Trump admin. concedes Maryland man from El Salvador was mistakenly deported/sent to mega prison - shrugs 'nothing can be done' [ETA: oh but it can!]

[durangodawood]

e

But a line-item veto only strengthens the power of the President's veto, giving them more power over congress. It exacerbates the problem rather than solving it.

One way to diminish the power of parties: ranked choice or similar voting systems. The voter can venture out beyond the current structural duopoly without fear of the spoiler effect.

 

[NxNW]

We need ballots to have "none of the above" as an option.

 

[durangodawood]

We need ballots to have "none of the above" as an option.

At first voters might be excited by that. They will soon realize its as much a spoiler as a 3rd party vote, and it will become useless.

 

[NxNW]

At first voters might be excited by that. They will soon realize its as much a spoiler as a 3rd party vote, and it will become useless.

It has a much better chance of winning, I think.

 

[NxNW]

Highly Respected Courts found that he was a member of MS-13, beat up his wife, etc.

But, neither of these things happened.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I see you are choosing to ignore how it violated a court order to send him to El Salvador, and that a judge ordered the planes to turn around while they were in the air.

The course of action I outlined could be used against anyone. Even a citizen.

Either we are a nation of laws that are followed in the process of deporting people, or we are a nation where the government can do anything it wants regardless of the law.

You clearly are fine with this and all subsequent administrations violating the law. I am not.

I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I am find with Trump deporting every illegal immigrants found in this country. 56% of Americans agree.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

This is not a foreign policy matter.

Then tell that judge to go to El Salvador and get the wife beater back. Let me know how that works out.

 

[Nithavela]

How did they know the problem with parties, considering political parties didn't exist? It wasn't until towards the end of Washington's Presidential term that the Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party--the first political parties in history--came to be.

In the UK, parties were existent since the middle of the 17th century. One of them, the Tories, still exist today. It is older than the USA by over a hundred years.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Don't forget due process.

They already get due process.

 

[JSRG]

In the UK, parties were existent since the middle of the 17th century. One of them, the Tories, still exist today. It is older than the USA by over a hundred years.

As I noted in the very next paragraph, which you did not quote, they would be more properly considered factions at that point than formal political parties.

 

[Nithavela]

It has a much better chance of winning, I think.

Only if you make voting compulsory like in Australia. If you don't, lazyness wins.

 

[7thKeeper]

Don't forget due process.

Oops, too late.

 

[7thKeeper]

They already get due process.

Not in this case they didn't.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Not in this case they didn't.

Yes, the wife beater got due process and the country is better off now that he is gone.

 

[iluvatar5150]

The error they made in regards to the President is, just like the error that causes a lot of problems, is not realizing the power of political parties. What does congress do if they want to limit the power of the President? Well, pass a law doing so. But since no President wants to lose power, they veto it. Then you need 2/3 of each house of congress to override it. Since the President's party doesn't want to weaken the power of their guy, and since it's virtually never that one party has 2/3 of each house, any attempt to dial back the President's power fails.

I have been persuaded by this article that the best way to reign in the power of the President would be to abolish the veto power, which gives the President absurd power over the legislature (quite frankly, the President has stronger power over the passage of legislation than the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader combined--how much sense does that make?). I wish there would be some movement in that direction. Such an amendment would not even be more beneficial to a particular party, as it would diminish the power of both Democrat and Republican presidents.

I don’t really see how the veto is the problem. The senate already needs a two-thirds majority to override a filibuster, which is assumed for anything remotely contentious that’s not 100% budget-related.

The problem is the nationalization of the political parties and political media. When the president is also the leader of the national party, the only time the veto is even a threat anymore is when both chambers of congress are run by the party opposing the president.

 

[hedrick]

I am find with Trump deporting every illegal immigrants found in this country. 56% of Americans agree.

The discussion here isn’t about illegal immigrants.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

The discussion here isn’t about illegal immigrants.

Yes, it is.

 

[loveofourlord]

Yes, it is.

of course you then ignore that it was granted, the person who called him ms13 was let go for conduct unbecoming an officer and other issues. And that was 6 YEARS ago, you need new due process, you don't just get to decide half a decade later to suddenly do something.

 

[JosephZ]

Yes, it is.

Garcia has protected legal status to be in the United States.

 

[wing2000]

I am find with Trump deporting every illegal immigrants found in this country. 56% of Americans agree.

Most Americans agree deportions should occur in accordance with the law and the Constituion.

You, Ooompa Loompa, apparently, do not.

I have yet to see you answer if you support the USSC's ruling.

Instead, you deflect, dive and refuse to answer.