WDSmart

The law is indeed "black and white." You're either guilty or not guilty. The determination of guilt or innocence io an accused, however, is a combination of objective and subjective judgments. A judge would be mostly objective but a jury's verdict would have some to a lot of subjectivity in it. As far as the term "open borders" go, I'd recommend the use of some adjective before the classification of "open" that more accurately describes your opinion of them. Something like "partially," "dangerously," or "welcomely," but not "completely." The same with Trump's "closed" borders. I'd recommend "mostly," "protectively," or "obstructionally," but not "completely." No, the biggest threat to the left (I'd say "left, moderates, and moderate right)" is not Trump but the number of his ardent supporters; but I agree that Trump, right now, is the right's (I'd say "far right's") greatest hope. I don't believe I am "out of touch" but just have different values than you (and MAGA supporters in general). I do believe that about 25% of the voting public in the USA (my home country) believe virtually 100% of what Trump says. Okay, 100% might be a little much, but I'd say at least 95%, and the other 5% that they don't believe, they don't care about because they have the same values as Trump. Then there's an additional 20% of current Trump supporters that, although they might not believe much of what Trump says, support him because they agree with the goals they think he's trying to achieve and don't care how he goes about achieving them. The former group, the 25%, I detest. The latter group, the 20%, I pity and hope they will wake up soon and realize Trump is just conning/deceiving them. Which of those groups are you in? And, just FYI, I am far-far-left and woke. (And I know I've written that before on other forums. 😉 )

No, again, you have the typical rightist black-or-white view that the border is either "open" or "closed." That's the same erroneous view you have of genders. A border can certainly be one of the extremes, but it also can be slightly or widely open, or slightly or tightly closed, just like genders. I do read a lot of posts here and on other social media sites. I may have said that before, but I believe considerably less than 50% of what I read there. I get most of my news from CNN, and I believe about 95% of what I see there. Yes, leftists do lie sometimes. Rightists do, too, of course. And then sometimes both state something they believe to be true, but later turns out not to be. I don't consider that a lie; I consider that an error in judgment of believing the source, and something they must consider in the future when hearing things from that same source. The biggest problem we (both leftists and rightists) have now is Trump. I'd say about 75% of what he says is a lie, not just an error in judgment, and, unfortunately, most rightists believe him 100%. 😒

No, with "open borders," there would be no such thing as an illegal alien. All immigrants would be welcome. Biden/Harris did not support "open borders," but during their four years, there were more illegal immigrants than in Trump's first term. Of course, as you now know, I support "open borders," and when I say that, I mean completely open borders. People aren't "watching" anything. People are just reading about issues like this on social media or watching them on TV. They believe what they read and see on TV. What that is all depends on where or who they are reading and watching. I've known the right-wing media, like Fox, have been lying for years. I think most people, except for ardent MAGA supporters, know that now, too. I'm a CNN-guy, myself. 🙂

I did believe her (Harris). I certainly do not believe anything Trump has said or says now. She did not have a record of supporting "open" borders. You are, like a lot of Trump supporters, misusing terms like these to denigrate people you don't like. What you should be saying is she did not support "closed" borders, but supported a border policy where immigrants were allowed to apply for visas and, if approved, enter the USA. Just like gender, the border is not just either "open" or "closed." It is operated in such a manner that it is a mix of those designations. Even Trump does not enforce "closed" borders. Harris' policies did not support "mass migration," but did allow immigrants to apply for visas, and if they entered illegally, apply for asylum. And, I believe she would do all this using legal due process, not just by edict. I don't remember anything about her stance on "men in girls' showers and sports," but I assume she was sympathetic to trans people and would have looked for ways to reduce the discrimination against them.

Racism, intolerance, selfishness, and stupidity are the hallmarks of Donald Trump, so I assume his supporters have to have some or all of those traits. How they relate to the subjects you've listed is... Open borders: racism, intolerance, selfishness. Mass migration: racism, intolerance, selfishness. Trans people: intolerance, stupidity. If Harris said she was against these or at least did not fully support them, I believed her. I don't know exactly what she said, but I know of no politician in the USA who fully supports any of these. I don't think Trump's election was based on a dislike or distrust of Harris. It was based on two things: his ability to con/deceive many of the voters and, what worries me the most, the fact that many of the voters actually have the same values as he does.

Again, I agree with you...sort of. Most US citizens, I don't know about "Americans," do not support open borders, mass-migration, and men in girls' showers and sports, but racism and intolerance are only two of the reasons they supported Trump. Selfishness and stupidity are two more important reasons. Harris also did not support open borders, mass migration, and men in girls' showers and sports. I don't know where you got the idea she did. She did, however, at least IMO, support the rule of law, so would have approached the controversies surrounding borders, immigrants, and trans people much differently than Trump has.

Yes! For a change, I agree with everything you've written above! 👍Sort of... I do believe in open borders and unrestrained migration. Yes, I know, or keep being told, that there are only two genders "under the law," but that doesn't make it true. Biologically and socially, that is certainly not true. At one time, the law allowed only certain people to go into showers and participate in sports, and designated them "Whites Only." Now, thanks to an early version of DEI, that law has changed, and most of us (but not all) believe that to be an improvement and a benefit to society. I believe some day, after the Trump government fiasco subsides, which could take many, many years, trans people too will be recognized and laws will be changed accordingly to accommodate them. This accommodation could be a removal of any gender qualifications on showers and sports, or it could be a creation of two additional classifications: Men/Trans-Women/Trans-Men/Women. I'd prefer the former but would accept the latter.

I agree that if he's found guilty of the crimes he's been charged with, he'll go to jail, but when he gets out, or if he's found not guilty of these crimes, his claim of being a refugee should have to be denied before he can be deported. That's the way I think due process works in his case, anyway...

I hate that he has done many things concerning immigrants without regard for the rule of law. I also dislike his emphasis that there are only two genders, when that claim is known to be obviously false to anyone familiar with biology or the varieties of people in human society.

Uh oh... 😧

Find him, arrest him, try him, when found guilty, lock him up for 30 days, and then deport him. 😡

Uh oh... 😧

Garcia is not the Democrats' "hero." He's just one of the many examples of the Trump Administration's disregard for the rule of law. Now that he's back in the USA, hopefully, he will be given due process. If he is found guilty, he could indeed be deported. That's okay with me as long as the process is done according to the rule of law.

If this percentage refers to people living in the USA, Trump never had even 50% of their approval rating. Even in the general election, he got less than 50% of the votes, and I suspect his approval rating of those who did not or could not vote was way less than that. I just checked Trump's approval rating online, and all of the recent polls show his rating about the same as his voting margin, around 50%. As a US citizen, I cannot understand how anyone could approve of what he's done since he took over the presidency this time or last time.

I detest both Trump and Musk, but it's totally inappropriate, and maybe even against the Constitution, for anyone in government to either give or retract funds awarded to an organization because they have a personal like or dislike of them. 😡

He got his due process, arrested him, determined he was illegal and send him home. Do you understand that. His family did not receive due process. They were arrested, [due process is supposed to go here], determined to be illegal, and scheduled to be deported. Do you understand that?

My home country, the USA, is definitely not "Luccie land," but it does have a constitution, the rules of which should be followed in all legal action. I know this doesn't always occur, but it is happening more frequently now that Trump is president. However, when anything like that does happen, it is our (US citizens') responsibility to speak up, reject, and condemn it. Whether or not that does any good does not matter. It's still our responsibility. That's what I am doing...

Or, you could just go to a government hospital and receive treatments for free or a very, very low cost.

I hope this woman gets a big, big reward for finding this from the government, or the rightful owner, if they can be found.

I've used both methods. Now I use the THB 65k+/month option. I'd think you'd first have to have the THB 800k in the bank to qualify for your visa. After that, the next year, you could use the THB 65k+/month deposit.

My bank produces the 12-month statement in ten minutes, and then, with the letter, which takes a couple of hours to get, I go to Immigration. My understanding is that the statement is only valid for that day, but that's just a guess; I don't really know. I always do all this on the same day.

Yes! And to all those who do not approve this ruling, I have but two words for you: Due Process!

anyone who is outside of America cannot possibly be retired or working, so I agree. You can only retire or work in America if you are an American. Once I met a guy in Thailand who was 90 and told me he was retired and no longer working, I showed him your post and now he realizes that's impossible. Back to America and into the mines!!!! My apologies. 😟 I mistyped my post above. I meant to say that "I hope Trump, or someone in his government, DOES NOT DECIDE that people who live outside the USA should not receive SS benefits. 😠

I certainly hope not. I'd hate to go back to being an un-woke capitalist.

Although I'm supportive of trans people, as long as we cling to this biologically inaccurate idea that there are only two genders, and because of that, we only have two categories, male and female, I also support the testing of individuals to determine which of those outdated and restrictive gender classes they should be allowed to compete. I would only ask three things: 1. The scores used to determine gender on the various physical, chromosomal, hormonal, etc., tests used should be publicly posted in advance. 2. The tests should be used to determine both genders, not just male. 3. The tests should be required of ALL athletes.