Trump formally files appeal of $365 million verdict, does NOT post required bond

[ishtat]

Then just let government establish all prices and determine the value of everything. The banks made money, a profit and that’s what capitalism is all about.

Theodore Roosevelt enacted legislation against Trump's type of "Robber Baron" capitalism 120 years ago where powerful entities obtained terms unavailable and to the detriment of other less powerful folk. The States including New York enacted their own legislation to match/support the Federal statutes. Trump has been defrauding US lenders for years which is why so much of his debt is held overseas. The difference now is that in Letitia James, Trump finally ran into an AG who was willing and capable of upholding law which has been on the statute book for years.

You said the original loans were repaid to the banks. In fact they were not: Trumps quite usual tactic was to get behind with payments and then demand re-negotiation at even more favourable terms. In other words he stiffed them. Unsurprisingly all the US banks eventually wanted nothing to do with Trump and he had to resort to overseas funds, a very substantial proportion of which came from Russia (A fact denied by DJT but confirmed by both of his sons)

It is close attention to detail which has enabled Letitia James to nail the fraudster Trump. Details ICH, are something you should consider, rather than half baked political rhetoric.

 

[icanhelp1]

Theodore Roosevelt enacted legislation against Trump's type of "Robber Baron" capitalism 120 years ago where powerful entities obtained terms unavailable and to the detriment of other less powerful folk. The States including New York enacted their own legislation to match/support the Federal statutes. Trump has been defrauding US lenders for years which is why so much of his debt is held overseas. The difference now is that in Letitia James, Trump finally ran into an AG who was willing and capable of upholding law which has been on the statute book for years.

You said the original loans were repaid to the banks. In fact they were not: Trumps quite usual tactic was to get behind with payments and then demand re-negotiation at even more favourable terms. In other words he stiffed them. Unsurprisingly all the US banks eventually wanted nothing to do with Trump and he had to resort to overseas funds, a very substantial proportion of which came from Russia (A fact denied by DJT but confirmed by both of his sons)

It is close attention to detail which has enabled Letitia James to nail the fraudster Trump. Details ICH, are something you should consider, rather than half baked political rhetoric.

I never said the original loans were paid back, what I wrote was that the banks were OK with doing business with Trump. NY is doing a big disservice to their business community by stealing Trump’s corporate assets. Doesn’t lend confidence to other companies that if Letitia has a bad day she doesn’t put their companies in her crosshairs. SDNY has tried to bag Trump and didn’t have the evidence for criminal charges other than a few employees . I never defended Trump’s business ethics but he’s not the critter he was back in the 80s or 90s. Back then he was a democrat and a democrat ally. Not sure about US banks but I’m sure your posting is accurate and credible, my issue is with the AG and the courts.

In the background of all this NY vs Trump is Gerald Nadler who lost a real estate case to Trump and has been railing against him since the 80s. IMHO

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I never said

No you didn't. You turned tail and ran from this faster than the roadrunner from the coyote.

Again I asked you, why it is not ok for James to campaign on prosecuting Trump, but it is ok for Trump to campaign on using his Presidential office if elected to take revenge?

I get why you're moving the goal posts, and I have to admit, it's almost as entertaining as I suspected it would be when I asked....

fucking pussy, you don't even have guts to defend it, you just pull a Schultz.

 

[dmallord]

It’s abuse of power, James should be disbarred but unfortunately the BAR association is now a leftist organization suffering from TDS on steroids.. The judge’s sentencing guidelines are his concoction and unconstitutional.

Abuse of power is not the case on trial here. Donald Trump's criminal NY case is based on fraud charges.

Your TDS opinion is not shared by many on this forum. But that's okay. In either opinion set, it is now beyond the originating judge's decision. Fortunately, I believe, the next appellate level is not an august members of this forum so our dispirit views will not bias their decision.

 

[dmallord]

This and the appearance of impropriety. James campaigned on getting Trump, impropriety clear and simple.

And Trump's campaign audiences are getting an earful on how he will use the DOJ to attack his enemies if reelected - not different right?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

And Trump's campaign audiences are getting an earful on how he will use the DOJ to attack his enemies if reelected - not different right?

Of course it's different, everything Trump does is perfect.

 

[dmallord]

I never said the original loans were paid back, what I wrote was that the banks were OK with doing business with Trump. NY is doing a big disservice to their business community by stealing Trump’s corporate assets. Doesn’t lend confidence to other companies that if Letitia has a bad day she doesn’t put their companies in her crosshairs. SDNY has tried to bag Trump and didn’t have the evidence for criminal charges other than a few employees . I never defended Trump’s business ethics but he’s not the critter he was back in the 80s or 90s. Back then he was a democrat and a democrat ally. Not sure about US banks but I’m sure your posting is accurate and credible, my issue is with the AG and the courts.

In the background of all this NY vs Trump is Gerald Nadler who lost a real estate case to Trump and has been railing against him since the 80s. IMHO

Thanks for the clarification. At least it adds a modicum of believability to your threads attempting to be a balanced observer. Better late than never, to the issues as they say. You mention Nadler - why? Is he tied to this current case in any way? If not, you are adding crap to the pie as obfuscation again. IMHO

You said your issues are with the AG and the courts. New York did not steal Trump's corporate assets - they are all in place and intact. The thirty-day clock is ticking before any of those are used to pay the fines. The AG will follow common legal practices to seize enough assets and liquidate them to satisfy the payment due - not all assets. That's the norm when a criminal is convicted and judgement is rendered. The rest will remain in the business name and under the legal monitor. Of course, that is held in abeyance pending Trump's right to an appeal.

The AG didn't have a bad day; she campaigned on reining in fraudsters, and Donald Trump was long noted for fitting that description from past performances. Like Al Capone, he was/is slippery and like the Feds the AG applied a new approach in gaining a conviction. In Capone's case, they changed tactics and prosecuted him for income tax evasion. This NY AG is applying a new strategy you frown upon as being unconstitutional and unfair. Neither she nor the judge in this case see it that way. But you similarly vilify them in a Donald Trump mannerism. Appeals will handle that not vitrolic posts against the court systems. I' give you that she is an astute AG, but not operating beyond her purview, unless an appeal says otherwise.

Trump is not the same critter he was back in the 80's and 90's is accurate. He is probably worse now that he has added politics to his gamesmanship. Back then it was the sincophant acts of a television actor and bad businessmen. Today, it has evolved into acts that perpetuated life and death consequences. People died at the Capitol and didn't have to. He precipitated the actions that caused those deaths, not to mention attacks on the very fabric of our Constitution.

Perhaps a quick recap is due here for readers.

• The NY criminal judge fined him a substantial amount, $364m. By Trump's own account at trial, he had the ability to pay from cash reserves. It turns out he lied about his cash reserves, as well. That fine was determined based on the difference between what rates a non-falsified loan application would have cost Trump, interests, etc. It was a large fine but not as punitive as possible. He could have been sentenced to jail time but was not.
• 
  
• Trump, personally was barred for running the business for three years - not forever. His two sons were barred for two years - not forever. The judge could have, but didn't, revoke his license to do business in the State of New York. That would have meant the end of Trump's businesses.
• 
  
• Initially, the judge barred Trump from using NY banking for financials but removed that restriction when Don contested that it would be impossible to obtain a bond or a loan on his properties to bond out. That spells leniency in most people's minds.
• 
  
• His company was placed under an experienced retired judge's oversight to ensure the businesses were financially managed in accordance with 'standard' accounting procedures - for five years - not forever. As you recall, Trump had three sets of financial books: one for loan purposes, one for Federal Income taxes, and the real set of true ledger accounting. At the end of those two, three, or five-year timeout periods, the Trump men will be allowed back into business management per the court order. 'Repentant and/or rehabilitated' presumably.
• 
  
• Another layer of oversight was added to assist the first appointed person - this placed a second set of eyes to ensure the empire played by the rules.

Trump could have been an honest businessman and avoided this mess. He wasn't. He blames any and everyone for his problems and holds out that he is a perfect businessman and totally an honest one - even the best President ever. Really?

 

[icanhelp1]

Thanks for the clarification. At least it adds a modicum of believability to your threads attempting to be a balanced observer. Better late than never, to the issues as they say. You mention Nadler - why? Is he tied to this current case in any way? If not, you are adding crap to the pie as obfuscation again. IMHO

You said your issues are with the AG and the courts. New York did not steal Trump's corporate assets - they are all in place and intact. The thirty-day clock is ticking before any of those are used to pay the fines. The AG will follow common legal practices to seize enough assets and liquidate them to satisfy the payment due - not all assets. That's the norm when a criminal is convicted and judgement is rendered. The rest will remain in the business name and under the legal monitor. Of course, that is held in abeyance pending Trump's right to an appeal.

The AG didn't have a bad day; she campaigned on reining in fraudsters, and Donald Trump was long noted for fitting that description from past performances. Like Al Capone, he was/is slippery and like the Feds the AG applied a new approach in gaining a conviction. In Capone's case, they changed tactics and prosecuted him for income tax evasion. This NY AG is applying a new strategy you frown upon as being unconstitutional and unfair. Neither she nor the judge in this case see it that way. But you similarly vilify them in a Donald Trump mannerism. Appeals will handle that not vitrolic posts against the court systems. I' give you that she is an astute AG, but not operating beyond her purview, unless an appeal says otherwise.

Trump is not the same critter he was back in the 80's and 90's is accurate. He is probably worse now that he has added politics to his gamesmanship. Back then it was the sincophant acts of a television actor and bad businessmen. Today, it has evolved into acts that perpetuated life and death consequences. People died at the Capitol and didn't have to. He precipitated the actions that caused those deaths, not to mention attacks on the very fabric of our Constitution.

Perhaps a quick recap is due here for readers.

• The NY criminal judge fined him a substantial amount, $364m. By Trump's own account at trial, he had the ability to pay from cash reserves. It turns out he lied about his cash reserves, as well. That fine was determined based on the difference between what rates a non-falsified loan application would have cost Trump, interests, etc. It was a large fine but not as punitive as possible. He could have been sentenced to jail time but was not.
• 
  
• Trump, personally was barred for running the business for three years - not forever. His two sons were barred for two years - not forever. The judge could have, but didn't, revoke his license to do business in the State of New York. That would have meant the end of Trump's businesses.
• 
  
• Initially, the judge barred Trump from using NY banking for financials but removed that restriction when Don contested that it would be impossible to obtain a bond or a loan on his properties to bond out. That spells leniency in most people's minds.
• 
  
• His company was placed under an experienced retired judge's oversight to ensure the businesses were financially managed in accordance with 'standard' accounting procedures - for five years - not forever. As you recall, Trump had three sets of financial books: one for loan purposes, one for Federal Income taxes, and the real set of true ledger accounting. At the end of those two, three, or five-year timeout periods, the Trump men will be allowed back into business management per the court order. 'Repentant and/or rehabilitated' presumably.
• 
  
• Another layer of oversight was added to assist the first appointed person - this placed a second set of eyes to ensure the empire played by the rules.

Trump could have been an honest businessman and avoided this mess. He wasn't. He blames any and everyone for his problems and holds out that he is a perfect businessman and totally an honest one - even the best President ever. Really?

This is a more realistic snapshot of what’s really going on in NY’s justice system, this from a Trump hater. The left controls all the levers of power and power corrupts if not challenged by a caring media. Finally a media legal analyst from an adversarial media platform says what most Americans believe.

https://glarity.app/youtube-summary/news-politics/cnn-legal-analyst-goes-nuclear-on-18834185_352806

 

[dmallord]

This is a more realistic snapshot of what’s really going on in NY’s justice system, this from a Trump hater. The left controls all the levers of power and power corrupts if not challenged by a caring media. Finally a media legal analyst from an adversarial media platform says what most Americans believe.

https://glarity.app/youtube-summary/news-politics/cnn-legal-analyst-goes-nuclear-on-18834185_352806

You post a one-minute video summary of an opinion expressed on a CNN interview as a realistic snapshot of what most Americans believe. I didn't see a nuclear moment—just a scholar waxing on a nostalgic moment in 2018. And your declaration that most believe it is subject to speculation. I don't believe the left controls the media.

I looked up the original CNN interview and watched it. The speaker offered his opinion that he 'thought' professionals should not express views as she did in 2018. Then, he noted no rules against her words to campaign in that manner. He said a book on ethics should be written, note there isn't one apparently], but he might include such procedures in a new book he would write on how one should conduct themselves while campaigning.

He didn't declare she was unethical or did something illegal by making such statements. He carefully threaded that line by saying, 'I don't think it was appropriate.'

You cite an opinion by a guy interviewed by a CNN reporter on an 'adversarial media platform' you dislike. You claim most Americans believe what he said, and somehow, that is meant to contradict what I wrote?

Know what? Her bravado wasn't the best campaign method; she could have done better. But it didn't interfere with her following the law and due process for Trump. She didn't manufacture evidence or lie in court about what she found out about Trump's businesses. She provided voluminous evidentiary trails about his dealings - the judge agreed.

But her responses are no more pejorative toward Trump than his toward her and the 'crooked' judge he labeled on the courthouse steps over and over as being out to get him even before the trial started. Trump declared the judge found me guilty even before he knew what the trial was about. [That's an insane concept - like declassifying documents just by thinking about it.]

You keep harping on this to sway a reasonable person into thinking he is innocent. He was found guilty.

 

[icanhelp1]

You post a one-minute video summary of an opinion expressed on a CNN interview as a realistic snapshot of what most Americans believe. I didn't see a nuclear moment—just a scholar waxing on a nostalgic moment in 2018. And your declaration that most believe it is subject to speculation. I don't believe the left controls the media.

I looked up the original CNN interview and watched it. The speaker offered his opinion that he 'thought' professionals should not express views as she did in 2018. Then, he noted no rules against her words to campaign in that manner. He said a book on ethics should be written, note there isn't one apparently], but he might include such procedures in a new book he would write on how one should conduct themselves while campaigning.

He didn't declare she was unethical or did something illegal by making such statements. He carefully threaded that line by saying, 'I don't think it was appropriate.'

You cite an opinion by a guy interviewed by a CNN reporter on an 'adversarial media platform' you dislike. You claim most Americans believe what he said, and somehow, that is meant to contradict what I wrote?

Know what? Her bravado wasn't the best campaign method; she could have done better. But it didn't interfere with her following the law and due process for Trump. She didn't manufacture evidence or lie in court about what she found out about Trump's businesses. She provided voluminous evidentiary trails about his dealings - the judge agreed.

But her responses are no more pejorative toward Trump than his toward her and the 'crooked' judge he labeled on the courthouse steps over and over as being out to get him even before the trial started. Trump declared the judge found me guilty even before he knew what the trial was about. [That's an insane concept - like declassifying documents just by thinking about it.]

You keep harping on this to sway a reasonable person into thinking he is innocent. He was found guilty.

You hate Trump I understand that. Just take a minute to watch other legal analysts comment on the abuse of power and the political nature of these proceedings. There’s not just the appearance of impropriety but impropriety itself. My comments are not about Trump but more about the abuse of power and publicly threatening the destruction of an individual. Letitia James has made this personal, this is the beginning of the acceptance of tyranny as a norm. Lady justice is no longer blind and NY will pay a price. I’m not going to write a long dissertation of why this trial is so wrongheaded, the leftist agenda has taken over your senses. The leftist culture is jubilant with these indictments while the modern day Nero ( Biden ) plays his fiddle while our country burns.

You like to write long narratives mostly correct sentence structure, correct punctuation, perfect spelling from the first capital letter to the last period in your narrative, But everything in between reeks of political bias, hatred and the leftist culture and ideology that the ends justify the means, win at all cost to hell with constitutional mandates that are supposed to protect citizens from their overtly intrusive government. Letitia James took an oath to defend and protect not impose her will by abusing the office of the attorney general.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You hate Trump I understand that. Just take a minute to watch other legal analysts comment on the abuse of power and the political nature of these proceedings. There’s not just the appearance of impropriety but impropriety itself. My comments are not about Trump but more about the abuse of power and publicly threatening the destruction of an individual. Letitia James has made this personal, this is the beginning of the acceptance of tyranny as a norm. Lady justice is no longer blind and NY will pay a price. I’m not going to write a long dissertation of why this trial is so wrongheaded, the leftist agenda has taken over your senses. The leftist culture is jubilant with these indictments while the modern day Nero ( Biden ) plays his fiddle while our country burns.

You like to write long narratives mostly correct sentence structure, correct punctuation, perfect spelling from the first capital letter to the last period in your narrative, But everything in between reeks of political bias, hatred and the leftist culture and ideology that the ends justify the means, win at all cost to hell with constitutional mandates that are supposed to protect citizens from their overtly intrusive government. Letitia James took an oath to defend and protect not impose her will by abusing the office of the attorney general.

Huh, the legal guy Fox News brought on said that Trump broke the law.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You hate Trump I understand that.

LOL the ican't defence when all other defences have failed.

Well done again dmallord.

 

[jomar]

I carry water for the constitution and equal application of the law. I’ve said many times in past post that I personally don’t like Trump as a person but I agree with his policies, especially on border security. Biden on the other hand is an absolute fool.

Far from going nuclear the analyst said both things can be true. That is, James ran on a political cry of she’d get trump for crimes that were an open secret, and that trump actually committed crimes for which he is being held legally accountable.

 

[icanhelp1]

Far from going nuclear the analyst said both things can be true. That is, James ran on a political cry of she’d get trump for crimes that were an open secret, and that trump actually committed crimes for which he is being held legally accountable.

Think about this! NY changed its statutes of limitation laws for one year so E Jean Carroll could file suit against Trump! Tell me that isn't a political move to keep Trump off the ballot.

Biden gets a pass on the classified document investigation while Trump, who was president, could legally possess documents. Trump, much like the past FBI sins against the Trump admin, is once again a victim of process crimes over a substantive violation of statute.

Bragg is pressing charges on an issue that outran statutes of limitations so he fabricated a lie attempting to combine it with a federal statute, which is outside his purview I might add, to give the indictment life.

Nothing political to see here. Then there's the Fani Willis saga.

 

[jomar]

Think about this! NY changed its statutes of limitation laws for one year so E Jean Carroll could file suit against Trump! Tell me that isn't a political move to keep Trump off the ballot.

So she’s making good on her campaign promises to bring the grifter to justice. Meanwhile, SCOTUS is slow walking the immunity trial, so maybe it all balances out

Biden gets a pass on the classified document investigation while Trump, who was president, could legally possess documents. Trump, much like the past FBI sins against the Trump admin, is once again a victim of process crimes over a substantive violation of statute.

You keep on forgetting to mention trump had them after he was no longer president and that Biden fully cooperated while trump lied and stonewalled and refused to return them

Bragg is pressing charges on an issue that outran statutes of limitations so he fabricated a lie attempting to combine it with a federal statute, which is outside his purview I might add, to give the indictment life.

If so, then it will fail

Then there's the Fani Willis saga.

Certainly bad optics, as they say

 

[dmallord]

You hate Trump I understand that. Just take a minute to watch other legal analysts comment on the abuse of power and the political nature of these proceedings. There’s not just the appearance of impropriety but impropriety itself. My comments are not about Trump but more about the abuse of power and publicly threatening the destruction of an individual. Letitia James has made this personal, this is the beginning of the acceptance of tyranny as a norm. Lady justice is no longer blind and NY will pay a price. I’m not going to write a long dissertation of why this trial is so wrongheaded, the leftist agenda has taken over your senses. The leftist culture is jubilant with these indictments while the modern day Nero ( Biden ) plays his fiddle while our country burns.

You like to write long narratives mostly correct sentence structure, correct punctuation, perfect spelling from the first capital letter to the last period in your narrative, But everything in between reeks of political bias, hatred and the leftist culture and ideology that the ends justify the means, win at all cost to hell with constitutional mandates that are supposed to protect citizens from their overtly intrusive government. Letitia James took an oath to defend and protect not impose her will by abusing the office of the attorney general.

I've said a couple of time if not more, that I despise Trump on moral grounds. I've taken over a minute - countless hours - to form opinions about Donald. I've read up on his past involvements in business, books about him, and most of what you have posted as counterpoints. It doesn't even begin to justify him as being something good for our country. His political antics are just as bad. Hate is too strong a word for my feelings - label me as disgusted with him.

I've endured watching a helluva lot television with his vitrolic actions. [Just look at the link's picture you sent - the face of a raging man.] Rarely is he ever calm enough to seem rational. Trump, on a justice scale, is not balanced to the good side. I believe he deserves to pay a price for his part in the J6 attempted coup. The Republican house members know it too; they refuse to express themselves out of some sense of losing political power and condemn a bad man. Shameful.

Trump took an oath to defend our nation and the justice system, the same as Letitia James. I haven't seen you condemn Trump's overwhelming flagrant abuses. Present a balanced side in any of your arguments - the pros and cons - I listen as you weigh those. Meanwhile, I believe Trump is guilty, although he may escape justice.

Thanks for the comment on my writing efforts. I'll try to be more brief if that helps in the future.

 

[icanhelp1]

I've said a couple of time if not more, that I despise Trump on moral grounds. I've taken over a minute - countless hours - to form opinions about Donald. I've read up on his past involvements in business, books about him, and most of what you have posted as counterpoints. It doesn't even begin to justify him as being something good for our country. His political antics are just as bad. Hate is too strong a word for my feelings - label me as disgusted with him.

I've endured watching a helluva lot television with his vitrolic actions. [Just look at the link's picture you sent - the face of a raging man.] Rarely is he ever calm enough to seem rational. Trump, on a justice scale, is not balanced to the good side. I believe he deserves to pay a price for his part in the J6 attempted coup. The Republican house members know it too; they refuse to express themselves out of some sense of losing political power and condemn a bad man. Shameful.

Trump took an oath to defend our nation and the justice system, the same as Letitia James. I haven't seen you condemn Trump's overwhelming flagrant abuses. Present a balanced side in any of your arguments - the pros and cons - I listen as you weigh those. Meanwhile, I believe Trump is guilty, although he may escape justice.

Thanks for the comment on my writing efforts. I'll try to be more brief if that helps in the future.

And yet immigration was under control, our petroleum reserves were full, unemployment at all time lows, no foreign wars, energy independence, military rebuilt, booming economy, stock market breaking records, made covid vaccines available for all, armed Ukraine, convinced NATO to pay their fair share, initiated the * First step act*, brought industry back to America, invested in rural America, dealt with China trade imbalance , tax cuts lifting all boats, created opportunity zones where long term investments were not taxed, massive deregulation that strangled economic growth, ended NAFTA and created USMCA, supported our farmers, MOST OF ALL HE PUT AMERICA’s interest first.

 

[icanhelp1]

I've said a couple of time if not more, that I despise Trump on moral grounds. I've taken over a minute - countless hours - to form opinions about Donald. I've read up on his past involvements in business, books about him, and most of what you have posted as counterpoints. It doesn't even begin to justify him as being something good for our country. His political antics are just as bad. Hate is too strong a word for my feelings - label me as disgusted with him.

I've endured watching a helluva lot television with his vitrolic actions. [Just look at the link's picture you sent - the face of a raging man.] Rarely is he ever calm enough to seem rational. Trump, on a justice scale, is not balanced to the good side. I believe he deserves to pay a price for his part in the J6 attempted coup. The Republican house members know it too; they refuse to express themselves out of some sense of losing political power and condemn a bad man. Shameful.

Trump took an oath to defend our nation and the justice system, the same as Letitia James. I haven't seen you condemn Trump's overwhelming flagrant abuses. Present a balanced side in any of your arguments - the pros and cons - I listen as you weigh those. Meanwhile, I believe Trump is guilty, although he may escape justice.

Thanks for the comment on my writing efforts. I'll try to be more brief if that helps in the future.

If you hate Trump on moral grounds then you should have disdain for the Kennedys, the Clintons and Obama who may go down in history as the most corrupt president ever.

 

[ll74]

And yet immigration was under control, our petroleum reserves were full, unemployment at all time lows, no foreign wars, energy independence, military rebuilt, booming economy, stock market breaking records, made covid vaccines available for all, armed Ukraine, convinced NATO to pay their fair share, initiated the * First step act*, brought industry back to America, invested in rural America, dealt with China trade imbalance , tax cuts lifting all boats, created opportunity zones where long term investments were not taxed, massive deregulation that strangled economic growth, ended NAFTA and created USMCA, supported our farmers, MOST OF ALL HE PUT AMERICA’s interest first.

Immigration was never under control. He had millions crossing the border.

Having more doesn't mean it's less under control.... Just more people coming.

 

[icanhelp1]

Immigration was never under control. He had millions crossing the border.

Having more doesn't mean it's less under control.... Just more people coming.

https://thehill.com/opinion/4423296...-double-under-biden-and-thats-just-the-start/

The number of illegal immigrants in the country has roughly doubled under President Biden. The United States had some 10.2 million illegal immigrants in 2020, and another 10 million have entered during Biden’s presidency. If the 20 million illegal immigrants were all in one state, it would be tied with New York for the fourth most populated state.

And here’s even worse news. If Biden wins a second term in office and there is no serious reform of U.S. immigration and asylum laws — both of which are very real possibilities — we can expect a continuing increase in the rate of immigrants crossing the border illegally.

 

[ll74]

https://thehill.com/opinion/4423296...-double-under-biden-and-thats-just-the-start/

The number of illegal immigrants in the country has roughly doubled under President Biden. The United States had some 10.2 million illegal immigrants in 2020, and another 10 million have entered during Biden’s presidency. If the 20 million illegal immigrants were all in one state, it would be tied with New York for the fourth most populated state.

And here’s even worse news. If Biden wins a second term in office and there is no serious reform of U.S. immigration and asylum laws — both of which are very real possibilities — we can expect a continuing increase in the rate of immigrants crossing the border illegally.

Yes, Congress needs to pass asylum reforms.

 

[icanhelp1]

Yes, Congress needs to pass asylum reforms.

Biden needs to stop abusing parole and catch and release.

 

[schism666]

Biden needs to stop abusing parole and catch and release.

trump should have finished started the wall you voted for.

 

[schism666]

If you hate Trump on moral grounds then you should have disdain for the Kennedys, the Clintons and Obama who may go down in history as the most corrupt president ever.

meanwhile, none of them were ever charged with half the shit trump is facing.

were they too good or was he just a dumb fuck?

 

[icanhelp1]

trump should have finished started the wall you voted for.

Pelosi should have funded it.