International News
See other International News Articles
Title: You Can't Hack Me
Source:
Hillary Clinton
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 24, 2016
Author: Hillary Clinton
Post Date: 2016-05-24 22:45:50 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 27112
Comments: 153
Nothing follows
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-95) not displayed.
.
.
.
#96. To: Operation 40 (#93)
Is that the same Justin Raimondo who wrote this? To begin with, Trump has taken a number of positions I cannot endorse: But that’s just the beginning of my objections to Trump the candidate. After all, one could conceivably overlook these flaws in the name of changing the general orientation of US foreign policy. And yet, in the case of Trump, even that possibility is foreclosed by his unreliability. While Trump conceives of his “flexibility” as emblematic of his ability to make a “good deal,” the reality is that he flip flops all over the place. One minute he’s totally against going into Syria, and the next minute he’s constructing “safe zones.” His mercurial nature is on display for all to see: once in office, it’s entirely possible he could do anything. I love Europe, too. I shall post some pictures one of these days.
You have a few screws loose in the noggin.
Trump will fit that for me .., Trump will FIX EVERYTHING for EVERYONE..
Are you high? What illegal narcotics are you injecting, today?
Quoting stupid faggots now. You have fallen and you can't get up.
Good idea. Why should we let terrorists recruit on the internet. Who cares what the aids receptacle says.
I'm not for turture. But I sure would torture someone if I knew they did something to my family.
Do you and butt boy want to let Muslims into the country? I want to kick the ones here out also.
You want foreigners to take us over and change us. Lets get real ugly with these wetbacks. Real ugly.
What is a "terrorist?" Someone or a group of citizens that is defined by a fascist government? You mean to say, a fascist government can define "terrorism" when, in fact, they operate outside the limits of the US Constitution?
I want that too. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I am for what Trump said. Trump said he would bring back waterboarding for the terrorists and it would be on firm legal grounding. “I’m in total support of waterboarding. It has to be within the law, but I have to expand the law,” Trump said. “I’ll work on it with the generals.”
You ask some pretty inane questions ... are you really so stupid?
On what basis would the courts claim jurisdiction and stop the deportation required to be deported pursuant to federal law? A deportation hearing is not a trial. It is a purely civil proceeding and the protections that apply to a criminal proceeding are not observed. About all it takes is for the adherence to due process, dotting the i's and crossing the t's. There must still be a fair hearing. There is not much to be proven with an undocumented immigrant. As such immigrant did not pass through immigration authorities, he has no status whatever, akin to the post-war freedman (former slave). The undocumented immigrant can leave the country and return lawfully to obtain status. As with the freedmen, the undocumented immigrants could be made citizens by constitutional amendment. As with the freedmen, the undocumented immigrant is not eligible for naturalization because he is not an alien, lawfully present in the United States. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/468/1032/ U.S. Supreme Court INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984) INS v. Lopez-Mendoza No. 83-491 Argued April 18, 1984 Decided July 5, 1984 468 U.S. 1032 Syllabus Respondent Mexican citizens were ordered deported by an Immigration Judge. Respondent Lopez-Mendoza unsuccessfully objected to being summoned to the deportation hearing following his allegedly unlawful arrest by an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agent, but he did not object to the receipt in evidence of his admission, after the arrest, of illegal entry into this country. Respondent Sandoval-Sanchez, who also admitted his illegal entry after being arrested by an INS agent, unsuccessfully objected to the evidence of his admission offered at the deportation proceeding, contending that it should have been suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful arrest. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the deportation orders. The Court of Appeals reversed respondent Sandoval-Sanchez' deportation order, holding that his detention by INS agents violated the Fourth Amendment, that his admission of illegal entry was the product of this detention, and that the exclusionary rule barred its use in a deportation proceeding. The court vacated respondent Lopez-Mendoza's deportation order and remanded his case to the BIA to determine whether the Fourth Amendment had been violated in the course of his arrest. Held: 1. A deportation proceeding is a purely civil action to determine a person's eligibility to remain in this country. The purpose of deportation is not to punish past transgressions, but rather to put an end to a continuing violation of the immigration laws. Consistent with the civil nature of a deportation proceeding, various protections that apply in the context of a criminal trial do not apply in a deportation hearing. Pp. 468 U. S. 1038-1039. 2. The "body" or identity of a defendant in a criminal or civil proceeding is never itself suppressible as the fruit of an unlawful arrest, even if it is conceded that an unlawful arrest, search, or interrogation occurred. On this basis alone, the Court of Appeals' decision as to respondent Lopez-Mendoza must be reversed, since he objected only to being summoned to his deportation hearing after an allegedly unlawful arrest, and did not object to the evidence offered against him. The mere fact of an illegal arrest has no bearing on a subsequent deportation hearing. Pp. 468 U. S. 1039-1040. Page 468 U. S. 1033 3. The exclusionary rule does not apply in a deportation proceeding; hence, the rule does not apply so as to require that respondent Sandoval-Sanchez' admission of illegal entry after his allegedly unlawful arrest be excluded from evidence at his deportation hearing. Under the balancing test applied in United States v. Janis, 428 U. S. 433, whereby the likely social benefits of excluding unlawfully obtained evidence are weighed against the likely costs, the balance comes out against applying the exclusionary rule in civil deportation proceedings. Several factors significantly reduce the likely deterrent value of the rule in such proceedings. First, regardless of how the arrest of an illegal alien is effected, deportation will still be possible when evidence not derived directly from the arrest is sufficient to support deportation. Second, based on statistics indicating that over 97.7 percent of illegal aliens agree to voluntary deportation without a formal hearing, every INS agent knows that it is unlikely that any particular arrestee will end up challenging the lawfulness of his arrest in a formal deportation hearing. Third, the INS has its own comprehensive scheme for deterring Fourth Amendment violations by its agents. And finally, the deterrent value of the exclusionary rule in deportation proceedings is undermined by the availability of alternative remedies for INS practices that might violate Fourth Amendment rights. As to the social costs of applying the exclusionary rule in deportation proceedings, they would be high. In particular, the application of the rule in cases such as respondent Sandoval-Sanchez' would compel the courts to release from custody persons who would then immediately resume their commission of a crime through their continuing, unlawful presence in this country, and would unduly complicate the INS's deliberately simple deportation hearing system. Pp. 468 U. S. 1040-1050. 705 F.2d 1059, reversed.
Explain your position. Answer my questions.
Are you high? What illegal narcotics are you injecting, today? I am definitely on a high. I have been on a natural high ever since Donald announced that he is running for president. That was when my system began to continually release endorphins and those naturally occurring hormones make me feel so very happy. It is the same feel-good factor I can get from chocolate when my serotonin chemicals are boosted as I look forward to a pleasurable experience. A natural high is the way to go, Bucky. That shit you are dragging down into your lungs can play havoc on your health and may eventually kill you.
Are your decisons, based on your 'high' meaningly effective for the nation? Or are you just jerkin' off to trump's wife?
Explain your position. Answer my questions. I will be more than happy to do that for you, Bucky boy. But I will only do so after I can get full confirmation that you have been in total withdrawal recovery treatment for at last three weeks. Then you should have the mental capacity to see the world as it is and not see the world as you are. When you can see real truth and not truth that you perceive, which is always subjective and always wrong, post your treatment results here on the forum.
I am not on drugs unlike you, pal. You need drugs, right? Why do you make us pay for your government sanctioned drug use?
The use of inappropriate graphically explicit sexual expression is evoked by a small and predictable set of variables. Some perverts are positively reinforced by siblings or parents for its use. Which was the case for you?
You are straining your pseudo-intellectual bullshit posts.
Nope, all I need is to show my wife true love and feel the deep respect she has for me. Perhaps scripture can best explain this combination of love and respect to you. Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:33 that a husband must love his wife and a wife must respect her husband. Both commands are unconditional. I trust you can understand this and that it does not run afoul in conflict with your deism beliefs.
So, now, you are introducing religious favours about your wife into the discussion. Can you saye: distraction?
I am so sorry. I regret that I failed to notice I was exceeding your ability to retain and apply new knowledge. I forgot that your information intake is limited and takes a very long time. I will try to “dumb down” my posts so that you can begin to understand them, or at least parts of them. Let’s test your comprehension with this: Mary had a little lamb, its fleece was white as snow. And everywhere that Mary went, the lamb was sure to go. On a scale of one to ten, with one being the least difficult to understand and ten being the most difficult to understand, how do you rate your comprehension in the test?
I want that too. I don't have a problem with that either. The problem is that Trump can say he's going to do it but he has not elaborated on how he's going to do it. He'll make Mexico pay for it. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. I am very worried about you, tater. You are posting total babbel.
Quoting stupid faggots now. Read much? Raimondo somewhat begrudgingly shows admiration for some of Trump's policies. Check The link that Operation 40 posted. http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2016/03/11/donald-trump-good-bad-ugly/ Trump : “We have 28,000 soldiers on the line, on the border between North and South Korea. We have so many places. Saudi Arabia was making a billion dollars a day, and we were getting virtually nothing to protect them. We are going to be in a different world. We’re going to negotiate real deals now, and we’re going to bring the wealth back to our country. We owe $19 trillion. We’re going to bring wealth back to our country.” This is really quite remarkable. What Trump is saying is something Ron Paul used to say: that we could avoid national bankruptcy if only we would ditch the Empire. Unlike Paul, Trump – who is no libertarian – doesn’t oppose Social Security in principle: far from it, he pledges to leave it untouched. The point, however, is that he is focused on the crisis in this country, and sees our overseas entanglements as an albatross hung around our necks. He topped this with an attack on the military contractors: “They have a fantastic lobby. They take care of all of the senators, the Congressmen. They have great power and they don’t bid out. The military is never properly bid. When we go out to military bids, it’s not properly bid. And the people that really sell us the product are oftentimes the product we don’t want, only because that particular company has political juice, OK?” This really underscores the corruption at the heart of the system. Recalling Eisenhower’s warning about the power of the military-industrial-congressional complex (that was the original formulation, which Eisenhower edited out of his speech), Trump exposed the real situation in this country: a government of completely bought-off politicians. I guess you'd like it better if Trump got no support from "queers". So he says. Bullshit! You obviously have not been paying attention and you are not learning, because you don't want to learn. All you want to do is condemn and find fault. Trump will make “American Great Again” by returning the American people the safety of their laws. He will begin by tripling the number of ICE officers. There are only about 5,000 officers and agents within ICE perform the lion’s share of ICE’s immigration mission. Compare that to the Los Angeles Police Department at approximately 10,000 officers and their area of coverage while 5,000 officers in ICE cover 50 states, Puerto Rico and Guam. The task of attempting to immigration law against 11 million illegal aliens already in the interior of the United States is a tough job and adding 10,000 more ICE officers is a beginning. There are more steps, but I will not take the time to “spoon feed” you here. You do know how to do research … don’t you?
So he says. See - the issue here is trust. I don't trust him. He's creepy and kind of a psycho. Your judgement is altered what with the raging hormones and endorphin-fueled high you get from your man-crush on St. Donald. Seriously -could you possibly be any more gay? I am prety sure, the US Congress must have an epiphany. Since the voters don't give a damn, nothing new is going to happen.
SuperTrump will fly in to save the day. He will spout all kinds of "hot-aire" to give the voters some appeasement. But actions? The nation sinks into the worst possible nation on the planet.
I don't trust him. You trust NO one.
Are you a soothe sayer?
Did you carry your mexican flag to protest trump today, along with the other calikooks?
Speaking of not giving a damn, are you still voting for your dog?
But I give a damn and that is why I urge you to write-in, "Scruffy" on your ballet ticket as our next President of the Unitied States of America. You will feel "clean" about your decision by not voting for one of these popular goddamned fascist, war mongering dawgs.
Overlooking your reticence, I can understand that voting for your dog is probably the consequence of you being so negatively emotional and acting out on that emotion which energizes the ready capitulation of your free will and therefore, makes you a Paultard zombie.
Comments (137 - 153) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest “Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#97. To: A K A Stone (#91)
#98. To: Gatlin (#73)
Faster than a speeding bullet! More powerful than a locomotive! Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! Look, up in the sky! It's a bird! It’s a plane! It's Trump’s plane carrying our “Superman!” Yes, it's our “Superman,” noble visitor from New York City, who crosses America with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men. Our “Superman,” who fights a never-ending battle for the common man to bring truth, justice and restore the American way.
#99. To: buckeroo (#98)
#100. To: Gatlin (#99)
Trump will FIX EVERYTHING for EVERYONE
#101. To: Deckard (#96)
Is that the same Justin Raimondo who wrote this?
#102. To: Deckard (#96)
He wants to increase domestic surveillance in the name of fighting the “war on terrorism.” At once point he suggested we would have to shut down “parts of the internet.”
#103. To: Deckard (#96)
He advocates torture of alleged terrorists and says he would murder their families.
#104. To: Deckard (#96)
While opposing US intervention in Syria – he once asked Bill O’Reilly “Do you want to own Syria?” – he now says he wants to create a “safe zone” in Syria so the refugees don’t have to come here. Call me crazy, but that looks like military intervention to me.
#105. To: Deckard (#96)
He wants to deport 11 million illegal aliens, an operation that – assuming it isn’t stopped by the courts – would be inevitably ugly and provoke massive resistance.
#106. To: A K A Stone (#102)
Why should we let terrorists recruit on the internet.
#107. To: Deckard (#96)
He wants to deport 11 million illegal aliens
#108. To: Deckard (#96)
He advocates torture of alleged terrorists and says he would murder their families.
#109. To: buckeroo, A K A Stone (#106)
What is a "terrorist?"
#110. To: Deckard (#96)
He wants to deport 11 million illegal aliens, an operation that – assuming it isn’t stopped by the courts – would be inevitably ugly and provoke massive resistance.
INS v Lopez-Mendoza, 468 US 1032 (1984)
#111. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#109)
You ask some pretty inane questions ...
#112. To: buckeroo (#100)
Trump will FIX EVERYTHING for EVERYONE
#113. To: Gatlin (#112)
#114. To: buckeroo (#111)
#115. To: Gatlin (#114)
#116. To: buckeroo (#113)
Or are you just jerkin' off to trump's wife?
#117. To: Gatlin (#116)
#118. To: buckeroo (#115)
You need drugs, right?
#119. To: Gatlin (#118)
Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:33 that a husband must love his wife and a wife must respect her husband. Both commands are unconditional.
#120. To: buckeroo (#117)
(Edited)
You are straining your pseudo-intellectual bullshit posts.
#121. To: ConservingFreedom (#107)
He wants to deport 11 million illegal aliens
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#122. To: Deckard (#121)
he has not elaborated on how he's going to do it.
#123. To: Gatlin (#120)
#124. To: A K A Stone, Operation 40 (#101)
Is that the same Justin Raimondo who wrote this?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#125. To: ConservingFreedom (#122)
He'll make Mexico pay for it.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#126. To: Deckard (#121)
The problem is that Trump can say he's going to do it but he has not elaborated on how he's going to do it.
#127. To: Gatlin (#126)
(Edited)
He will begin by tripling the number of ICE officers
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#128. To: Deckard (#127)
#129. To: buckeroo (#128)
Since the voters don't give a damn, nothing new is going to happen.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
#130. To: Deckard (#129)
SuperTrump will fly in to save the day.
#131. To: Deckard (#127)
See - the issue here is trust.
#132. To: buckeroo (#130)
#133. To: buckeroo (#130)
#134. To: buckeroo (#128)
Since the voters don't give a damn ...
#135. To: Gatlin (#134)
#136. To: buckeroo (#135)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]