Sanders joined ABC News’s “This Week,” where host Jonathan Karl asked if there was anything Trump has done right.
“I think cracking down on fentanyl, making sure our borders are stronger,” Sanders replied. “Look, nobody thinks illegal immigration is appropriate, and I happen to think we need comprehensive immigration reform, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for people to be coming across the border illegally.”
While the senator agreed with Trump on strengthening the country’s borders to protect citizens, he disagreed with the president’s mass deportation plan.
“He wants to deport 20 million people who are in this country who are undocumented,” Sanders said. “Well, you do that, you destroy the entire country.”
“Because I got news for you, Trump’s billionaire friends are not going to pick the crops in California that feed us. They’re not going to work in meatpacking houses,” he continued. “That’s what undocumented people are doing.”
Given that this is as far left as US politicians get, I’d say unlikely.
The War on Drugs is well-documented to be a racist pretext for mass incarceration and violation of 4th Amendment rights, etc., (see The New Jim Crow for example), so Sanders is either a useful idiot or complicit.
I mean, yeah, if you’re punishing people for consuming the drugs directly, 100%. However, Trump’s focus has been more on preventing fentanyl from entering the country.
Unfortunately, he’s still an idiot since the US’s own pharmaceutical companies are the primary culprit and he’s just using Mexico as a scapegoat, so yeah, you’re not wrong lol.
A full pardon? Maybe for some of them, especially the zine guy, but the guy who actually shot the cop, unlikely. No democrat would want the optics of that.
Cop shot first. The guy who shot him did so in community defense.
In fact that cop may have given the shooter’s attorneys an argument to revisit Harlow v Fitzgerald, and hand the SCOTUS the full text of §1983. They were given, unknowingly, an illegally edited text in 1982 when Harlow v Fitzgerald established Qualified Immunity, which is illegal according to the full statute as recorded in the 1871 Congressional Record.
What are the chances that these people will get pardoned, etc, when(if) normality returns?
Also what’s the chances that the judge who handed down these long and unfair sentences will get any repercussions for being so obviously corrupt?
Given that this is as far left as US politicians get, I’d say unlikely.
…What’s wrong with his position, exactly?
“cracking down on fentanyl”
The War on Drugs is well-documented to be a racist pretext for mass incarceration and violation of 4th Amendment rights, etc., (see The New Jim Crow for example), so Sanders is either a useful idiot or complicit.
I mean, yeah, if you’re punishing people for consuming the drugs directly, 100%. However, Trump’s focus has been more on preventing fentanyl from entering the country.
Unfortunately, he’s still an idiot since the US’s own pharmaceutical companies are the primary culprit and he’s just using Mexico as a scapegoat, so yeah, you’re not wrong lol.
You removed, or stupid?
I really love what you’ve contributed to the conversation, “Nonconfrontational”.
“You removed, or stupid?” and “Can you not read?” are very informative, thank you for posting.
Guess I shouldn’t be too surprised by someone from lemmy.ml, though.
Answer the question, lol.
A full pardon? Maybe for some of them, especially the zine guy, but the guy who actually shot the cop, unlikely. No democrat would want the optics of that.
Cop shot first. The guy who shot him did so in community defense.
In fact that cop may have given the shooter’s attorneys an argument to revisit Harlow v Fitzgerald, and hand the SCOTUS the full text of §1983. They were given, unknowingly, an illegally edited text in 1982 when Harlow v Fitzgerald established Qualified Immunity, which is illegal according to the full statute as recorded in the 1871 Congressional Record.