TexasCHLforum.com

The new zero tolerance policy. Why should we not have a zero tolerance policy? You bring your kid with you to a convenience store and hold up the place then you go to jail and your kid goes somewhere else. Or perhaps we should put your kid in jail with you? Or, as the liberal mindset goes, we reward you for holding up the place, put you on welfare, provide free medical care, food and shelter for you and your kid. And, if you want to go to college we will send you to college at resident tuition rates while other real citizens have to pay non-resident rates if they are not Texans. Even better, let's set up a non profit organization of attorneys to coach you on how to be a crook and get away with it. Oh, we have that already and they still have their non-profit status showing illegals how to invade the U.S.

We should treat every illegal exactly the way Mexico would treat an American that illegally entered Mexico or even worse, brought a gun into Mexico. Heaven forbid!

I wish there were like buttons on this site, rotor's post before this would get one. My opinion, the left is loosing their mind over the criminal immigration issue (and the successes that Trump has had). They seem to think that it is perfectly ok to break the law and think there should be no consequences. I got in a discussion on Facebook yesterday with a friend of a friend. That lady is a university level history teacher that is very clearly hard left with no concept of the truth. When she was confronted with facts, she called me a fascist among other things. She thinks the positions of the left are very much constitutional and that those of us on the the right are fascist that will destroy the country. Professors like her are the reason that kids coming out of college are so confused. I ended that discussion as I realized that there was no way to reason with that woman. I also un-friended my "friend" as I was tired of his left leaning positions.

The left seems to be doing everything they can to divided the country and start the next civil war. They may get their wish and it won't be pretty for anyone.

dale blanker wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 12:32 am

Bitter Clinger wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:06 pm

philbo wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:27 pm A federal judge on Friday sent Paul Manafort to jail pending trial after he was charged with witness tampering.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... op+News%29

but I didn't know that Manafort was transgender!

You are confused, as usual. Think Michelle Obama.

Seriously, I suppose you and philbro are also "ok" with jailing folks who have only been indicted, in clear violation of due process, as long as they have some ties, however tenous, to our President? "Guilty until proven innocent" is a typical communist dictatorship ploy embraced by the Obama DOJ against political adversaries. Very third world which should make you both pleased. Welcome to Venezuela. Passport please.

https://www.americandailynews.org/2018/ ... d-instead/

They went looking for children in cages ( photo from 2014 that would be Obama )

Instead found teens on leather sofas watching World Cup on a big screen T V.

Bitter Clinger wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:34 pm

dale blanker wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 12:32 am

Bitter Clinger wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:06 pm

philbo wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:27 pm A federal judge on Friday sent Paul Manafort to jail pending trial after he was charged with witness tampering.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... op+News%29

but I didn't know that Manafort was transgender!

You are confused, as usual. Think Michelle Obama.

Seriously, I suppose you and philbro are also "ok" with jailing folks who have only been indicted, in clear violation of due process, as long as they have some ties, however tenous, to our President? "Guilty until proven innocent" is a typical communist dictatorship ploy embraced by the Obama DOJ against political adversaries. Very third world which should make you both pleased. Welcome to Venezuela. Passport please.

Yes, there is confusion. I was respecting the opinion of U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson and agreeing with you. The violation was Manafort's on the conditions of his bail. Get it???

Bitter Clinger wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:34 pm Seriously, I suppose you and philbro are also "ok" with jailing folks who have only been indicted, in clear violation of due process, as long as they have some ties, however tenous, to our President? "Guilty until proven innocent" is a typical communist dictatorship ploy embraced by the Obama DOJ against political adversaries. Very third world which should make you both pleased. Welcome to Venezuela. Passport please.

Are you honestly suggesting that every person indicted can not be held in jail until trial? If so, you obviously have no clue how the judicial system works at all and are repeating things that make you truly appear ignorant. Or, are you suggesting that Manafort be treated to a different set of rules while awaiting trial than every other citizen in the US? Either way your statement is not supported by any apparent understanding of the US legal system. Please find the following from the American Bar Assoc. on pretrial proceedings:
https://www.americanbar.org/publication ... e_blk.html

Long story short, Manafort was out of jail awaiting trial under a set of terms established by the court. Manafort violated those terms and after a hearing and due process, was placed in jail pending trial. Treated as any other citizen under indictment for a crime.

50 Media Mistakes in the Trump Era: The Definitive List

https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/06/10/ ... tive-list/

philbo wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:45 am

Bitter Clinger wrote: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:34 pm Seriously, I suppose you and philbro are also "ok" with jailing folks who have only been indicted, in clear violation of due process, as long as they have some ties, however tenous, to our President? "Guilty until proven innocent" is a typical communist dictatorship ploy embraced by the Obama DOJ against political adversaries. Very third world which should make you both pleased. Welcome to Venezuela. Passport please.

Are you honestly suggesting that every person indicted can not be held in jail until trial? If so, you obviously have no clue how the judicial system works at all and are repeating things that make you truly appear ignorant. Or, are you suggesting that Manafort be treated to a different set of rules while awaiting trial than every other citizen in the US? Either way your statement is not supported by any apparent understanding of the US legal system. Please find the following from the American Bar Assoc. on pretrial proceedings:
https://www.americanbar.org/publication ... e_blk.html

Long story short, Manafort was out of jail awaiting trial under a set of terms established by the court. Manafort violated those terms and after a hearing and due process, was placed in jail pending trial. Treated as any other citizen under indictment for a crime.

The US legal system is corrupt. Read the OIG report. Know what they call lawyers who graduated in the bottom half of their class? An attorney...

Why are they separating Paul Manafort from his wife and daughters?

spectre wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:55 pm Why are they separating Paul Manafort from his wife and daughters?

Do you think the whole family was conspiring against the United States AND tampered with witnesses too???

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,
over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it
and a moral code that glorifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat

"moral code"?

dale blanker wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:10 pm

spectre wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:55 pm Why are they separating Paul Manafort from his wife and daughters?

Do you think the whole family was conspiring against the United States AND tampering with witnesses too???

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,
over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it
and a moral code that glorifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat

"moral code"?

Do you apply the same standard to those that break the law entering the country illegally?

philbo wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:45 amLong story short, Manafort was out of jail awaiting trial under a set of terms established by the court. Manafort violated those terms and after a hearing and due process, was placed in jail pending trial. Treated as any other citizen under indictment for a crime.

I have not studied this case very much, but I have a problem with the basic philosophy of what you posted. Not only should Manafort not have been brought back in and held in jail, but there should have been no conditions on his release. If a person is indicted, he is only accused of a crime. He is not convicted yet. So, how do we justify "house arrest" with a GPS monitoring system for him? And that was after he posted bail too.

The only purpose of holding someone in jail before a trial should be to ensure they show up at trial. It must be based on probable cause to believe he would flee if he were not held. If there is no evidence to suggest he would flee, there should be no bail required. If there is some evidence to suggest it, then I can see requiring enough bail to ensure he will show up (and enough bail is a flexible term based on the assets of the accused and the seriousness of the charge). There should be no other conditions on the release.

As I understand it in this case, the conditions on Manafort included the house arrest but also something about not attempting to influence the other witnesses. Using this system, it is an abuse of his rights because it allows them to punish him for contacting the witnesses based on just rumor or suspicion, not a trial and conviction. And tampering with witnesses is already a crime, so this was in effect saying we will make it a condition of your release that you don't commit a crime.

And just so you know, I have these beliefs for everyone, not just in this case. Our system of bail and pre-trial detention is broken and needs to be fixed. It has been shown to work to pressure people into plea bargains that might not be their best option. I am not a big believer that the people who took the bargains were not guilty, but I do believe they would have been better treated by going to trial later and not being held in jail. And yes, I admit some would commit more crimes while out on bail, but that is not what bail is for.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry ... 44319.html

Does Prince Harry support Trump?

Megan's dad does it again.

bblhd672 wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:50 am 50 Media Mistakes in the Trump Era: The Definitive List

https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/06/10/ ... tive-list/

Excellent article, thank you for posting.

srothstein wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:24 pm And just so you know, I have these beliefs for everyone, not just in this case. Our system of bail and pre-trial detention is broken and needs to be fixed. It has been shown to work to pressure people into plea bargains that might not be their best option. I am not a big believer that the people who took the bargains were not guilty, but I do believe they would have been better treated by going to trial later and not being held in jail. And yes, I admit some would commit more crimes while out on bail, but that is not what bail is for.

This has been proven very recently: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/06/off-du ... z5ImZe1SEG

Imagine if he had taken a plea bargain.....!