Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Yup, that's crickets you hear from SGG.

For 3 days.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JJ:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States. To apply for Asylum, file a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, within one year of your arrival

---

HOWEVER, You must be in the USA LEGALLY. These rules do NOT apply to illegal aliens.

---

I deleted the rest of your post because you misrepresent the facts by omitting what we know to be true. Your are not here illegally if you come looking for help. What you've posted here is wrong and what I post below is why you are wrong.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
speaking of the constitution

Killing of Americans Deepens Debate Over Use of Drone Strikes - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/.../killing-of-americans-deepens-debate-over-p
roper-use-of-...
Apr 23, 2015 - WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Thursday that two American Qaeda operatives killed in Pakistan in January had not been ...

From torture to drone strikes: the disturbing legal legacy Obama is ...
https://www.vox.com/.../obama-farewell-speech-torture-drones-nsa-surve
illance-trum...
Jan 10, 2017 - Using drones to kill American citizens without trial, collecting the email and phone records of millions of Americans on a daily basis, and ...

Is the Government's Mass Surveillance of Americans Justified?
www.newsweek.com/governments-mass-surveillance-americans-justified-730
288
Dec 4, 2017 - As the New Year's deadline for reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) approaches, current and former ...

Quote:

---

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
This has WHAT to do with the topic at hand?

---

You mean the topic about how terrible it is when a president shreds the Constitution?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I Googled the topic:

Can you apply for asylum from outside the US?

You may apply for asylum if you are at a Point of Entry or in the United States. You may apply for asylum regardless of your immigration status and within one year of your arrival to the United States.

Can I still apply for Asylum even if I am in the United States illegally?

Yes. You may apply for asylum with USCIS regardless of your immigration
status if:

+You are not currently in removal proceedings
+You file an asylum application within one year of arriving to the United States or demonstrate that you are within exception of that rule.

Where can I find the law on Asylum?

...the Asylum Program can be found in Section 208 of the INA. Rules concerning
eligibility requirements and procedures can be found at 8 CFR 208.

(Source: USCIS - U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services)


SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
A person who has made illegal entry may apply for asylum. However, the US reserves the right to detain that person while determining his/ her status. If the status is determined to be ineligible, that person may be deported immediately, at the discretion of relevant officials. That person also becomes permanently ineligible for any type of legal stay in the US in the future.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Legal lessons from Russian trolls. How precious.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted:
Legal lessons from Russian trolls. How precious.

---

NPC

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
speaking of the constitution

Killing of Americans Deepens Debate Over Use of Drone Strikes - The ...
https://www.nytimes.com/.../killing-of-americans-deepens-debate-over-p
roper-use-of-...
Apr 23, 2015 - WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Thursday that two American Qaeda operatives killed in Pakistan in January had not been ...

From torture to drone strikes: the disturbing legal legacy Obama is ...
https://www.vox.com/.../obama-farewell-speech-torture-drones-nsa-surve
illance-trum...
Jan 10, 2017 - Using drones to kill American citizens without trial, collecting the email and phone records of millions of Americans on a daily basis, and ...

Is the Government's Mass Surveillance of Americans Justified?
www.newsweek.com/governments-mass-surveillance-americans-justified-730
288
Dec 4, 2017 - As the New Year's deadline for reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) approaches, current and former ...

---

This has WHAT to do with the topic at hand?

---

You mean the topic about how terrible it is when a president shreds the Constitution?

SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).

---

No, the topic is "due process"

I'm surprised Jewels didn't give you the Thread Police treatment. He must be slipping.

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
I was pointing out to SGG that applying for asylum isn't a free 'get out of jail' card. While anyone can apply within the limits specified, there are serious consequences to identifying yourself to the authorities - like being jailed while your status is determined; and then losing your case - like immediate deportation and permanently losing any right at all to be in the US at any time for any reason.

I suspect most people would not actually apply for asylum because of that. Losing and being in the US puts a legal target on your back. Being in the US illegally - unknown, uncounted, and living in the shadows - might be preferable.

---

Quote:

---

While kiki's frequent lazer-focus again rules the day and cuts through your BS and fluffery, almost everybody recognizes this "due process" as Code Words for your delusions. You had no intention or desire for any real discussion on that actual subject.

BTW, this quote of SGGs is from 24 June.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Legal lessons from Russian trolls. How precious.

---

NPC

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Kiki,

We've had our differences here in RWED, but I do appreciate how you responded to my comment regarding the USCIS rules.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Quote:

---

While kiki's frequent lazer-focus again rules the day and cuts through your BS and fluffery, almost everybody recognizes this "due process" as Code Words for your delusions. You had no intention or desire for any real discussion on that actual subject.

BTW, this quote of SGGs is from 24 June.

---

And now for you Jewels:

I created the thread to "discuss" the topic. I place discuss in parentheses because that word could take a detour into insanity and vitriol (something that you have proved time and again to be quite frustrating to respond to). You have every right to say whatever comes into that mind of yours, it doesn't make it correct, but you have that right. Having said that, I have the right to call you an idiot for all your attempts to sabotage that discussion.

So, to be sure, I don't give a shit if you think I'm being sincere or not.
Whenever you come to the discussion in a forthright manner, then, maybe we can
have a decent conversation.

BTW, you often comment on topics months later. Really, are you the Thread Police here? If so, send me a copy of the Rules and Regs, will ya!

SGG

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Legal lessons from Russian trolls. How precious.

---

NPC

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

I'm definitely a PC, here.

You revealing your Nazi roots is no surprise, either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
"No, you're just deflecting. We're talking about Trump wanting to eliminate due process."

I'm discussing the TOPIC, which in part is the right to due process and Constitutional protections. How meaningful is that right in general?

If Obama deprives actual US citizens of due process and Constitutional protections, do you think it's a problem?

---

First of all "If Obama" is totally hypothetical so apparently he didn't. Seocndly,"The 1951 Refugee Convention gives migrants the right to apply for asylum in the United States, regardless of whether they entered or remained in the country legally or illegally."

T

---

You should probably read up on this instead of cherry picking what you like and posting it all over these boards.

Rather than do that for you, I thought I might post something which shows that the convention has a long history of being pretty much meaningless...

Quote:

---

Although the Convention is "legally binding"

---

So let me ask you dummy. What does legally binding mean to you?

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
So let me ask you dummy. What does legally binding mean to you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
So let me ask you dummy. What does legally binding mean to you?

---

By who's authority? The U.N.? That's a laugh.

Doesn't matter what legally binding means to me when nobody in the history of EVER has invoked any part of it.


I'd look forward for them to try now. Bad timing, with the state of the Supreme Court. Even worse if they wait a few more years when Ginsberg gets replaced. She is 85 after all.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

You dummy, you posted it was legally binding. So dummy, If it's legally binding that's it, that's the law regardless how it was applied or not in other instances.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
So let me ask you dummy. What does legally binding mean to you?

---

By who's authority? The U.N.? That's a laugh.

Doesn't matter what legally binding means to me when nobody in the history of EVER has invoked any part of it.


I'd look forward for them to try now. Bad timing, with the state of the Supreme Court. Even worse if they wait a few more years when Ginsberg gets replaced. She is 85 after all.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

You dummy, you posted it was legally binding. So dummy, If it's legally binding that's it, that's the law.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
There are 143 countries which have agreed to the obligations under both the Refugee Convention and its Protocol (known as 'states parties'). There are also three countries (including the United States of America) which have agreed to the Protocol only, and two small countries that have agreed to the Convention only.

May 14, 2016


tic tac

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Kiki,

We've had our differences here in RWED, but I do appreciate how you responded to my comment regarding the USCIS rules.

---

I appreciate the discussion as well. I hope we can do it again sometime!

---

Quote:

---

What does that have to do with commenting on topics months later? Does you feelz dat topics haz a expiration date?

---