US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[FILTH Tourist]

So why can't illegal aliens make use of a public defender? From the description in the video, it sounds like he's setting up some special fund for regular immigration attorneys to get paid from. My question is, will this siphon off more or less tax dollars than simply hiring more public defenders?

Do you really trust a public defender with your future? Our undocumented pets deserve more than some measly PD.

The serious answer is that you only get a PD if you are charged with a crime (and illegals are entitled to one if they get charged with a non-immigration crime like robbery). They want immigration lawyers specifically to help get as many of them some sort of visa before Trump comes into office and to help defend them in immigration court because they are not entitled to PDs there.

 

[YarrBlueballs]

So why can't illegal aliens make use of a public defender? From the description in the video, it sounds like he's setting up some special fund for regular immigration attorneys to get paid from. My question is, will this siphon off more or less tax dollars than simply hiring more public defenders?

One of the big things when it comes to the immigration system, on any side of it, is just how fucking overwhelmed it is. It's been overwhelmed for probably a solid two decades now, but it's only been getting worse, especially with the use/abuse of asylum adding even more complexity to the system. More people doing it will, ultimately, help the issue if not the economics, though of course the latter depends on local support moreso than federal. Federal $$$ is barely anything when it comes to immigration, the primary issue is always state and local infrastructure and their $$$, which, mysteriously, nobody really wants to study.

 

[Spasticus Autisticus]

Just because someone is accused of being here in the country illegally doesn't mean they're not entitled to legal due process, or legal representation. Even when you're too poor to afford an attorney, you still have that right to representation. That's why public defenders are a thing, and there's bit in Miranda rights about a right to an attorney.

So why can't illegal aliens make use of a public defender? From the description in the video, it sounds like he's setting up some special fund for regular immigration attorneys to get paid from. My question is, will this siphon off more or less tax dollars than simply hiring more public defenders?

I'm sure a lawyer will have some Talmudic reasoning to counter this, but here's my argument: when I attempt to cross a border legally, there is no such thing as due process or Constitutional rights. My belongings and body can be searched without a warrant. If I'm crossing into a country not my own, I can be denied for any reason whatsoever, and I have no recourse beyond possibly appealing to some ombudsman. Jumping the border illegally should not entitle you to due process if those who cross legally don't have it.

Edit: I agree that if an illegal immigrant is being charged with a crime beyond violating immigration law, then due process and right to representation should apply, but someone who is simply getting deported shouldn't be entitled to a lawyer at the taxpayer's expense.

 

[AnotherPleb]

Federal $$$ is barely anything when it comes to immigration, the primary issue is always state and local infrastructure and their $$$, which, mysteriously, nobody really wants to study.

There might be some really fucking awkward questions where all the money in the countless infrastructure bills that got passed really went.

 

[Kankichi Ryotsu]

Gonna be a long four years for some

View attachment 6688731

Man, the projection here is insane. So calling Trump the president is cult behavior when he's literally the president? Lmao, some people's TDS is terminal, they can't be cured.

 

[Gehenna]

I do not think they are coming for me over Kamala. I am just one of thousands they offered money to but I was not shocked that the campaign blew through that money.

I can't speak for you but one of the numbers I heard was ~20 grand for certain online personalities. And they paid off I think 2-300 of them.


Addition: @Betonhaus Oh you think thats lunacy. They paid the celebrities' to endorse them -off the books- and didn't declare it to the FEC. Massive chunks of their spenditure have not been filed. In clear and blatant violations of federal law. To the point the FEC, despite usually being fairly soft on Democrat's, is actually investigating it.

 

[Seedling]

To the point the FEC, despite usually being fairly soft on Democrat's, is actually investigating it.

I imagine the punishment (if any) will be a slap on the wrist.
Speaking off has any campaign been fined by this in the past?

 

[marvlouslie]

The responses to this post on X have been GOLD.

Everyone agrees that she's completely wasted in this video.

"Don't ever let anyone take your power away from you. You have the same amount of power as you did before November 5th." Bitch, no you don't. You literally had your power taken away from you.

It's not that she had power "taken" from her. People literally just voted against her. She's whining because people rejected her.

"Don't ever let anyone take your power away from you."

Is this an insurrection??

This could be interpreted as "incitement". She literally can't fucking help herself.

 

[Caddo Cobgang]

View attachment 6691940

Is this the closest thing we're going to get to a Kamala YouTube apology?

leftists are fucking insufferable.

 

[GAY Ted Wheeler]

I can't speak for you but one of the numbers I heard was ~20 grand for certain online personalities. And they paid off I think 2-300 of them.


Addition: @Betonhaus Oh you think thats lunacy. They paid the celebrities' to endorse them -off the books- and didn't declare it to the FEC. Massive chunks of their spenditure have not been filed. In clear and blatant violations of federal law. To the point the FEC, despite usually being fairly soft on Democrat's, is actually investigating it.

They were offering $10K to absolute nobodies that had at last 500K bot subscribers. When the forensic accounting autopsy is done it’s going to be amazing seeing how many z-list grifters got $5-20K to do nothing but lose votes.

The off the books payments should also be entertaining to watch play out. Imagine being one of the bums that game money to the DNC to pay smooth brain Beyonce to show up and do nothing or have stomach stapling Oprah show up and bloviate about it being the end times.

 

[Coo Coo Bird]

He's completely right though, lol.

There were so many pro-abortion ads this election cycle to drum up more of the "outrage vote," and literally all of them I saw involved women who were frumpy, dumpy, fat, and at least perimenopausal. Once I noticed this pattern, every pro-abortion ad made me laugh.

I remember Corissa and Julianna obsessing over abortion even though they're lesbians who are too morbidly obese to get pregnant, and Julianna insists she's not a woman anymore:

But abortion campaigning is really about getting women to fear pregnancy, so you have to start them early with abortion picture books:

J posted on IG a link to a book on abortion for 8 to 10 year olds.

The person who wrote it has some interesting ideas on how early children should know to get an abortion...with info on drugs avaiable, etc. She wants children to join her crew and get emails from her.

---

similar thing they did to nixon imo. People remember him based on futurerama's portrayal of him rather than the intelligent but controversial man he really was. (looking back imo watergate is nothing compared to what the presidents of my lifetime sans trump have done wrong)

Watergate was a game-changer for journalism. Woodward and Bernstein got books and movie deals, and the media got to pat itself on the back for bringing down a president:

The official version of Watergate tells us that a few vigilant journalists, with assistance from public-spirited judges, the FBI, special prosecutors, and members of Congress, brought down a corrupt president, thereby preserving the rule of law in Washington and proving that the system “works.” The heroes in this version included Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, who were responsible for much of the original reporting on the scandal; Mark Felt, deputy director of the FBI, who leaked confidential investigative reports to the two journalists (though this was not made publicly known until decades later); trial judge John J. Sirica, who pressed defendants in the Watergate burglary (under threat of long prison sentences) to implicate superiors in the Nixon administration, then turned over secret grand jury reports to the House impeachment committee as a road map for that investigation; Archibald Cox and Leon Jaworski, special prosecutors who pursued Nixon in court, successfully sued for access to his tape-recorded conversations, and thereby forced him to resign; and Senator Sam Ervin, chairman of the Senate select committee that investigated the matter and brought to light Nixon’s secret taping system, which the special prosecutor would use to seal the case against him.

This version of Watergate was first set forth by Woodward and Bernstein in All the President’s Men (1974), their best-selling book on the scandal, followed by a popular movie (starring Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman) with the same title. The two journalists continue to write and comment on Watergate to the present day, still advancing the same narrative, and now applying it to Donald Trump as an updated model of Nixon. Their portrait of Watergate has always been something of a caricature, a drama pitting heroes against villains, which conveniently ignored important aspects of the story that might have complicated the narrative.

Other authors have tried to fill in the cracks in the official story by pointing out, for example, that many of the figures leading the investigations into the White House were partisan Democrats with political motives in discrediting Nixon and forcing him from office. That was true of many of the journalists, including Woodward and Bernstein, who drove the story, and several of the lead investigators. Cox, for example, the first of the special prosecutors appointed to investigate Nixon’s role in the events, was a law professor at Harvard and a Kennedy loyalist appointed by Attorney General Elliot Richardson as a condition for Richardson’s confirmation in the Senate, and at the insistence of Senator Edward Kennedy, then a powerful member of the Judiciary Committee. Cox and his staff set out from the beginning to “get” Nixon, so to a great degree their mission consisted of investigating a person rather than a crime. Nixon had no knowledge of the burglary before it happened; hence, the charges against him, as against many of his aides, involved “process” crimes (perjury, destroying evidence, and so on) that arose out the investigation itself.

The Playbook for Lawfare

Ever since then, journalists all try to find a big scandal to drag down a president with (conservative presidents, that is. Ironically, Woodward got in huge trouble for criticizing the Obama administration.) They tried to repeatedly smear Reagan, but he remained popular with voters. You can hear the seething in this article:

Nothing stuck to 'Teflon' president
By Patricia Schroeder

As a young congresswoman, I got the idea of calling President Reagan the "Teflon president" while fixing eggs for my kids. He had a Teflon coat like the pan.

Why was Reagan so blame-free? The answer can be found in the label that did stick to him — "The Great Communicator."

Reagan's ability to connect with Americans was coveted by every politician. He could deliver a speech with such sincerity. And his staff was brilliant in playing up his strengths. They made sure the setting for any speech perfectly captured, re-emphasized and embraced the theme of that speech. And, let's be honest, Reagan told people what they wanted to hear.

Remember how we were promised a big tax refund, a huge increase in military spending and a balanced budget? Selling that was like selling a hot-fudge-sundae diet. When the national debt grew during his administration, you couldn't blame Reagan. He came across with that Irish twinkle.

Americans are optimistic by nature, and they loved that Reagan believed to his core in the American Dream. If someone accused him of hurting college students by cutting loans, President Reagan could be seen on the nightly news writing a personal check to a struggling student.


Hey, I'm a liberal Democrat, and I believe the president often didn't understand the impact of many of his administration's actions.


But Reagan's incredible ability to communicate and his staff's genius in exploiting that ability are the reasons his presidency will be sealed forever in a Teflon coat.


Patricia Schroeder is president and CEO of the Association of American Publishers.

I always thought the diehard Reagan loyalism among some conservatives was a knee-jerk reaction to how many blatant partisan attacks were aimed at him. They did manage to make "Reagan closed the asylums!" stick, even conservatives get surprised when they hear deinstitutionalization started as early as the Kennedy Administration.

In light of all that, the sudden fondness of the media for George W Bush and Dick Cheney suddenly makes sense. Of course journos love them, they caused a scandal every week. You know how easy it was to be a pundit or a talk show host back then?

You will find that in a lot of the left now. They hated their conservative dad so much that they became them. I do blame the 90s and 2000s conservative boomer Christians. Going off about how D&D makes you summon the devil and how video games make you shoot up schools. It pushed the youth in to the hands of the Marxist shitheads. They grew up and now we have 30-40 year old soyboy faggot leftists, who are only leftists because their dads smashed their SNES because his local pastor told him it is a devil summoning box.
They did a shit load of damage to the conservative side. I remember how the same game journo scum that tell you how you are a racist sexist incel, told Jack Tompson it was free speech to call him a dickwop for objecting to GTA3.

One of the greatest tricks the media ever pulled was convincing people that only fundies ever caused moral panics.

Dungeons and Dragons panic was happily stoked by news media publicizing the disappearance and suicide of James Egbert. A liberal Jewish woman named Rona Jaffe decided to write a book called Mazes and Monsters that got adapted into a CBS TV movie starring Tom Hanks being driven insane by wizard games.

People probably told you about Tipper Gore putting Parental Advisory stickers on albums she deemed offensive. There was also massive criticism of slasher movies promoting violence against women, Roger Ebert being a famous hater:

“I think a lot of people have the wrong idea. They identify these films with earlier thrillers like Psycho or even a more recent film like Halloween, which we both liked. These films aren’t in the same category. These films hate women, and, unfortunately, the audiences that go to them, don’t seem to like women much either…To sit there [in the theater] surrounded by people who are identifying, not with the victim but with the attacker, the killer – cheering these killers on, it’s a very scary experience.” – Roger Ebert, “Siskel and Ebert at the Movies”

Ebert at the Horror Movies

Jack Thompson's only mistake was being a white man criticizing video games for conservative reasons. If he just threw on a wig and lipstick and said Grand Theft Auto promoted racism and toxic masculinity, he would've been hailed as a hero.

 

[Francis York Morgan]

I can't speak for you but one of the numbers I heard was ~20 grand for certain online personalities. And they paid off I think 2-300 of them.


Addition: @Betonhaus Oh you think thats lunacy. They paid the celebrities' to endorse them -off the books- and didn't declare it to the FEC. Massive chunks of their spenditure have not been filed. In clear and blatant violations of federal law. To the point the FEC, despite usually being fairly soft on Democrat's, is actually investigating it.

If this tweet is true and they were telling their donors some completely different numbers, that's another reason for the FEC to look into what the hell was going on.


L / A

Over $1.5 billion is such an insane figure to blow through in such a short amount of time. I don't think you can cover it up because the groups the Democrats actually care about are pissed.

 

[AnotherPleb]

Over $1.5 billion is such an insane figure to blow through in such a short amount of time. I don't think you can cover it up because the groups the Democrats actually care about are pissed.

When someone blows through that money that quickly and has nothing to show for it heads tend to roll.

 

[Francis York Morgan]

When someone blows through that money that quickly and has nothing to show for it heads tend to roll.

Well, nothing good. Her campaign did perform the impressive feat of making New Jersey and New York look like potential swing states.

 

[The Ugly One]

I'm sure a lawyer will have some Talmudic reasoning to counter this, but here's my argument: when I attempt to cross a border legally, there is no such thing as due process or Constitutional rights. My belongings and body can be searched without a warrant. If I'm crossing into a country not my own, I can be denied for any reason whatsoever, and I have no recourse beyond possibly appealing to some ombudsman. Jumping the border illegally should not entitle you to due process if those who cross legally don't have it.

Edit: I agree that if an illegal immigrant is being charged with a crime beyond violating immigration law, then due process and right to representation should apply, but someone who is simply getting deported shouldn't be entitled to a lawyer at the taxpayer's expense.

To play devil's advocate:

If you're not being apprehended at the border, then the state has to prove that you are not a citizen and that you came into the country illegally. It can't just say, "so and so doesn't belong here, pinky swear," and off to Guatemala you go. So there is some minimal due process you're entitled to.

 

[Irene and 22 others]

Well, nothing good. Her campaign did perform the impressive feat of making New Jersey and New York look like potential swing states.

If the rumors about their internal numbers always showing that she was trailing are true, it's little surprise that the campaign blew through $1.5 billion that quickly. Anyone with half a brain and access to that data knew that she was going to lose and the tap would be cut off after that. May as well grab as much as you can for you and your friends even if the spending makes no political sense or doesn't help you where you need it.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

I always thought the diehard Reagan loyalism among some conservatives was a knee-jerk reaction to how many blatant partisan attacks were aimed at him. They did manage to make "Reagan closed the asylums!" stick, even conservatives get surprised when they hear deinstitutionalization started as early as the Kennedy Administration.

And who was governor of California in the 60s? Oh that's right, Saint Ronnie the Gun Grabber, who was indeed closing asylums in California. The only thing false about closing the asylums is that it didn't occur when Reagan was president, he just acted like the RINO he was and did it as governor in the 60s.

 

[Dog-O-Tron 5000v5.0]

Californian software engineers desperately need an army of nannies and gardners who work for less than legal minimum wage to survive, and without them the economy will fail. Won't anyone think about the poor software engineers in Silicon Valley who make 6 figures and can't afford a white nanny, or the millionaire construction firm owner who can't make enough profit if he pays Tyrone and Mike what they want as opposed to Juan who he picks up at Home Depot for $50 a day?

https://calmatters.org/economy/2024/11/trump-deportations-california-economics/

Archive

If undocumented immigrants “magically disappear, you’re going to erase 10% of California production,” said Giovanni Peri, professor of international economics at UC Davis. “We’re talking about hundreds of billions of dollars.”

The loss of workers only speaks to part of the financial impact of deportations. Undocumented immigrants also power the state’s economy as consumers and taxpayers.

There may also be indirect impacts from the deportations. The loss of workers in construction, agriculture (including the state’s world-famous wine industry), hospitality and the care economy would have ripple effects on the rest of the state, according to Manuel Pastor, professor of sociology and American studies and ethnicity at the University of Southern California.

“Behind every software engineer is an army of nannies, food-service workers and gardeners,” Pastor said.

Also LOL:

She also said the fear is bound to be felt by others who could be mistaken for being undocumented: “I’m a dark Latina. What if I’m walking somewhere and don’t have my (ID)? What would happen to me?”

She should check out this documentary for a preview of what will happen to her:

 

[Kane Lives]

Why is it that Our Sacred Democracy is still counting votes three weeks after an election?

Not even the most banana republic of LatAm will allow this.

 

[General Emílio Médici]

preview of white house press briefings during trump's second term:

View attachment 6691408

Reminder: communist agitators literally use press passes as shields to pretend they aren't actvists. They will partake on all the violence, and hide behind it the moment authorities arrive. Do not believe them, they would never give you the same chance anyway.

View attachment 6691483

Her smile and optimism: gone

Just because someone is accused of being here in the country illegally doesn't mean they're not entitled to legal due process, or legal representation. Even when you're too poor to afford an attorney, you still have that right to representation. That's why public defenders are a thing, and there's bit in Miranda rights about a right to an attorney.

So why can't illegal aliens make use of a public defender? From the description in the video, it sounds like he's setting up some special fund for regular immigration attorneys to get paid from. My question is, will this siphon off more or less tax dollars than simply hiring more public defenders?

Because there is no real defense in this case, and the entire fiction of sanctuary cities and their indentured slaves has no basis on the law. If they got a public defender all they would be able to do is request asylum by claiming the illegal migration was done to escape faster and that won't fly under Trump where you have some hard proof that Los Zetas want to Funky Town you or that you have a Fatwa on your head in Birmingham.

Similarly they may claim they wanna do it legally and just are waiting for it, which will similarly result in a the Trump admin not buying it in like 95% of the cases as they can see no attempts have been made.

As mentioned, unless there is a different crime they are acused of not related to the illegal crossing and living illegally on the nation a public defender can do nothing to really help and the deportation is not prison so it isn't held to the same standard.