ABC: The Department of Justice is suing SpaceX, the aerospace company owned by Elon Musk, over alleged discriminatory practices against people living in the country under asylum and refugees. The federal government contends in its civil lawsuit, which was filed Thursday, that the company violated the Immigration and Nationality Act between September 2018 and May 2022 by discouraging asylees and refugees from applying to the company and refusing to hire or consider them (ABC).
Katie Pavlich: In other words, SpaceX hired Americans and DOJ is unhappy about it. For years the Biden administration has targeted Musk and snubbed Tesla, the most successful and productive electric car company on the planet, at official White House events because the employees are not unionized. When Musk purchased Twitter late last year, the White House questioned the sale and Democrats like Senator Elizabeth Warren on Capitol Hill demanded a federal investigation (Townhall).
.
Ok, so... there are some thoughts here. The Biden DOJ is suing Space-X for not hiring refugees? I originally thought maybe they were talking about H1Bs, but then I re-read what I was seeing and it said people seeking asylum and refugees. These are essentially illegal immigrants, are they not? So I'm really confused... because unless they have a work visa, I'm pretty sure hiring illegals is, well... illegal?
I'm also confused because I know through colleagues that Space-X deals with everything from developing ICBMs, to rockets for the Air Force, and other government contracts, all of which require their employees to be US Citizens.
Being honest, I barely read either of these articles because it seemed so ridiculous that I couldn't bring myself to get through this. So I'm hoping the resident lefties would be willing to do the research for me and explain it.
Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), limiting employment to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents (green card holders) can be a violation of law.
Under IRCA, the protected class of individuals who generally may not be discriminated against in hiring, termination, and recruiting, or referring for a fee consists of U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, "temporary residents" (a term of art that applies to almost no one anymore), and refugees and asylees. The U.S. Department of Justice Best Practices page offers the following guidance:
[This message has been edited by TheDigitalAlchemist (edited 08-25-2023).]
Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), limiting employment to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents (green card holders) can be a violation of law.
But... most defense contractors are prohibited from hiring non-US Citizens, which Space-X is (among other things). So I find this odd because nearly all the Federal contracts for anything related to space and defense prevent the hiring of foreign nationals.
As an interesting point, the US Government ONLY hires US Citizens... so I find it odd that Reagan would pass a law that says, do as I say, not as I do...
I really think it is a waste of everyone's time to bring discussions from one thread into another where it has nothing to do with the subject matter, but since you did
quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
When private companies censored conservative opinion and conversation, it was okay. They were "private" companies. .
If you are talking about Twitter and Facebook the restricted post from BOTH sides of the political aisle
quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
FredToast thinks "innocent till proven guilty" only applies in the legal system.
Let me hear you say that Joe Biden is innocent. Otherwise stop trying to attack me with this line.
I do not know what is going on with this lawsuit. I agree that it seems a little unusual, but there is a bigger point that a lot of people are ignoring.
Musk's Starlink satellites are key to providing internet to Ukraine in its war with Russia, giving Musk an influence that's more like a nation state than an individual. He had the ability to cut off military communications between forces in the Ukraine, and used it to negotiate higher payments from the Pentagon. Musk also demanded real time info on the battlefield, which became a problem when it was elarned that he was also in communication with Putin. The US also depends of Musk to provide the services that NASA used to.
So I think the government is getting scared about their dependence on Musk. They put themselves in that position, but this lawsuit looks like them flexing their muscle a bit to try and keep him in line.
Originally posted by Wichita: Just leftist weaponizing the justice system for political purposes. This is what leftist do. They are not good people.
Surely, it would not be much of a burden for SpaceX to be able to defend this in court with the best lawyers that money can buy, and DOJ knows that. SpaceX presents a hard (or hardened) target in court. It's not some pushover like Emanuel's Empanada Emporium on Wheels.
So if DOJ doesn't have a ducks-in-a-row-quality case on legal grounds, and is just doing this to curry flavor politically, with whomever might like such a federal lawsuit, then I predict even an "Obama judge" would not be willing to trash their own professional reputation by warping the Laws of Law (so to speak) in such a way as to bend over backwards to favor a judgement for DOJ and against SpaceX.
"Sleep soundly on this one, my friends."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-26-2023).]
Originally posted by fredtoast: I really think it is a waste of everyone's time to bring discussions from one thread into another where it has nothing to do with the subject matter, but since you did
Get along little doggie.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: If you are talking about Twitter and Facebook the restricted post from BOTH sides of the political aisle
Da' um. If you represented me in a court of law. I would appeal due to ineffective council. Do you understand English ? If you meant what I think you mean, I call BULLZHIT !
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: Let me hear you say that Joe Biden is innocent. Otherwise stop trying to attack me with this line.
Do you really not understand that Joe Biden is innocent ? Till proven guilty ?
I believe (and it's just a guess, I'm not nearly as smart as that one member that can't spell a name correctly.🙄) that the Government was denied some sort of access to something else Musk runs and is pushing back with things that cost him money and time in any way they can until he relents. It's just yet another sign of the weaponization of our legal system as I see it.
I believe (and it's just a guess, I'm not nearly as smart as that one member that can't spell a name correctly.🙄) that the Government was denied some sort of access to something else Musk runs and is pushing back with things that cost him money and time in any way they can until he relents. It's just yet another sign of the weaponization of our legal system as I see it.
Originally posted by Fats: It's just yet another sign of the weaponization of our legal system as I see it.
At least it is not partisan.
Republicans have proven that they have no problem with weaponizing the DOJ. Donald Trump got elected on the promise to weponize the DOJ and "lock up" his political opponent Hilary Clinton.
Republicans only started clutching their pearls and squealing about a weaponized DOJ when they felt that it was being used against Republicans.
With Musk it is not about party affiliation. It is about national security. I don't care for it, but it is different from what the conservatives have been crying about ever since Trumps criminal behavior started to catch up with him.
Republicans have proven that they have no problem with weaponizing the DOJ. Donald Trump got elected on the promise to weponize the DOJ and "lock up" his political opponent Hilary Clinton.
Republicans only started clutching their pearls and squealing about a weaponized DOJ when they felt that it was being used against Republicans.
With Musk it is not about party affiliation. It is about national security. I don't care for it, but it is different from what the conservatives have been crying about ever since Trumps criminal behavior started to catch up with him.
You need to open the window and let some fresh air in.
The Republicans found a crime and identified a suspect.
The Democrats identify a suspect, then try to find a crime.
Republicans never found a crime committed by Hilary Clinton.
But they did; however, the FBI / DOJ said, "No reasonable prosecutor would convict."
That has now changed, and the DOJ is quickly setting new precedent. Like the nuclear option in the Senate... this too will come back to bite Democrats in the butt. As they say, don't open a door unless you're prepared to go through it ... there are a LOT of Democrats that are thinking to themselves... "Oh **** ..."
"We went at this very hard to see if we could make a case," but "my judgment is that she did not" break the law, Comey told the House panel.
According to Comey, there are two things that matter in a criminal investigation like this: Did the person being investigated mishandle classified information, and did the person know that what he or she was doing was illegal? "It takes mishandling it and criminal intent," he said.
[This message has been edited by fredtoast (edited 08-29-2023).]
"We went at this very hard to see if we could make a case," but "my judgment is that she did not" break the law, Comey told the House panel.
According to Comey, there are two things that matter in a criminal investigation like this: Did the person being investigated mishandle classified information, and did the person know that what he or she was doing was illegal? "It takes mishandling it and criminal intent," he said.
NO... the actual quote is, "No reasonable prosecutor would bring this case." That is a direct quote.
But times have now changed... this was a nod to Hillary because she's in a special class. Rules for thee, but not for me. As I've said, any other person that would have done even 1/100th of what she's done, would see jail time. Any "REASONABLE" person would recognize what this was... different rules, for different people.
The Democrats have once again opened Pandora's box with their charges against Trump. I'm very much looking forward to how the Republicans will weaponize the DOJ against Democrats when they're back in office. I suspect it'll work out just as well for them as the nuclear option did for passing spending bills and approving judicial appointments. I'm VERY much looking forward to this. You can be sure that if Trump wins the presidency again... it's going to get really exciting.
I'm taking bets right now. There is no way that Biden runs again. I know he says he's running, but there's too much going on that I think we're all aware of. The DNC has the Super Delegates, so they basically pick their candidate, almost regardless of the primary vote. This was a big thing in appointing Hillary during the primary, and I think they'll do the same with the next candidate.
Any reasonable person can see that Biden does not have all his faculties all the time. This isn't a knock on leftist politics Rinse, Patrick, Fred... this is simply a fairly obvious observation. He gets confused easily, gets lost while on stage, requires cue-cards for absolutely everything he does, and starts rambling incoherently when he goes off script. His mannerisms, and everything about him are DRAMATICALLY different from the Joe Biden of even 8 years ago. He is a completely different man today.
My thought is that Biden is hanging in there ... that his cabinet / advisors are having him hang in there long enough until the primary election starts coming into play (what is it... March I think?). Biden is hanging in there long enough to keep the pressure off the other candidates, and keep it on himself. He'll shoulder all of this and then when the primary election time comes... he'll make a speech about allowing the "new generation" to come into the DNC.
This is when they bring out Gavin Newsom. He's dynamic, argues well... even when it's about stuff he's failed miserably on... he can talk around his failures to make you think it's all part of a glorious strategy for greatness. I didn't pull this out of my ass... but the fact that Gavin Newsom has been to the White House dozens of times over the past year... and the majority of the times he's visited, Joe Biden wasn't even at the White House. Tell me why a governor would go visit the White House when the president isn't even there?
The reason is... they want a private conversation, in a room with white news, with no electronics, and no recording devices... and it's much easier for Gavin to go to the White House, than it is for the advisors to go to California.
So this is how I think you'll see it play out. JFK Jr will get **** on by the Super Delegates (probably won't make the actual majority anyway, so it'll be legitimate), and Gavin Newsom will take the primary lead, and Biden drops out. They'll need to play this before the first set of ballots are printed though.
NO... the actual quote is, "No reasonable prosecutor would bring this case." That is a direct quote..
Absolutely correct. The reason no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case is because the evidence shows no crime was committed. It was just negligence.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm taking bets right now. There is no way that Biden runs again. I know he says he's running, but there's too much going on that I think we're all aware of. The DNC has the Super Delegates, so they basically pick their candidate, almost regardless of the primary vote. This was a big thing in appointing Hillary during the primary, and I think they'll do the same with the next candidate.
Any reasonable person can see that Biden does not have all his faculties all the time. This isn't a knock on leftist politics Rinse, Patrick, Fred... this is simply a fairly obvious observation. He gets confused easily, gets lost while on stage, requires cue-cards for absolutely everything he does, and starts rambling incoherently when he goes off script. His mannerisms, and everything about him are DRAMATICALLY different from the Joe Biden of even 8 years ago. He is a completely different man today.
My thought is that Biden is hanging in there ... that his cabinet / advisors are having him hang in there long enough until the primary election starts coming into play (what is it... March I think?). Biden is hanging in there long enough to keep the pressure off the other candidates, and keep it on himself. He'll shoulder all of this and then when the primary election time comes... he'll make a speech about allowing the "new generation" to come into the DNC.
This is when they bring out Gavin Newsom. He's dynamic, argues well... even when it's about stuff he's failed miserably on... he can talk around his failures to make you think it's all part of a glorious strategy for greatness. I didn't pull this out of my ass... but the fact that Gavin Newsom has been to the White House dozens of times over the past year... and the majority of the times he's visited, Joe Biden wasn't even at the White House. Tell me why a governor would go visit the White House when the president isn't even there?
The reason is... they want a private conversation, in a room with white news, with no electronics, and no recording devices... and it's much easier for Gavin to go to the White House, than it is for the advisors to go to California.
So this is how I think you'll see it play out. JFK Jr will get **** on by the Super Delegates (probably won't make the actual majority anyway, so it'll be legitimate), and Gavin Newsom will take the primary lead, and Biden drops out. They'll need to play this before the first set of ballots are printed though.
Only way this happens is if Biden has a health issue arise during the campaign.
I would not be surprised if he did have a health issue, but I believe Biden would be forced to endorse Harris instead of Newsome. So if he is forced to step aside I don't think we would hear who he endorsed.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I'm very much looking forward to how the Republicans will weaponize the DOJ against Democrats when they're back in office. .
You already saw it in the 2016 election when FBI reopened the Hilary laptop investigation two weeks before election and then cleared her afterwards.
There is NO chance that Donald J Trump will ever get elected as POTUS again. Absolutely no chance. Zip, Zilch, Nada.
If anyone would care to bet $100(US) against my claim, to be paid into Cliff Pennock's Beer Fund, now's the time to speak up.
And if Cliff Pennock would agree to this, I suggest a permanent banishment from PFF to the loser of this bet if payment is not made within 30 days of the conclusion of the next US presidential election.
BULLZHIT !
No one on the far right has any real confidence in Trump being re-elected.
