neither requires a significant investment by the government.
1) Require all jobs applicants (including 'independant' contractors to be processed through E-Verify. This would include day laborers and any job for pay... even a handy man/woman would need to process their information through E-verify
hahahahahaha
I mean, might still be worth doing, but enforcement there is a nightmare. No significant investment, you crack me up.
Enforcement of contractors would take some work, but AZ hasn't really had any issues with enforcing E-verify. Some random spot checking of people advertising contracting work, with a small portion of checks devoted to input from a tip hotline, would take care of much of it. It is surprising how fast unauthorized laborers vanish whenever enforcement is even remotely enforced.
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
The guy in the video makes some compelling arguments in favor of immigration.
Now, one might want to argue that immigration needs a minimum of regulation and I can totally agree with that(too much regulation seems dumb tho). I also agree that illegal immigration have it's problems and can be harmful.
But the idea that even legal immigration should be stopped seems dumb to me. Ethnic homogeneity isn't worth the loss of all benefits that immigration can bring IMO.
Robot ready - mass influx of workers won't be required.
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
Daily reminder that the DNC explicitly denied the FBI access to their "hacked" servers on several occasions and the FBI was totally okay with not being able to investigate that because... reasons.
They then went on to say that the intelligence community still agrees with their assertion, but since then we've also learned that it was only a few agencies, not all of them. Also, how those agencies can agree on what happened on servers that they didn't have access to is questionable.
And this:
"
The firm’s CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with openly anti-Russian sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also happened to donate at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.
Look, I understand if one wants to say "there was no collusion between Trump and Russia". So far one can make that argument as there's no evidence of such thing.
BUT
What are the basis for saying that Russia didn't attempt to interfere with the election? The former Director of the FBI said under oath that the attempt was real:
We know from Comey's own testimony that he buckled to Lynch's orders to deescalate the investigation of Hillary. We know that despite all the immunity from prosecution he handed out, we received no additional information on what Hillary did. We know that after years of digging through emails, Comey supposedly couldn't find any crimes, despite so many obvious crimes that any prosecutor fresh out of law school could find. We know that Comey couldn't distinguish between illegal classified breaches made before or after laws were changed, nor bother to investigate why those changes were made - despite verifiable proofs of what happened.
In short, we know Comey is a stooge of the left. He is a traitor to the bureau and everything it is supposed to represent. His testimony under oath is not trustworthy. I fully expect him to be prosecuted if he doesn't turn state's evidence against his globalist masters.
"
soneka101 wrote:
P.S.: Trump might not have colluded, but Carter Page, Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort are shady as hell. I wouldn't put my hand at the fire for any of them.
"The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.
Flynn’s intervention on behalf of Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz was highly unusual, and included a letter in 2014 on his official Pentagon stationary, a public interview in 2015 supporting Gritz’s case and an offer to testify on her behalf. His offer put him as a hostile witness in a case against McCabe, who was soaring through the bureau’s leadership ranks.
The FBI sought to block Flynn’s support for the agent, asking a federal administrative law judge in May 2014 to keep Flynn and others from becoming a witness in her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) case, memos show. Two years later, the FBI opened its inquiry of Flynn.
The EEOC case, which is still pending, was serious enough to require McCabe to submit to a sworn statement to investigators, the documents show.
The deputy director’s testimony provided some of the strongest evidence in the case of possible retaliation, because he admitted the FBI opened an internal investigation into Gritz’s personal conduct after learning the agent “had filed or intended to file” a sex discrimination complaint against her supervisors.
McCabe eventually became the bureau’s No. 2 executive and emerged as a central player in the FBI’s Russia election tampering investigation, putting him in a position to impact the criminal inquiry against Flynn.
Three FBI employees said they personally witnessed McCabe make disparaging remarks about Flynn before and during the time the retired Army general emerged as a figure in the Russia case."
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
Last edited by DalaiLama#6738 on Jul 3, 2017, 4:10:19 AM
Daily reminder that the DNC explicitly denied the FBI access to their "hacked" servers on several occasions and the FBI was totally okay with not being able to investigate that because... reasons.
They then went on to say that the intelligence community still agrees with their assertion, but since then we've also learned that it was only a few agencies, not all of them. Also, how those agencies can agree on what happened on servers that they didn't have access to is questionable.
And this:
"
The firm’s CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with openly anti-Russian sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also happened to donate at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.
(This is probably going to be my last series of posts re:Russia/election sub-topic, and I'm going to try my best to make it conclusive. It keeps coming up ITT, so to match soneka's effortful post, I'll do the same.)
Publicly, Russia definitely hacked the election.
The NSA data-dump (via Reality Winner) shows as much in addition to Comey's testimony. It's pretty hard to deny this while also claiming with a straight face that things are working as normal.
---
The reasoning to disbelieve this claim is a combination of:
- distrusting the NSA/TLAs in general which people probably should ever since they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar re: domestic surveillance,
- distrusting the DNC with e-mails leaked that imply they might have thought up the Russia thing as a last-ditch attempt to scare people into votes,
- understanding that countries often and routinely attempt to hack each other as a matter of course; that 2016 is nothing out of the ordinary,
- the ease of the DNC and Podesta e-mail hacks (ostensibly phishing e-mails, for both) doesn't scream state actor,
- a history of warmongering on false evidence, specifically referring to "WMDs" in Iraq and acknowledging the unwholesome state of our military-industrial complex.
Even accepting a few of those above is enough to side on the side of "this is some made-up bullshit intended to beat war-drums and/or steal power", with the collusion story being extra, bonus, cherry-on-top made-up bullshit to directly steal power.
If the NSA/CIA/DHS had admitted that they were intentionally hacking US election computers in Georgia, I might believe some of their other claims. Right now, I view them as very skilled deceivers who haven't been caught at lying as much as Hillary has.
In short, we know Comey is a stooge of the left. He is a traitor to the bureau and everything it is supposed to represent. His testimony under oath is not trustworthy. I fully expect him to be prosecuted if he doesn't turn state's evidence against his globalist masters.
"
DalaiLama wrote:
Spoiler
"The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.
Flynn’s intervention on behalf of Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz was highly unusual, and included a letter in 2014 on his official Pentagon stationary, a public interview in 2015 supporting Gritz’s case and an offer to testify on her behalf. His offer put him as a hostile witness in a case against McCabe, who was soaring through the bureau’s leadership ranks.
The FBI sought to block Flynn’s support for the agent, asking a federal administrative law judge in May 2014 to keep Flynn and others from becoming a witness in her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) case, memos show. Two years later, the FBI opened its inquiry of Flynn.
The EEOC case, which is still pending, was serious enough to require McCabe to submit to a sworn statement to investigators, the documents show.
The deputy director’s testimony provided some of the strongest evidence in the case of possible retaliation, because he admitted the FBI opened an internal investigation into Gritz’s personal conduct after learning the agent “had filed or intended to file” a sex discrimination complaint against her supervisors.
McCabe eventually became the bureau’s No. 2 executive and emerged as a central player in the FBI’s Russia election tampering investigation, putting him in a position to impact the criminal inquiry against Flynn.
Three FBI employees said they personally witnessed McCabe make disparaging remarks about Flynn before and during the time the retired Army general emerged as a figure in the Russia case."
Yes! It's all a big plot to get Flynn for something that he did in the past!
Just ignore that he talked with Russians about sanctions before he took office. And then lied to Mike Pence about it.
There are two more stances where he did shady stuff, but I don't think it's worth discuss this with you.
Obligatory redpill on Comey. If you go "lol 4chan", I can provide a source on almost everything that has been said here about Comey, just ask. The Trump stuff is speculation of course.
"Trump is promoting violence against CNN" this is what I read everywhere around facebook, everyone seems super offended. Yet, those same people were calling for the murder of Trump for months....
