Biden tells NASA engineer Indian-Americans are ‘taking over the country’

Yup. Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley come to mind. Not to mention that Asian Americans are top shelf, model citizens who excel at everything. We are truly most fortunate to be a nation of many races. And that the principles established by our European Founding Fathers are embraced by so many kinds is about the best that anyone could hope for. Now if we could just purge our nation of socialistic and communistic notions, we could actually make some serious progress, with freedom leading.

 

I get it. I truly do. You've adopted Trump's Sleepy Joe notion and are running with it. I guess it is payback for the countless ways Dems criticized Trump. Carry on.

 

I see. So they tested positive AFTER they were released. So your point was.... what? And what does that have to do with Biden?

Everything the former President* didn't do. Like following science... And not lying.

 

I love your post - it reminds me an old communist joke:
A communist leader was asked to say in one word what is the economic situation of the country.
Good - he answered.
And in two words?
No good.

Here is the whole conversation:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-indian-americans/

Biden: Hey, Doc. How are you?
Mohan: I’m doing very well, Mr. President. Thank you for —
Biden: I just want you to know —
Mohan: — for taking the time to speak with us.
Biden: Are you kidding me? What an honor this is. This is an incredible honor. And it’s amazing. Indian — of descent — Americans are taking over the country: you; my Vice President; my speechwriter, Vinay. I tell you what. But thank you. You guys are incredible.

 

Why bother testing them if you let them go before the results are back? That makes no sense.

 

Maybe you're right. But I wasn't the one who said that they were released after they tested positive. It was @ButterBalls . Maybe you can convince him that what he posted is absurd.

 

The border patrol works for Biden. Biden is responsible for everything they do.

 

You are again responding without understanding what is being debated. You should stop doing that. It doesn't reflect good on you.

 

First of all, there is no requirement that I follow your rules.

You are contradicting your own words as I pointed out earlier.

 

Yeah. You can just respond to something completely unrelated to the debate by quoting one of my posts, if that makes you happy. But I can also ridicule the fact when you do that.

 

I would be very careful how you do that.

 

Biden talks about POC as objects or pets. They exist for his purposes.

I sincerely believe he thinks black people are inferior and that he genuinely dislikes India Americans because they are proof that systemic racism does not exist.

 

Is that some sort of threat? My only concern is that it's funny.

 

Call it whatever you want.

 

How would you show that? As far as I'm concerned to be "torture" actual physical injury must be inflicted.

 

I don't think either Trump or Biden are racist. They have been racially insensitive though.

 

And you would be wrong. I ask again: If I showed you here and now, not only that that's inaccurate, but that the Trump policy to separate children from their family, as explained by himself and by his AG, constitutes torture according to the definition written in the U.S. Code, would you admit it? Or would I just be wasting my time because you'll deny it even in the face of clear evidence that you can't dispute?

Shouldn't be a difficult question to answer....

 

Prove it and I'll admit it.

 

Note bolded text.

18 U.S. Code § 2340

"''torture' means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A)
the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B)
...
(C)
...
; or
(D)
the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, ...
​

Should be clear from the above that torture, according to our legal code, is not just physical harm. Now... as far as the policy, this is how our AG at the time described it.

"If you cross the border unlawfully ... then we will prosecute you. If you smuggle an illegal alien across the border, then we'll prosecute you. ... If you're smuggling a child, then we're going to prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you, probably, as required by law."
​

The child is (as are the parents), as the above code states "under the physical control" of authorities. Separating them from their parents will cause those children suffering and mental pain and suffering. Some of these children were separated for weeks, months... even years (hundreds had not been reunited even to the day Trump left the Presidency) from their parents. This is "prolonged mental harm" to those children. Some of the parents were deported and no effort was made to reunite them.

Here is how Trump described the policy:

"When you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. Now, we don't have to prosecute them, but then we're not prosecuting them for coming in illegally. That's not good."
​

Keep in mind that applying for asylum is not illegal. It's in our code. But they must be inside our country to apply for asylum. You can't do it if you are not physically inside the U.S. Even if you entered illegally. So this threat that a child will be subject to severe suffering falls under 18 U.S. Code § 2340 D.

For reference:

8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum
...

"Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title."
...

​

 

Not a valid source.

 

The U.S. Code is not a valid source?????

Wow! Talk about excuses!

I guess I did waste my time. Never mind.... I won't waste it anymore.

 

Yeah right. You'll keep posting.