114 points

What “illegal immigrants” in their right mind would be out partying at an after hours night club with everything going on? I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few, but 100? This reeks of steamed hams. 100 migrants localized entirely in this illegal nightclub, in this political climate? I would like to see the evidence

permalink
report
reply
76 points

Evidence is no longer a thing, due process being over and all that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-47 points

Was no longer a thing a long time ago

Democrats and Republicans both worked hard for the elites to make sure of it

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

Don’t you dare both sides this horse shit we’re dealing with. Only one side caused it and continues to support it. And you know that you little traitor.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

They probably weren’t out partying carrying their birth certificate on them. At this stage you’re probably considered illegal if you can’t prove your citizenship right then and there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Even if you have evidence, ICE will just say, “take them anyway! They don’t look white.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

“Steamed Hamming” is my new phrase of the year.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Well I’m from Aspen, and we don’t call them illegal After hours nightclubs…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yes seriously I want to know, since when has it been illegal for a night club to be open after a certain hour?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Let’s be honest, most people are dumb and operate under the “It won’t happen to me” delusion

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You’re right. If the government did not already have a history of essentially human trafficking innocent people, I would be much less inclined to care about this

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

If it’s illegal and all that, yes, they should be held to standard.

But given the fact that this administration likes to slap the word “illegal” on anything they don’t like, was it really? Or is it a boy crying wolf again?

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Did you buy a Tesla? No? Congrats, you are part of the illegal boycott now. President said so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points
*

I didn’t buy a Tesla, no. Yet it is not illegal for me because he’s not my president and he has no legal power over me, even if I’m also indirectly affected by his policies. American defaultism is pretty cringe, imho.

Did you buy one? Because if so you unironically contributed to the mess which allowed the richest man to buy his way into presidency.

See? I can also reply nonsense and immature “gotcha” stuff that has nothing to do with what I originally said as well. 🥸

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I am agreeing with you here, for fuck’s sake.

This administration likes to call all things it does not like illegal. Like not buying a Tesla.

I agree i could have worded more clearly. But chill out, man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

American defaultism is pretty cringe, imho.

You’re in a thread about America and Americans are at least the plurality here on Lemmy, if not the majority. Of course in this situation, when you make a statement about the US, people assume you’re from the US. What do you expect? It’s pretty cringe for people to make a big deal out of well founded assumptions being incorrect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

If it’s illegal and all that, yes, they should be held to standard.

The past few years have eroded the meaning of illegal, and even standards. They have even chose to ignore due process.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nobody should be deported their “legality” shouldn’t matter. Nobody is illegal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Who said they should be deported? And if they are indeed commiting an illegal act under the written law, why shouldn’t they be subject to any consequences for breaking said law?

I don’t agree with authoritarianism, but I won’t defend lawlessness either. These extreme and radical stances from either party are why the US is where it currently is.

I cast my doubt over the the very foundation of the act of imprisoning these people, not if they’re innocent or not. Because without due process everyone is guilty until proven otherwise - and even then not really. I think you missed my entire point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Just out of curiosity, what are some of the “left” stances you feel are extreme or radical?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Stonewall was deemed illegal by the cops that raided it, and that’s the genesis of queer pride.

Sometimes illegal shit is not only okay, but necessary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We know it’s a bad situation when the basic elements of the constitution are considered “extreme and radical”

No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

yes no prisons or police should exist. “lawlessness” is a good thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Everything that would normally get you a small infraction or fine, will now make you an illegal immigrant ready to be thrown into the concentration camps.

Only the elite are allowed to live, the rest should remain silent, obedient and weak.

There will be no more partying. No more unsanctioned laughter and joy.

permalink
report
reply
21 points

/checks to see if it’s Colorado Springs

Of course it is.

Right wing AF. I don’t think many people have a clue how insanely god-squad right wing the USAF Academy is. It’s cult-like.

permalink
report
reply
7 points
*

Pretty sure the word “illegal” is being used very loosely here.

permalink
report
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 322K

    Comments