WDSmart

I certainly HOPE the US dollar is "safe." I depend on it. However, with Trump as president, I do worry about this. 😞

Yes, kind of... If they were ACCUSED of a crime and got bail and then (or before had) applied for asylum as a refugee, I would have no problem with him (or her) paying the bail or arranging for a bond and going free BECAUSE they are at that time, as all accused are, pressumed to be innocent. If they were CONVICTED of a crime, I would expect them to be given the same sentence as anyone else found guilty of committing that crime, and after their sentence was done, ICE could detain them, refuse their asylum application, and deport them if they thought that was best.

which way? Did you give her a written document the bank accepted,that gives her access? Or else? Most of my money is in a savings account. The account is in my name only since I use it as financial proof to secure a One-year Stay Extension. Even though the account is only in my name, my wife's signature (which is written in ink that is only visible under a light the bank uses) is on the last page of the back of the bank book (which shows all the transactions) and gives her the authority to withdraw money using the bank book (not the debit card).

Yes, I would allow anyone accused or charged with a crime of any kind to remain in the USA on bail (or in jail if no bail was allowed). In the case of "illegal aliens," I would only allow that if they have filed for an Asylum (Refugee) visa.

Thanks for the info. Part of my point in this forum is that many of the people described as "illegal aliens" may have indeed entered the country illegally, but have since filed an application for asylum. International law allows that an asylum refugee can enter any country illegally if they are indeed fleeing some kind of threat in their home country. Their longer-term status is then determined later during their asylum application proceedings. That's my understanding of that process. Also, I believe there is a big difference between being "accused" and "found guilty" of any act, so I believe accusing an illegal or legal alien of something should not be a valid criterion for deporting them.

I'm not sure what the actual law is, but I carry a photo of my passport, including the pages with my visa, visa extension, and 90-Day report in my phone. I've never been asked for these by a government officer. I do have to have my real passport to get a new bank book and other things at my bank. That's the only time I know I need to actually have it.

This is a violation of their First Amendment right to free speech. I understand that this part of the Constitution applies to everyone who is legally in the USA. I'm sure this will be challenged in court, and we'll see what happens then.

It's not as complicated as you pretend. If you are not XX, you compete against the blokes. That's it. Simple. Maybe unfortunate for the % of 1% but that's life. We can't ruin women's sport for the fraction of a % with such rare conditions who also happen to be world class athletes. If that's what you think, then I assume you are suggesting there just be two categories in every sport: women (XX) and non-women. Right? (Oh, and special categories for age groupings, the blind, those without legs, etc...) And the last I saw, there are about 4% of the population that are not pure XX or XY.

This is exactly why I give my Thai wife withdrawal access to my bank account.

I agree with this approach, but as long as we only place people into two categories, male and female, we'll have problems sorting them out. Here is an example of what we're up against: "The Complexity of Sex Chromosomes Most people have either XX (typically associated with female development) or XY (typically associated with male development) sex chromosomes, but there's more to the story. *Variations in Sex Chromosomes* 1. *XYY*: Some individuals have an extra Y chromosome (XYY), which can lead to varying physical characteristics and developmental outcomes. 2. *XXY (Klinefelter syndrome)*: This condition occurs when a male has an extra X chromosome (XXY), which can affect physical development, fertility, and cognitive abilities. 3. *X0 (Turner syndrome)*: Females with Turner syndrome have only one X chromosome (X0), which can lead to short stature, heart defects, and other physical characteristics. 4. *Mosaicism*: Some individuals have a mixture of cells with different sex chromosomes (e.g., XX/XY), which can result in varying degrees of physical and developmental characteristics. *Intersex Conditions* Intersex conditions, formerly known as hermaphroditism, occur when an individual's reproductive or sexual anatomy doesn't fit typical male or female classifications. Examples include: 1. *Androgen insensitivity syndrome*: Individuals with this condition have XY chromosomes but are resistant to androgens (male hormones), leading to female physical characteristics. 2. *Congenital adrenal hyperplasia*: This condition affects the production of sex hormones, leading to varying physical characteristics. *Epigenetics and Hormonal Influences* Epigenetic factors, such as gene expression and hormonal influences, also play a crucial role in shaping an individual's biological sex and gender." (I have no source I can acknowledge for this information.)

I didn't Google any of this, but I will not dispute it. My comments in this forum are based on three of my opinions: 1. There are federal agents (ICE) and local agents (District Attorney, police, judges, etc. - DAs). ICE can investigate and deport people, DAs can't. DA's can try people for rape or any other crime committed in the US, ICE can't. 2. Many of these people labeled "illegal aliens" did enter the US illegally, but have since filed for Refugee status. That is something that ICE has to sort out, not the DAs. 3. If any of these people have been ACCUSED of rape (or any other crime) while in the US, they are entitled to a presumption of innocence and a trial. That is done by the DAs. If any of these people have been accused or convicted of rape (or any other crime) before coming to the US, that is something that will be considered in their application for Asylum (ICE). What I see here is that many people mix up the two jurisdictions and just think any "illegal alien" accused of rape (or any crime) while in the US should and can be immediately deported. I don't think the two systems work together that way.

I don't recall any other presidents deporting people. I'm sure they did, but I did not know, or at least don't remember, who they were or the details. Yes, I do expect I will oppose almost everything Trump does. In this case, however, the reasons are that he is doing this, which, IMO, is illegally, and it involves a very large number of people.

In my opinion, these forums, and, in fact, all social media, are all about sharing thoughts.

There is no difference in my perception of reality between the rape of a child and the rape of an adult. I am not a legal expert, and I couldn't find an absolute answer online about whether the laws differ in these different cases, so I am not ignoring anything. Both child and adult rape are serious crimes and should be punished. Whether one would result in more punishment than the other, I don't know. I would not be surprised that most people think the same way you do about this, so a jury might well recommend a more severe penalty for child rape than the rape of an adult. Whether a judge would is more uncertain. I can only say that I think both are serious crimes and that they should be punished.

Your thoughts are highly offensive. You must not have kids I consider the rape of or any unprovocked assault on anyone a very serious crime regardless of the victim's age or physical capacity. My "thoughts" (comments) only offend you because you either misunderstand or disagree with them. I have eight children (four natural, three adopted, and one foster child), but they are all adults now. I now have 12 grandkids (most are now adults), and three great-grandchildren.

I consider the rape of or any unprovocked assault on anyone a very serious crime regardless of the victim's age or physical capacity.

The problem with all this is there are two different legal authorities implied. One is federal (ICE) and one is local (DA). I'll respond to you in the order of your comments: If someone in the USA is accused of a crime committed in the USA, the DA should handle the case in accordance with the law. If the person is not a citizen of the USA, they should not be automatically extradited. A decision on that should be made after the outcome of their trial, and that decision would be made by ICE. If, during their investigation of a non-citizen, ICE discovers they have an outstanding warrant in another country or even a conviction, this would be presented and considered as part of the person's application for US residency. If a non-citizen is denied residency, then they can be deported. Any person charged with a crime, whether it be jaywalking, rape, or serial murders, committed in the USA the DA should handle the case in accordance with the law. If the judge at the preliminary hearing, after hearing the details of the case, decides to grant the accused bail, then that is the judge's prerogative. The judge, however, does not have the prerogative to order them to be deported. Any person charged with a crime, whether it be jaywalking, rape, or serial murders, committed before they came to the USA, ICE would be present and consider that as part of the person's application for US residency. If a non-citizen is denied residency, then they can be deported. I don't want to run for any office in the USA or anywhere else. I want to live the rest of my life in Thailand. I don't want anyone CONVICTED of rape to go unpunished. However, I also don't want anyone only ACCUSED of rape to automatically be punished. They should be assumed to be innocent and have a right to a trial.

I don't consider rape (or murder) of a child any less of a crime than that of an adult. Do you? And if so, why?

I did read the whole thing. I didn't interpret what I read the way you did. I'll answer your questions above and comment in the order you listed them. I do think EVERYONE, no matter what the charges are against them, should be assumed to be innocent and are eligible for a bond. That bond should be set according to the charges and the proof presented to the judge by the prosecuting attorney. IMO, the bond for people charged with rape of a child should be very high. But, as far as I can tell, these people are NOT accused of rape by a local community but are being charged with something else. ICE is the only agency accusing them with rape. Yes, these people MAY HAVE broken the law by coming into the USA illegally, UNLESS they are REFUGEES. That is what they must do: go to court and present their case so a judge (or jury?) can decide if they are here illegally. I had to look up "MS13" and "TDA," and now see they are criminal gangs in the USA (MS13) and other countries. I'm sure they are very nasty gangs, and anyone associated with them should be investigated. BUT, I don't think any agency can just assume someone is a member of one of those gangs without proof - and I don't believe tattoos are proof. A person could be a refugee fleeing a country that used to be a member of one of these gangs but is no longer. In my view, as in all matters, the law should be followed when investigating, detaining, and ESPECIALLY in these cases, before deporting anyone.

@safarimike11, What I am referring to in my previous comment could be found in just the first sentence of the article above: "Massachusetts has come under scrutiny for its handling of illegal migrants accused of serious crimes, including child rape, as state policies prevent authorities from holding individuals on ICE detainers alone. " Who is accusing these migrants of crimes? I think in these cases, it is ICE alone, based on some information they received from the migrant's former country. It is not an accusation of crimes committed in the USA, nor anything that has been proven in a court in the USA. That's what I assume is true throughout the article.

Questions and remarks I have about these cases are: 1. Were the accusations for rapes done in the USA or the country they came from? 2. Have they been charged here in the USA for rape? 3. Almost everyone, no matter what the charge, even murder, is entitled to consideration of a bond. The bond increases with the severity of the charges. This is why I think in these cases of low bond, that these individuals were not charged with rape in the USA, but ICE is saying they have in the country they came from. 4. All of them, I assume, are only CHARGED with rape (either in the USA or their former country), but have not been tried so, in the USA, they are assumed to be innocent. 5. Like a lot of Trump's deportees, these people may have been suspected of something or even charged with it, but they have not been convicted of anything yet.

Wow! ❤️

I don't think the child should be punished for the incident by treating him for "everything." Nothing in the article indicated the child had done anything to provoke the dog, although, of course, that might be the case. I think there is still time for the child to learn how to treat and live compatibly with animals and other people. As far as the dog is concerned, a small amount of pentobarbital could be given as a sedative, but too much would be dangerous, so I think that is uncalled for.

and an injection I agree both the child and the dog might need an injection if it is determined that the dog has rabies.

4 a.m. What is anyone doing out at that hour?