Immunity decision out

I honestly don't even know where to start with this from a factual standpoint, so I will just bulletpoint this:

1. Stanford doesn't do the research. Individual scientists do the research. In this case, the research was run by an expert in the field of immigration economics, Ran Abramitzky. The data is generally available for this type of research to validate results. In fact, I went to his website and found that you can replicate his methods and he provides his data for many studies involving issues related the economics of immigration (which includes crime, it should be noted).

2. No, the majority of immigration of the 1960s-2007 was not from "Southeast Asia, Europe and certain areas of Africa under duress from commie-backed militias." The largest source of immigration in the late 20th century was Mexico. Anti-immigration people of 30-40 years ago were not big fans of Mexican immigrants, much like anti-immigration people now aren't fans of Central American immigrants.

3. It is interesting how Cubans from before 2007 are good, but Cubans after 2007 are "the lowest of the low."

4. It is also interesting how Vietnamese people escaping Communism are good, but Chinese people escaping Communism past 2007 are, again, "the lowest of the low."

5. We had substantially more Iranian immigration in the 20th Century than we are getting now. It peaked around 1990, when about 1.1% of immigrants were from Iran. Now, it is about 0.9%, which is pretty similar to history.

6. I have no idea how Europe, Africa, and Southeast Asia are all "low on the crime spectrum." Seems like an absurd claim, but let's see if you can back it.

Honestly, the age old "the previous generation of immigrants are better than these immigrants" argument is one of my favorite anti-immigration arguments. It always lacks factual basis and is usually constructed to justify any of a number of beliefs (often how their ancestors were good or how they would be pro-immigration if not for how awful current immigrants are). But this version of it was pretty special. I put it up there with the time that a person of Italian descent told me how Italian immigrants were all good because they learned English (I should note here that the person who told me this had two grandparents that immigrated here from Italy and never spoke a word of English in their decades of living here).

 

And there's the incisive, well-thought out rebuttal ( or as some orange idiot said, reffutal) that we expected.
LOL

 

And… the movement to remove Cubans from being viewed as minorities continues.

Replace “Cuban” here with “Black” or “LGBTQ” and see how that works out for you.

 

Only if they get here legally

 

One of your more informative posts. Good work on noticeably stepping up your game.

 

It was predicted on 2009 that Obama,-Biden would turn America into a banana republic.

As the banana Republic dictator Oscar Benavides said:

"To my friends everything; to my enemies THE LAW."

 

The Kremlin was happy with Biden'# performance. Russia knows president Trump will make a negotiated settlement possible.

Examples of Biden lies:

--Trump wants to take away your social security.


--“there are 40 percent fewer people coming across the border illegally” as compared to when Trump was President."

--Trump said Nazis and white supremacists are "fine people."

 

GROSS.

 

I will concede this decision has the potential to be bad for the country long term, but I hope everybody understands that Biden and the Democrats forced the SCOTUS hand. When you have DA's literally running on a campaign of "I'll lock the #1 contender for POTUS up if you elect me", does that not open up its own Constitutional crisis? Remove politics from this for a second. Biden's 3rd ranking DOJ official takes a demotion going the southern district of New York's DA's office. If we're being honest, Biden and Bragg forced this decision, because without it, it's giving the DOJ and DA's office immunity in essence.

This ruling doesn't have a good aftertaste. But understand it would have been Trump next handpicking who works in which DA office and Trump would have numerous GOP prosecutors on his payroll to initiate charges on a slew of things. They can charge anybody with anything. So this ruling probably does more for Biden than it does for Trump. The classifieds case was not going well for Jack Smith. The Fulton County case (which I thought had the best chance for a negative outcome for Trump), the DA screwed that one up. In Manhattan, what's Merchan going to do? Put him in jail for 6 months? Guess what? He'll still win, lol.

It's Biden's people who should be happiest overall. Because Trump would have 100% initiated god knows what charges, investigations, etc etc and this ruling protects Biden from any of that.

 

Libs of TikTok is the worst thing running on social media currently. Vile, vile people. Hilarious that you get your news from those folks but can’t say I’m surprised.

 

Yes! This is the entire purpose of the people over a monarch. It is baffling what the Court has done.

 

How can you blame him? Where else can you stay updated as to how every trans athlete in America is doing or when a person with apparent issues steals $3000 in luggage?

These are the issues of our times folks

 

Nonsense.

 

I'd like to make ONE POINT HERE...

The SCOTUS didn't GIVE TRUMP IMMUNITY... The Constitution of The United States gave President Trump immunity.

The "wise Latina" doesn't know the Constitution.

 

After his disastrous debate performance, Biden goes on TV to bitterly complain that the courts won’t allow him to jail his opponent.

Optics go from bad to worse.