President is not a dictator. The President cannot write laws, the way Obama tried to.

Trump wants the Congress to write new immigration laws.

You know .... the way the constitution describes the legal way for making new laws in the US

I think this is all a hoax. The Illegal Immigration problem was solved back in the 80's.
We gave complete Amnesty to all who were here and we created the I-9 Form in order to prevent Business from hiring persons not allowed to work. Since they can't work, they no longer have any reason to come here. So this is all a hoax. Must be, or else we were lied to in the 80's and all those billions of I-9's filled out by Americans were for nothing.

Tongue in cheek of course.

Part of the long term fix to "illegal immigration" will be a registry for guest workers, so that immigrants can come temporarily, work, and then go home.

And this will have to be coupled with strong sanctions on any business found to be hiring illegals.

I see and hear many saying that when one breaks the law, they should expect and accept their punishment.

So my question is: When did the infants or toddlers that were brought here by their parents break the law? Are they expected to self deport when they realize they are undocumented, or does the offense automatically occur at age eighteen. They did nothing wrong, took no part in the violation.

Their parents may have violated immigration law, but the children are blameless. We do not jail a two year old if their parent stashes shoplifted goods or drugs in their stroller.

At some point, it becomes cruel and unusual punishment to evict these children from the only society they have ever known, for violations that their parents or others committed, and that is explicitly unconstitutional.

You realize that the logical outcome of your argument is ludicrous, right?

You are basically arguing that if a baby gets brought into the US, then it is home free and can never be deported for being an illegal.

If that was true and that was the law, what type of behavior do you thing that that would encourage?

This whole issue shows that root cause of the issue is the initial illegal immigration, by anyone. If the government had of stopped that, then we wouldn't have to deal with all these side effects later

I apologize for the delay in this reply, still getting used to the way Steem works and did not see your comment until yesterday.

Yes, I fully realize exactly what the logical outcome of my statement is, although I would say that the deportation of children and young adults that have committed no offence against anyone is ludicrous.

If a pregnant "illegal" manages to cross the border and has her baby within our imaginary borders, then the child is a Constitutional citizen, with all of the proper documentation. What kind of behaviour does that encourage? My stance is that it does not matter to me whether the child was born before or after their parents "illegal" activity. You seem to place way to much import on that distinction.

The logical conclusion to your argument would be to deport all people that entered the borders without express permission and their descendants as well. What starting date should we set for that? Do we just single out those from Mexico and South America that came in the last couple of decades, or do we deport everyone but the descendants of the native Americans and Mexicans that survived initial contact with Europeans? Or those that settled areas conquered by the military after broken treaties? That would include almost all US citizens. Ludicrous? Illegal is illegal.

Since the beginning of mankind there have been borders, first natural, then man made and imaginary. None of these borders have ever been able to stop people from migrating to where they wanted to go. Not ice age ice packs, nor oceans, nor walls. I do not understand how you could possibly believe that things could, or should, be any different now.

People have a natural Right to travel and live where they want, always have and always will. No artificial construct will be able to stop this any more than did the oceans, or deserts or any other barrier our species has encountered.

Our government is supposed to be OF, FOR, and BY the People, and cannot exercise any Right not possessed by People. I have no Right to limit any People from travelling to or from any location, you do not have that Right, so how can you claim that Right for the government, unless of course, you are claiming that immigrants are not People, which is an entirely different issue, and not the case, I would hope.

You seem to put a lot of credence in the law, which is just another artificial barrier restricting certain people. There are many laws, and some have said that the majority (if not all) of the People in the US commit multiple felonies regularly, without even knowing they are in violation. Are you willing to boast that you have never knowingly or even unknowingly violated any one of the tens of thousands of laws that US citizens, and State citizens are subject to? If you are, then I would have to ask, since there is no way for you to know every law, how can you be so sure, and then state that, if true, you are the ONLY person I have ever encountered that has never crossed any legal line.

Finally, what effects are you talking about, exactly? The vast majority of immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, never get arrested for any crime, nor do they call the police when they are the victims of crime. Their children attend our schools and watch our TV programming and are as completely indoctrinated into our strange materialistic, consumer driven society as any child born here. They take jobs with wages and working conditions that no citizen would ever accept, get no social security if they get hurt, get no welfare or even food stamp benefits (In most States), keep the cost of food and a myriad of other products low enough to allow purchase for even the poorest US citizens to afford. Their children are bilingual as a necessity, speaking at least twice as many languages as the average US citizen.

By my research, experience and personal tally, the provide much more than they take, which is exceptional in this Country.

This is such a non issue, but as long as the powers that should not be keep some of the people focused on this, which is, at it's core another race issue, others focused on racism against blacks, still others focused on who stands for what song, others concentrating on the Kardashians, sports, crime, etc etc, then they will never be held to account. We will continue to spend 100% of our tax money to pay for interest on money borrowed that the government should have printed for free, spend billions of dollars on our military to destroy lives around the world, billions more to allow the government and corporations to know every keystroke we press, video of every step that we take, recording every word that we say, and control us to a person. The law is the law, but there are far more consequential violations that we should be focusing on other than which side of an imaginary line someone was born on.

This whole mess is just one more demonstration of the chaos caused by illegal immigration.
The media act like these people are being sent to Gulags in Siberia. Is Mexico really that horrible and if it is, shouldn't we be talking about that.

No. That is nation building. We don't need to try to figure out what the issues are in Mexico and offer to "fix them". That is Mexicans issue. US should butt the hell out of Mexican issues, and Canadian issues, and XXX issues where XXX is any country other than the US.

The US should focus on two things:
a) enforce the laws that are on the books
b) if people don't like the laws on the books, then lobby Congress and get the right people in Congress to write new laws

You mistook my meaning. I meant we need to shift the narrative from, "why is America so mean" to "why does Mexico suck so much". I didn't mean talk about it, then go fix it for them. Just to opposite, I want to know why it is OUR problem in the first place.

OK, understood your point now, and I agree. It is not our PROBLEM that Mexico is apparently so broke that many want to immigrate to the US.

It is in fact a good thing that the rule of law and Constitution of the US, have made the US the location that the most people in the world want to immigrate to.

We should be using that to further advantage.

We should be choosing who can come in and immigrate on the basis of who is likely to make the biggest contribution.

Develop a score card on who is likely to contribute most to the long term benefit of the US, and let those people in first, move them to the front of the line.

A lot of these people will be the Dreamer students that "have made a great life for themselves" in the US.

We should throw the door open to these foreigners, if they are college grads and can contribute.

And for all Dreamers that are thugs and hoodlums and nogoods and ruffians and have had multiple scrapes with the law before getting to 25; out the door on Uncle Sam's boot. You are NOT welcome, go back to where you came from and create hell on earth there, we don't need or want you in the US.

One of the great benefits of being the single destination in the world that the most immigrants want to come to - we can choose who we want to let in - we should start being choosy.

The Executive Order by Obama was approved and did not face federal court as being "unconstitutional".

As for Trump's actions. His action is a direct attack on immigrants. The problem is really him deporting people that literally have grown up here in the USA. Imagine you being raised here in the USA and came here when you were just an infant and going back to a country where you probably don't even speak the language of correctly as an adult. That is completely immoral. And as a libertarian getting deported is completely immoral, period.

Trump is getting the rightful opposition that he deserves for pushing this back to Congress to push his opposition to immigration. It has been clear, he is not pro immigration. He's doing what he can to limit it, even legal immigration.

Just because DACA didn't face a court challenge doesn't mean it was "approved". The Obama administration implemented this policy unilaterally. The DA in DACA stands for Deferred Action, it was intended as a temporary solution to an immigration problem that was intended to be resolved via "comprehensive immigration reform". (how many times have you heard that phrase?) Anyway Congress never dealt with the issue so here we are.

The only thing done today was to eliminate any additional DACA applications from being processed and attempt to force Congress to deal with it in a lawful manner. I would guess most of the opposition Trump is receiving is due to the fact that Congress would rather do what they do best, kick the can down the road. Making law that's fair and constitutional regarding immigration is long overdue.

DACA could have been challenged federally as being unconstitutional. And as such since it wasn't the claim by the OP @davebrewer is false. He claimed that DACA was unconstitutional. So clearly it wasn't unconstitutional if they didn't proceed legally.

"Fair and constitutional" fair and constitutional to whom?

The current immigration status already prefers US citizens above immigrants. (Taxes and others benefits are not included as they are separate from the actual act of
immigrating). To come to the US it's quite difficult and yet to leave, Americans just have to pay 100$ and get their passport easily. One a few months some get approved in a few weeks.

If we want something "constitutional" then let Congress remove barriers to open travel between countries. That is equally as constitutional as more regulations on travel.

What happened to freedom in America? Ideals of freedom are really skewed by the minds of Americans.

No esecholo. Just because it wasn't challenged in court doesnt mean it isn't constitutional.

If you shoot someone you committed murder, no matter whether you go to court or not.

If the President is unilaterally writing laws, then that is unconstitutional, no matter whether it is taken to court or not.

If DACA is such a great law (as written by Obama), why not trust in Congress to write the same law and pass the same law.

If Congress writes and passes a new version of DACA, that is fine. That is what Congress is supposed to do per the Constitution.

In the USA you are innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law.

If you shoot someone you can be charged with murder or you protected yourself in self defense. Murder suggests the unjust death of someone else (using law as a basis).

Sorry, but Executive orders and deferred actions are legal unless officially challenged by the court and deemed illegal.

Political science 101

Your opinion of what is legal or not doesn't change the fact of what the government deems is legal or not. Your opinion is 100% irrelevant to reality.

the Constitution says what is legal.. not if it gets to court or not. Only citizens are given the protections of the Bill of Rights, the Bill of Rights limits what our govt. is allowed to do. The protections (i.e.) innocent until proven guilty, protects citizens not the 3 branches of our government. Political Science 101? please tell me you didn't pass the class with your level of understanding. If the govt. breaks their agreement with the citizens.. they are automatically illegal... the people of the USA have the Bill of Rights - the govt. does not. Please review PS 101

The Constitution suggests what is legal, remember federal court cases of what the Constitution means determines it's legal meaning.

The Constitution is not the end all be all and if it was then I would be free to yell that I have a bomb in an airport terminal and not be charged with disturbing the peace... Look at the regulations for gun rights... The law doesn't end at the Constitution. The Constitution is nothing but a suggestion, it means little to those who are shifting it's meanings.

So yes... The court does determine it. Not the Constitution.

"Only citizens"... Wrong.. any "person" have rights under the Constitution (including illegal immigrants, you can look it up as it seems you do not understand political science in America).

Don't down talk to me when you actually believe the interpretation of the Constitution is not determined by the court. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Our freedom of speech is regulated, our right to privacy and freedom from unjust search, seizure and freedom from cruel punishment is regulated... And most of all the right to bare arms is regulated.

Don't be an uneducated hillbilly with that simple minded reasoning of American political science.

If you are in the US illegally, you are subject to deportation by the government, subject to the condition that you have constitutional due process to prove that you are in fact in the US legally.

If you are here illegally, you will not be able to prove you are here legally, and you are subject to deportation.

That is the law.

You may not like the law, but that is the law.

Until Obama decided to take it upon himself to rewrite the law and make special exceptions for Dreamers.

Because he chose not to do this through Congress, the Executive Order was always subject to being reversed by the next President, because what Obama did was not passed into law via Congress.

That is how the Constitution works.

In the US illegal immigrants are protected by the constitution and are then sent to court to determine their sentence (hence why sanctuary cities exist, which is legal). Illegals have rights, there is no debate on the subject.

Dreamers was a modern move with DACA but illegal immigrants had rights within the Constitution even before Obama was born.

I didn't take a stand on whether it was constitutional or not, I did try to make the case that DACA is not law. It is a policy implemented by a former administration via executive order. I suspect it would have been challenged if not intended as a temporary solution.

Fair is relative, it's going to be interpreted differently depending on which side of the argument you're on. Constitutionality if questioned can be resolved in the courts.

Seems like the rest of your post is an attempt to compare international travel and immigration. Not the same thing.

I understand your point of EO's.

International travel AND immigration are associated with one another.

Getting deported is immoral? Who writes your material? Fact: if you are here illegally you're breaking the law. It doesn't matter how long you've been here... if you break the law you get punished. Period.
As far as Trump not wanting immigrants here... I stand up and applaud... loudly... it's about damn time a president actually stood up for the American people... #MAGA

If you earn Steem and do not file taxes for the money you earned (and further trade that money in other exchanges) then you are breaking the law. If you speed in a vehicle going over 1 mph or 1 kph above the speed limit, you are breaking the law. If you Jaywalk. You are breaking the law.

There is a reason why, in the USA, there is jury nullification. Also in US history there wasn't strong controls on US border and migration laws federally until the opposition to the Chinese around 99 years after the US was established.

Damn time a president stood up for the American people? Bush and Obama bombed and slaughters hundreds of thousands of people for America. Raegan, and FDR did the same... Etc. Your presidents have murdered, cheated, had people enslaved and economically oppressed just to protect your American people from 'terrorism', famine, violence, and from competition..

"#MAGA" is complete bullshit to foolish tools that believe your presidents didn't put you people first. Being against migration doesn't help America. Quite the opposite (immigration and tourism is dramatically down), inflation is still relatively the same while wages haven't bounced back significantly, and Trump still isn't paying off the debt.

Trump supporters are being played. The market is going to bounce back and yet be ultimately weakened by more protectionism.

If I get a speeding ticket I broke the law. I accept my consequences and pay my fine. Even if it's a law I don't personally agree with (seatbelts)... the law is the law. Without it there would be no order.
As far as our presidents bombing other people to protect "American interests" that's bull shit... they did that because they like to interfere in shit that ain't our business.. and for profit...y'all got right to be mad about that... but if you come to our country or we go to yours the law must still be obeyed

Order? So we must be ordered now?

Please, if it would be the crown. Can I smoke a blunt in my room without fear of imprisonment or the very possible fear of execution by the police.

There is a fine line where we must determine what is moral and what is not. You conclude that people should be deported because it is the law and thus is moral because it's law. Or do you have another justification for deportation to be moral?

So what do you say about civil rights movements? Civil disobedience? Etc. I suppose the creation of this country (USA). I guess they all should have just followed the law, according to your position. Instead of avoiding taxes, the founders of this country should have not started a violent uprising and just wait it out. Martin Luther King Jr. Shouldn't have promoted nonviolent civil disobedience and just told everyone to wait it out as well. You see your position is just as dangerous and weak as anyone else in history who just wanted to wait things out to see where they would go. It's cowardly.

Now instead of waiting things out, you want people to obey your bullshit laws because you particular like a certain set of laws that you think is moral.
Law does not equal morality and learning from the founders of this country, from civil rights movements and the creation of Bitcoin and Steem these were all movements against their respective governments not in support of it.

There are tons of laws I think are bullshit and shouldn't be there but they are. And should be enforced. Some of our laws are immoral. We are not perfect. Do we need a revolution? Probably. But if you choose to live somewhere you should abide by their laws... we (USA) didn't like your laws. Rather than try to overthrow your country we left and made our own.

Thanks Dave. Congress makes laws, not the President.

And if you aren't following the law, you need to accept the punishment

They didn't "leave"... They murdered people and attacked the innocent to form their "nation". Quit ignoring history. America was a colony of the English empire. They were not sovereign. They broke the laws and the "American founders" were enemies of the state... They were terrorists.

This post received a 1.5% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @davebrewer! For more information, click here!

Yes there is difference in the policies of different politicians @davebrewer you wrote very well.

It is nice to read that few of the people have tried to make call and said that end the cruel @davebrewer nice post

Nothing we havent been seeing the past 2 years eh?

The MSM is the greatest enemy of the American people!