Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247) |
Author: Dope1   😊 😞
Number: of 84350 
Subject: Re: Trump: I Would Encourage Russia...
Date: 02/13/24 5:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 2
"Good faith" negotiating doesn't usually mean "everything I want and exactly the way I want it, and nothing you want and no changes to how I want it." There's good reasons for these things.

Good thing no one is doing that. One more time, I offered the trigger levels. Mike wondered why the sunset. Folks on this board dug their heels in and wouldn't budge.

Why?

Can't have it both ways.

We talked about the sunset provision - what ended up in the bill was a likely violation of international human rights law as it applies to refugees, so you definitely want to come back and revisit that in a few years.

LOL. That's not a good reason. If it was "international law" that free speech was to be outlawed, does that override our 1st Amendment? Hardly. Show me any country on the planet that would accept the notion that literally anybody has a right to entry.

The bailouts for blue cities are there because Abbott sent so many migrants to blue cities. So funds to mitigate the impacts of these migrants aren't just going to go into ruby red Texas any more. They'll also go to blue cities as well.

LOLOLOLOLOL. Why was Abbot able to do that? It's because he got sick of bearing the entire burden himself.

As for the "democrat friendly court in DC," can you explain what that particular point is about? Right now, all appeals of immigration court decisions already go to the Board of Immigration Appeals in DC. Are people being told that this is a new arrangement?

X (Twitter): Rep. Dan Bishop on X: "All challenges to the statute or any policy, guideline, or procedure Mayorkas sees fit to issue will be heard exclusively by the federal

All challenges to the statute or any policy, guideline, or procedure Mayorkas sees fit to issue will be heard exclusively by the federal district court in the Swamp. Tough orders from federal district courts in Texas and Florida will be no more.

Rep. Bishop has a screenshot of the provision. The bill states clearly that only the DC court can hear any challenge to the bill or anything Mayorkas does with respect to it.

Why do you think that's there?

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to Dope1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community