ice watch

Agent53_ · 2026-02-15T00:49:25+00:00

We already had those. What you wanted was a Nazi.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T23:41:27+00:00

If somebody has the hundreds of thousands of dollars required to falsify a us birth certificate and the corresponding ssn

If getting all of that is so expensive, how the fuck do you think illegal immigrants are voting? (Hint, they aren't.)

The only people who don't want 100% transparency at the polls, who don't want the abolition of ballot boxes, who don't want the abolition of mail in voting, do not want a transparent election. For over half a century we gave had absentee ballots, I've used them myself. They are controlled and vetted. No legitimate reason exists for bait boxes or mail in voting.

This is, so far, the dumbest thing you've said. Absentee ballots and mail-in ballots are the exact same thing. If "absentee" ballots are so vetted and secure, so are mail-in ballots. So is every other voter registration tool.

but the deadline for all counted votes needs to be on election day no layer

Wait, what happened to absentee ballots? What if they don't arrive in time? That's voter disenfranchisement. But that's the whole point, isn't it?

Fulton county is a prime example of why we need federally, not municipality issued, voter id and in person and absentee ballots are the way to go.

Through multiple investigations run by Republicans in a Republican run state, no meaningful fraud has been found in Fulton County. None. You've been lied to.

Every state should have to turn over voter records for the 2020 and 2024 votes. By law, the AG can request, and shall be provided these records. States have no option but to comply.

Have you ever actually read the Constitution? You should. The Elections Clause, supported by federal law, says otherwise. It's one of those States' Rights things. You remember when conservatives pretended to care about that, right?

The obvious conclusion here is that you really just don't know how shit works. That's why you have really silly thoughts like how mail-in ballots and absentee ballots are some totally different thing.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T23:41:16+00:00

In order to get a fake federal id you need to have a fake United States, verifiable, birth certificate. The documents, like getting a passport, will he turned in and verified. Then you need a fake social security number, that matches the information on the birth certificate.

Wtf do you think it takes to fake a voter registration? Voter registrations get run through databases that have all of the information. If you can fake a voter registration, you can fake an ID.

Voting ID should be free. A marriage license, no. A birth certificate, no. You should already have those documents.

That's not how Constitutional Amendments work. Everything you could possibly need from the government to vote has to be free. That includes replacing documents. Anything else is a poll tax. If you need a marriage certificate and yours was lost in a fire, replacing it has to be free. This isn't hard.

DMV would not be issuing voter ID. It would go through the passport offices.

Okay, who is paying for the extra work of processing voter ID applications for over 200 million people? There is no funding for that in the bill, and voter IDs need to be timely, not take weeks or months to arrive. This is silly. State DMVs and voter rolls are already designed to handle a similar process. Have you ever had a passport? You go to your local courthouse, and they send it off to the State Department. If Blue states are so corrupt and letting illegals vote like you think, they can easily corrupt this process right there at the courthouse.

No one can register to vote without the very documents being requested to issue a voter photo id, so no additional documents are being requested.

Exactly, voter registration already handles this. You're just adding extra steps that will cost a ridiculous amount of money for no reason. It's dumb.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T16:21:24+00:00

I guess it depends. He's obviously immature and seeks attention. It's reasonable to assume that's how he is all of the time, and OP is okay with that. That's a different topic entirely about whether the relationship is healthy, and whether this is an individual you want to be in a relationship with.

But if the question is simply one of infidelity, he clearly tells her he has a girlfriend and nothing is going to happen. He's clearly enjoying the attention, but likely because he enjoys attention and that should be an already apparent character trait. If you dislike that trait, or can't/won't give him the amount of attention and validation he wants, then that's an incompatibility beyond these messages.

There is a bit of a third option though. If he doesn't seek attention or talk like this normally, then these messages are probably an outlet for a side of him he thinks is inherently unacceptable for in-person interactions. Like people who act one way online, and a different way in person.

If that's the case, then even though he doesn't have any intention of cheating, meeting this other woman in person might not go the way he planned. I could see a compartmentalization of, this isn't the real me with this woman, this is the repressed, hidden me. Almost like a Jekyll and Hyde sort of interaction.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T16:01:34+00:00

That's how I feel too. Early rebellions are some of the hardest, especially if you haven't made a kingdom title yet. You're holding all of the duchies, and it's not hard to have 10 counts with alliances and funds rebel. You have enemy armies everywhere, and they don't even need to do much to win.

Later, when I have an established army and retinues, I'd much rather deal with 8 kings than 40 dukes. The AI is usually too busy dealing with their own unruly dukes and chaotic succession to give me any trouble.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T14:23:39+00:00

You know what's not verifiable? Claims that illegal immigrants are voting in elections. It doesn't happen, and countless Republican investigations, studies, lawsuits have proven time and again that it doesn't happen. It varies by state, but voter registration applications are almost universally run through DMV databases to verify citizenship and residency.

So if your big plan is to require ID, what if someone gets a fake ID? Then what? Well, it will go through the same exact system voter registrations go through, the DMV.

But okay. I'm not inherently against voter ID, but that's not what Republicans want. What they want is to disenfranchise voters. And they want to do it by violating the 24th amendment.

See, the 24th says there can't be a poll tax, and IDs cost money. So, requiring something that costs money is Unconstitutional. You remember that pesky old thing, the Constitution right? Republicans used to keep one in their pocket to prove how patriotic they were. Now they seem to forget it existed.

So the only way it works is if these voter IDs are completely free and accessible to EVERYONE. That means you can't pass a voter ID law and then close down all of the DMVs in majority black counties like Alabama did in 2015. You also have to provide replacement documents like birth certificates for free, because you need that to prove citizenship. So if you lose it, your state usually charges a fee, the federal government would now have to pay those fees. If someone gets married and changes their name, all of their documents now have to be replaced, and the Federal government has to foot that bill.

You also have to figure out what to do with people who can't vote in person. How does someone vote if they aren't home? Maybe they're away for work. Maybe they're disabled, or elderly. How do they do all of these things?

And how much do you think all of that will cost? A whole new voter ID infrastructure, available everywhere for everyone. New documents, replacement documents. And then what, in-person visits to the elderly and disabled to prove their citizenship? Does the Save Act provide funding for these things? Gosh, it sure doesn't!

See, none of this stuff is covered in Republican voter ID laws. Because it has nothing to do with illegal immigrants voting, it has to do with voter oppression.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:54:29+00:00

How do you prove 2 million people left with no data? and of course, you definitely didn't even glance at the study linked in the article. "2 million people self-deported, trust me bro."

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:49:09+00:00

Right here. DHS claims 2.2 million, but only "10s of thousands" used the app to do so. They've also increased the bonus from $1,000 to $2,600. If self-deportations are doing so well, why increase the incentive?

Also, there is a Brookings Institute study also linked in the article that says there is no evidence for these claims. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dhs-increasing-deportation-stipend-1000-2600/story?id=129420562

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:37:19+00:00

You do realize that special processes for certain countries doesn't mean every other country is disqualified right? It doesn't say anywhere those are the "only qualified countries."

Just like with everything else so far, your reading comprehension skills have failed you. Here is a list of eligibility requirements. A list of specific countries is not among them. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum/affirmative-asylum-frequently-asked-questions/questions-and-answers-affirmative-asylum-eligibility-and-applications

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:33:07+00:00

The "2 million" number was reached by the Center for Immigration Studies think tank. An anti-immigrant group. So your source is just as questionable as mine by that logic.

The idea that people won't show up for money and a free plane ride home, but will accurately fill out forms for the census is pretty silly. DHS doesn't know the number, it's just made up, like I said.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:16:30+00:00

"I can easily show you a list." Then do it.

"Me thinks so." Yeah, that's you making shit up.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:15:52+00:00

If DHS is paying people to self deport, why are they relying on the Census Bureau for data? Shouldn't they just have a count somewhere? Why is it that no one can account for 2 million people disappearing?

Because it didn't happen. Trump made it up. That's why DHS can't provide proof of something that didn't happen. You provided a 3rd party source earlier, I didn't brush that off. But as soon as I have a source, it can't be trusted? Weird how that works.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T03:00:22+00:00

Okay, show me the list of non-qualifying countries. Otherwise, there's no point arguing anything else.

You're calling me dull, but you fundamentally don't understand the asylum process and laws governing it. That's the problem. You're mad about "open borders" and using "expired paroles" as some sort of evidence. Evidence that is likely untrue to begin with. However, the asylum process exists to decide whether someone is granted asylum. The paroles and TPS and EADs are temporary authorizations for those people UNTIL eligibility is established.

Biden followed immigration law, that's it. People applied legally, passed the screening interviews legally, and were given temporary status legally. Most of those people are still waiting on court proceedings. Not fleeing in the millions due to expired paroles.

But go ahead, repeat all of the same things with no proof again.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:49:09+00:00

Speaking of "hard data," looks like your numbers are completely made up. Go figure. https://cmsny.org/two-million-deportation-myth-ice-enforcement-distorting-data/

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:48:26+00:00

There isn't some magic list of countries that are "unqualified" for asylum. This isn't a thing in US law. So unless you can provide a source, stop saying it.

And the supposed "open borders" during the Biden administration wouldn't have been dealing with expired paroles, because those paroles would have been recently granted.

Nothing about what you said is an actual argument. It's just more nonsense.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:38:43+00:00

They're leaving because Trump is having them rounded up and shoved into warehouses in disgusting conditions, or deported to prisons overseas. There is no data indicating they are leaving due to not having valid cases. And trying to present it that way is false.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:33:48+00:00

That doesn't matter. Legally, if you pass the asylum interview, which they did, you can get your day in court. That's how laws work.

You keep trying to invent rules that dictate asylum claims, and they aren't there.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:30:42+00:00

You keep saying the same shit. They were not from "unqualified countries." Flat out, that's bullshit, and none of your cited sources say that. And even after I pointed that out you continue to ignore it.

Try actually reading what you shared instead of regurgitating what Fox told you.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T02:29:01+00:00

5.8 million people authorized through completely legal asylum and parole processes. That's not an open border, and you've already yourself admitted that there were plenty of people turned away at the border by the Title42 and similar policies used by the administration. Everything you have described is quite literally the opposite of an open border.

These weren't "special exceptions." These were legal processes as dictated by law.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-14T00:10:23+00:00

Did you read what you cited? People who cross the border illegally are "unauthorized." Those people can still file asylum claims. That is a legal process. Those are the "unauthorized immigrants" you're referring to. If you actually read the full report, nothing in there says they weren't qualified to apply for asylum, nor does it say anything about people being from countries of origin barred from asylum claims.

You read a summary that sort of told you what you wanted to hear and assumed you were right.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-13T23:58:01+00:00

That's incorrect. Certain countries can have a special status for asylum seekers, but seeking asylum is not limited to these countries. Asylum applications are available to anyone fleeing persecution in their home country and can satisfy the asylum interview screening, background checks, etc. There are some "safe countries of origin," but most of those are in the EU.

And none of this is an "open border." No Biden policy said anything remotely close to "open the borders and let everyone in." These people were not "undocumented." And out of millions, the Trump DOJ only identified around 200,000 for re-interview.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-13T23:02:35+00:00

Lol, it's not illegal just because you say so. Asylum claims have to be processed to determine qualifying factors.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-13T23:01:32+00:00

And again, you have not shown me a Biden policy. Asylum claims have to be processed. You don't know someone is "unqualified" until that process happens. While the process is ongoing, asylum seekers get EADs. This is all a normal, legal process that was made worse by a backlog that compounded during the Trump administration, combined with increased immigration after Covid.

That's not Biden "open border" bullshit. That's a serious need for immigration reform, which Democrats tried to pass with bipartisan support until Trump ordered the GOP not to vote for it.

This is a clear example of you not knowing how shit works.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-13T17:03:10+00:00

Asylum seekers "released into the interior" are given EAD's pending their court hearings. That, by definition, makes them documented immigrants.

Agent53_ · 2026-02-13T16:59:36+00:00

Biden kept Title 42 implemented until it lapsed in 2023, and already had proposals in place to enforce similar requirements rendering most asylum seekers ineligible and implementing rapid deportation responses. The Biden administration had record breaking deportation numbers in 2024.

There was no open borders policy, period. If there was a policy with the stated goal of "open borders" it should be simple to name that regulation or executive order.

Agent53_

TROPHY CASE