Jump to content

GroveHillWanderer

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    3,960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

GroveHillWanderer's Achievements

Platinum Member

Platinum Member (9/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • 5 Reactions Given
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

6.5k

Reputation

  1. The trouble with that argument is that Trump is not only against illegal immigration, he is also against legal immigration, as pointed out in the Forbes article below. Donald Trump’s Team Takes First Steps To Cut Legal Immigration https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2025/03/04/donald-trumps-team-takes-first-steps-to-cut-legal-immigration/
  2. Their economy is also in dire straits. If it were not for military expenditures, it would be even worse off. The Russian economy is on the brink of collapse and Putin knows it https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-economy-putin-ukraine-war-deal-talks-trump-b2714371.html
  3. Suppressing people who are gay does not change their sexuality, so I'm not sure how you figure that it increases the number of heterosexuals.
  4. VAERS doesn't prove anything. That's because it doesn't provide any evidence about what caused the adverse events reported to it. Their website makes that quite clear. This is from their FAQ page. https://vaers.hhs.gov/faq.html
  5. As previously mentioned, this deal does not provide any absolute guarantee that the US will get any money back, and certainly not in the short term. It's only if the fund set up by this deal is still making money after ten years, that the US has the possibility to get some money out of it. And while that's certainly possible, there is no concrete assurance there will be profits a decade from now. Anyway, even if the US does get something back, it won't be during Trump's term in office - unless he's still in office in 2035, that is.
  6. It's not often that I agree with Rand Paul, but he's bang on the money here. https://youtu.be/aOK2NW7Va6E?si=PaWSc0cbMB33_3ky
  7. I hear Trump is considering renaming the San Andreas fault to Biden's fault. 😀
  8. What $$ do you think the US is getting from this deal? This is a deal whereby both the US and Ukraine will be involved in a Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. There is the prospect of the US getting some kind of return eventually, but not for at least a decade (and only if the fund actually makes a profit). As mentioned in the article below: Trump minerals deal blames Putin for invasion https://web.archive.org/web/20250502114816/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/05/01/trump-minerals-deal-ukraine-blames-russia-invasion-zelensky/ There will be no direct payments from the Ukrainian government to the US as part of this deal.
  9. But if you meant, "who guarantees the due process rights of the murder victims of illegal aliens," then again, you haven't understood what"due process" means. Due process applies when a person is subject to certain proceedings by the government, such as prosecution for a crime. It doesn't apply to someone who is dead, they tend not to get prosecuted, as a general rule.
  10. Sorry, that doesn't even make any sense. What does, "murder victims of the illegal aliens due," mean?
  11. I wouldn't set too much store by Thailand Medical News site articles. They specialise in doom-laden, click-bait headlines - as a quick glance at their site will show.
  12. You're the one who's confused. As the extract from the Supreme Court ruling I quoted earlier states, even illegal aliens must be afforded due process. In case that wasn't clear enough for you, the following law journal article also states it, quite unequivocally. https://www.lawshelf.com/blogentryview/the-due-process-rights-of-illegal-entrants-to-the-united-states (Emphasis mine).
  13. You don't appear to understand what "due process" means. Due process doesn't mean being immune from prosecution, it means that a person's legal rights are respected and that the government must follow a prescribed process when taking actions that could affect their rights, such as (for instance) when prosecuting them for a crime.
  14. Yes, the same legal process. As the Supreme Court said, in one of their recent rulings on the Abrego Garcia case: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a931_2c83.pdf
  15. US pulls out of formal peace talks between Ukraine and Russia https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/us-withdraws-ukraine-russia-peace-talks-b1225632.html
×
×
  • Create New...