Credo

I think there is a lot of confusion about how it works when employing an undocumented person. Most companies require a lot of information before employing someone. If the salary is $15 an hour, an undocumented can't really go in and say, 'hey, I'll work for $7.50'. What happens is they use illegally obtained documents to gain employment. They will be getting the $15 an hour. They will have taxes, social security, etc. taken out of their pay. It becomes a little more problematic if a company contracts with an independent company for employees. Then the original company is not the employer, the independent company is the employer and pays the wages. In that case, it's harder to determine whether or not the independent contractor actually paid the full wages. Small independent companies involved in jobs such as building contractors, landscaping companies and other small independent businesses can more easily hire illegals. Some of these contractors employ people as day labor. The overall impact on wages has to do with the availability of those who will work for $15 an hour and bigger employers are reluctant to raise wages because they have a supply of workers at $15. There was a thread that sort of addresses how this works. It doesn't identify anyone as undocumented but it shows how labor laws are avoided by a large employer. In this situation it involved employing children. https://aseannow.com/topic/1266853-exclusive-hyundai-subsidiary-has-used-child-labor-at-alabama-factory/

.....maybe just best to do it at the ballot box.

So, once again it was OK to forcibly remove children from their parents?

So, it was OK to forcibly remove children from their parents? It was all in good faith, so it was OK?

I think the whole situation is a little deeper than that. It was better orchestrated and planned. The Proud Boys knew what to do and when. They didn't attend the rally and positioned themselves at various points around the Capitol prior to the rally even ending. All they had to do was wait for the 'orders' to be given at the rally and the insurgents to arrive and that's what happened. The rally attendees by and large had little knowledge of what they were getting into. As many of them have already testified, they went to the Capitol because the President told them too and they retreated when they were told to. They were simply foot soldiers. What they did was illegal and egregious, but their participation and planning was limited. That is why they were not well armed with guns. The planners behind this were armed and a back up arsenal was not far away. Remember, Steve Bannon's podcast before Jan 6, in which he said it wasn't going to be like you think and that 'All Hell Going to Break Loose’. He had spoken with Trump on Jan 5. It's clear that Bannon knew, the President knew and the Proud Boys knew. They were following Trump's directives. They had been told to 'stand down and stand by.' That's what they had done and now was their time to stand up. https://www.npr.org/2021/03/02/972895521/prosecutors-proud-boys-gave-leader-war-powers-planned-ahead-for-capitol-riot https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/steve-bannon-trump-phone-call-jan-6-1381848/

The US is basically controlled by business. If it's good for business it will be allowed to continue. Remember, some businesses are 'too big to fail', but you never find a person that's too important to be homeless.

Wrong again: In March 2022, 49-year-old Texan Guy Reffitt, was convicted (among other charges) for being unlawfully present on Capitol grounds while possessing a firearm and transporting firearms during civil disorder. A Department of Justice indictment from January 2021 also states that Christopher Alberts, Maryland, was found carrying a Taurus G2C semi-automatic handgun on Capitol grounds on January 6. Off-duty Drug Enforcement Administration agent Mark Sami Ibrahim, 32, was also indicted by a grand jury for bringing a firearm within the United States Capitol and its grounds. https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-were-there-armed-protesters-capitol-january-6-1715326 Please note, the last person did have a weapon inside the Capitol. Other insurrectionists have bragged about having weapons. Having a weapon ON the grounds is no different than inside. It's still illegal. And yes, it does count if you have a cache of weapons stashed for the purpose of commiting a crime. Your denials are beginning to look suspect. Perhaps you could just state your agenda.

Ah, so now we will justify your falsehood. That is a true mark of a Trump supporter. You can't bring a weapon into a rally with the president. The majority of people went to Washington to attend a rally. The call to go to the Capitol was announced to most at the rally, not before. Some people did know and that's the reason for the cache of weapons stored off site. It was planned. It was coordinated. Here's from a tweet that was shared during the Jan 6 Committee: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/05/mypillow-ceo-mike-lindell-says-phone-records-subpoenaed-by-house-jan-6-committee.html He knew they were armed -- and they may have been informed of the plan to invade the Capitol. Here's more about them: Trump knew crowd at rally was armed yet demanded they be allowed to march https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/28/trump-jan-6-rally-guns-capitol-attack

And this is from your second link: Yet, despite his hard-line rhetoric, Trump has still deported fewer immigrants than President Barack Obama did in each of the early years of his term. Like most of what Trump, there was more noise than results.

You said there were none. You are wrong, there were. Those guns were in a restricted area whether they entered the Capitol or not. Again, you are simply wrong, stop trying to minimize it. But FBI spokesperson Carol Cratty told NPR that Sanborn was talking only specifically about arrests by the FBI, and not other police agencies that made arrests on the day of the riot — including arrests of people allegedly carrying guns. https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters-were-armed-here-are-the-weapons-prosecutors-say-they-used

Oh there were weapons and there were guns. Most of the guns were off-site but ready for action. Several rioters had firearms and dozens more wielded knives, bats and other real and makeshift weapons. Some were charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds while others stashed them nearby Lonnie Coffman of Alabama was found with multiple weapons in his vehicle and on his person. Coffman’s truck, which he had parked in the vicinity of the Capitol on the morning of Jan. 6, was packed with weaponry, including a handgun, a rifle and a shotgun, each loaded, according to court documents. In addition, the truck held hundreds of rounds of ammunition, several large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, a crossbow with bolts, machetes, camouflage smoke devices, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails. https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/06/15/fact-check-were-firearms-other-weapons-capitol-jan-6/7621149001/ During Trump's speech, there were several people spotted by police with AR style rifles in the trees near the speech. Trump was aware of it and wanted them to be allowed into the speech. Secret Service would not permit them to enter the Ellipse.

You do know that everyone has to go to court. The one with the best lawyer will be the employer, but since these are usually owned by a conglomerate, the most they will get is a fine. The employees will be held in custody and no hearing if they have an order of deportation. Businesses are very seldom ever punished even when they know full well employees are illegal.

That sounds like cruel and unusual punishment for the inmates.

Doctors do NOT have oversight. Here are the reporting requirements: 46 states and the District of Columbia require hospitals, facilities and physicians providing abortions to submit regular and confidential reports to the state. 8 states require providers to indicate the method of payment, such as insurance or self-pay, for the procedure. 28 states require providers to report postabortion complications. 16 states require providers to give some information about the patient's reason for seeking the procedure. 10 states ask whether the abortion was performed because of a threat to the patient's health or life. 7 states ask whether the abortion was performed because of rape or incest. 15 states ask whether the abortion was performed because of a diagnosed fetal abnormality. 9 states ask whether the abortion was performed for other reasons (e.g. the patient's economic or familial circumstances). 6 states require providers to report whether the fetus was viable. 14 states require providers to indicate if the state mandates for abortion counseling and parental involvement were satisfied. 9 states require providers to report whether state-mandated counseling was provided. 14 states require providers to report whether state requirements for parental involvement were met. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/abortion-reporting-requirements My opinion on abortion is not a part of this topic and is not something that needs to be discussed.

Don't try to confuse what you believe with the law. The AG, who got it wrong from the start and made disparaging remarks is now to believed that she could have gotten an abortion. So, how does that work? Do you take your child to the AG first? Do medical providers need his consent in writing?

I'd say that's a big yes: Since the Revolutionary War, immigrants have been a vital part of the United States military. In fact each year about 8,000 non-citizens enlist in the U.S. armed forces. According to the U.S. Defense Department, there are currently 30,000-plus non-citizens serving on active duty. https://citizenpath.com/immigrants-military/#:~:text=Since the Revolutionary War%2C immigrants,citizens serving on active duty.

So, the AG can definitively say that she could have gotten an abortion in Ohio? Abortion is illegal and he has no information on her medical conditions, yet he says it would be OK for an abortion. I think that's the biggest porky in a while. He'd be the first to have this doctor burnt at the stake. Take a look at what happened to the doctor in Indiana, where it is legal and is now facing a major backlash. It's pretty obvious you and your ilk are less-than-honest in what you will do to a doctor performing an abortion. You can bet your sweet behind that had the doctor terminated the pregnancy, she'd be lucky to be out on bail. In the Conservative world, she committed a hanging offense. Numerous other doctors in other states have faced similar problems. Women with potentially life-threatening conditions and needing an abortion have either not gotten one or been sent to another state. Doctors are just too scared that what they consider as life threatening may not agree with what the law thinks is life-threatening.

Oh, I see you followed the anti-WHO koolaid and that they were controlled by China. They weren't and they aren't. China was ground zero for Covid so information on the virus came from them.

He bought both guns and the ammunition legally. He wasn't a criminal until he got into a pickup and drove it without a license, he wasn't a criminal until he trespassed on school property with a weapon and he wasn't a felon until he started shooting. If the gun had been illegal in the first place, he wouldn't have been able to buy one at a store. If the age was 21 for the purchase, he wouldn't have had one.

You don't normally engage in hair-splitting responses but here you are splitting hairs. It's not generally a good idea to ignore information from the WHO. They don't give it lightly. As for people being admitted to the hospital and discharged the same day, I have never known anyone who was in the hospital only a part of a day with the exception of people who were admitted and then died. I suspect part day admissions are a rare event.

No, they usually just deflect off on to other topics. In short, they go silent. The point is, they are still around and still capable of damaging the cause of the Ukrainian people.

What a nasty, caustic response to a simple statement. I do know a fair amount about climate and weather. I even have a degree that backs that up. It's a complex issue and if people want to discuss it, a link is helpful.

The problem I see, and have experienced, is that the US medical system is hard to access. I returned to the US and getting signed up under medicare and getting insurance was a hassle. I required a lot of help negotiating the system. Once in, my primary doctor (or I should say his staff) were most helpful in getting me the specialized medical attention I needed. The health care I've received for a number of conditions has been excellent. I had the same medical issues in Thailand and they were very good, but not as good as the US. I know people who simply do not qualify for medicare/medicaid and who cannot afford insurance. Obamacare helped a great deal, but they still can't get the care they need and can't pay for medication.

Since there is no treatment or vaccine for this, quarantine is the ONLY way to stop it.

I hope that the cancelled flights and airline chaos has prevented any infected people from getting on a plane to some far away destination.