Three Martha Vineyard Migrants File Lawsuit Against DeSantis

YouTube screengrab

The undocumented migrants who were transferred to Martha’s Vineyard have quickly adopted one common American practice: litigation. A firm, Lawyers for Civil Rights, in conjunction with the migrant-led nonprofit Alianza Americas, filed the action on behalf of Yanet Doe, Pablo Doe and Jesus Doe who are using pseudonyms for the action “on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated.” The filing is a Jackson Pollock of legal claims with twelve claims thrown against Florida from false imprisonment to intentional infliction of emotional distress to misuse of the Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund. The splattering of claims face considerable legal barriers based on the consent of the migrants, as shown in a waiver released by Florida.

The filing of a lawsuit upon entry to the United States is not unprecedented, of course. Indeed, I teach in torts where an immigrant to the United States filed a tort action for an involuntary inoculation upon entry in O’Brien v. Cunard. Yet, this is a case involving undocumented migrants who allegedly signed a waiver and agreed to the trip.

The filing does not include the widespread claims of kidnapping and human trafficking made by Democratic politicians and some legal experts. Cable programs are still claiming that criminal kidnapping charges should be brought after the flight. In the narrative or background sections, there is no such allegations and the actual civil claims do not appear based on those theories.

The claims include only three Section 1983 claims and do not include the allegation of human trafficking for sex or labor exploitation that is the basis for human trafficking.

As for kidnapping, two of the three 1983 counts involve due process or equal protection claims. One involves “unlawful seizure” because “by fraudulently inducing individual Plaintiffs to cross state lines in the manner described herein, Defendants unreasonably seized Plaintiffs without just cause.” The count states that, “particularly after the individual Plaintiffs had boarded the airplanes and were in mid-air, Plaintiffs were not free to leave, and were induced into that condition through false promises and misrepresentations.” The thrust is a temporary seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

The lawyers are alleging that the migrants were mislead or defrauded in going to Martha’s Vineyard. The flight is portrayed as “designed and executed a premeditated, fraudulent, and illegal scheme centered on exploiting this vulnerability for the sole purpose of advancing their own personal, financial and political interests.”

Gov. DeSantis responded by calling the lawsuit “political theater,” which is ironic given that the flight was clearly designed as precisely that type of political theater.

However, most of these claims are highly dubious and will require substantially more factual support to survive a threshold challenge. The first challenge will be to show that the waiver was secured by trick or fraud.  The consent form – available in English and Spanish – states:

“I agree to hold the benefactor or its designed representatives harmless of all liability arising out of or in any way relating to any injuries and damages that may occur during the agreed transport to locations outside of Texas until the final destination in Massachusetts.”

A consent form in multiple languages provided to migrants. 

The lawyers are citing a brochure to support the claim of fraud. The brochure reads “Massachusetts Refugee Benefits” with instructions for how to change an address with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), including USCIS Form AR-11, “Alien’s Change of Address Card.” The complaint states:

On information and belief, the brochure was manufactured by Defendants. The brochure echoed the type of false representation that had been given orally, including statements such as: “During the first 90 days after a refugee’s arrival in Massachusetts, agencies provide basic needs support including…assistance with housing…furnishings, food, and other basic necessities…clothing, and transportation to job interviews and job training…assistance in applying for Social Security cards…registering children for school….”

The brochure had a separate section entitled “Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA),” which stated: “Provides up to 8 months of cash assistance for income-eligible refugees without dependent children, who reside in Massachusetts.” It had other sections that described “targeted services for . . . employment.”

The state says that the brochure takes material from the state website for refugees and migrants.

The state is also likely to replay media accounts of migrants expressing satisfaction with going to the island, including an NBC report as well as a Telemundo report of migrants thanking Desantis.

The most serious allegation is that Florida officials “told them they were flying to Boston or Washington, D.C., which was completely false.” The question is the proof of that representation since the waiver refers only to the destination being “the State of Massachusetts.”

Most of the claims are barely defined, let alone supported. For example, on false imprisonment, the complaint merely restates defrauding claims:

The Plaintiffs’ participation in the federal immigration processes—to which they are constitutionally entitled—was impeded, as they were transported thousands of miles away from where they needed to continue immigration proceedings. Plaintiffs were not informed that they would be flown to an island off the coast of Massachusetts that can only be reached by plane or ferry. The first time that many of the putative class learned that their destination was Martha’s Vineyard was when they were in mid-air. When they arrived, they were not provided with any of the goods and services which they were promised by Defendants. They felt defrauded and tricked and were traumatized by the experience.

The only confinement alleged is the flight itself, which necessarily does not allow people to leave mid flight. Thousands of migrants have been transferred by flights to locations around the country, including trips arranged by the Biden Administration and a Democratic mayor.

The complaint is stronger on rhetoric than supporting facts or law. It will face a motion to dismiss and that the litigants may be able to offer more evidence of a fraud or misrepresentations to negate their signed waivers. However, this is unlikely to result in a serious threat to these ongoing flights by various states. This is a civil action that, even if it can survive threshold challenges, will be in the court system for a long time in seeking to establish these claims. Many of these claims are likely to be dismissed or abandoned in the course of that litigation.

Here is the complaint: Alianza-Americas v. DeSantis

255 thoughts on “Three Martha Vineyard Migrants File Lawsuit Against DeSantis”

  1. No, activist lawyers did (cough*ACLU*cough). And they can **** ***** ****** themselves. Enough already. Nobody I know, in a *blue* state, is voting for dems in a few weeks. That is a *fact*. They can twist it all they like.

  2. Hey, Democrats, how about you stop pushing your open border policies so we’ll have less kids abandoned in the desert?

    https://youtu.be/8r86h1u2ugY

    Take some responsibility for this mess you’ve caused, for God’s sake. No matter who’s in the White House, Democrats keep pushing and pushing for more illegal immigration. Well, now we’re getting millions, while Martha’s Vineyard found 50 to be beyond their tolerance.

    1. Karen, show us an article from a well-known source quoting a Democratic leader as promoting ‘open borders’.

      But don’t come back and say ‘sanctuary cities’ are the same thing as open borders. They aren’t!

        1. RE:”They just haven’t been there.” They know it isn’t, and they don’t need to be in that they’ve wittingly rendered it as such.

      1. Anonymous:

        This is the game that Democrats play. They claim to be open borders, but here are their actions:

        1. They create sanctuary cities that protect illegal aliens from court-ordered deportation, including for violent felons. So they oppose legal deportation of anyone.
        2. Immigration courts are backed up. By the time a case is heard, if the request for asylum is denied, then Democrats oppose deportation because they’ve already been here a while. Again, they oppose the legal system.
        3. They are on record publicly welcoming illegal immigrants, and they call any criticism of illegal immigration racist and xenophobic
        4. They actively fight all attempts to secure the border, and called a wall xenophobic
        5. They disagree with the current international qualifications for asylum, for which 95% of illegals claiming asylum do not qualify for. They wish to expand the definition to include those who face poverty or violence, which would qualify most people on Planet Earth.

        So, if they oppose the deportation of convicted felonious murderers and rapist, oppose court-ordered deportation, and oppose securing the border, the election of Joe Biden led to millions of illegal border crossings, and ICE confirmed the Biden Administration has deported far fewer than Obama ever did, how is that not open borders?

        I can’t find anyone they support keeping out or deporting.

        It’s like the guy who claims he respects women but beats his girlfriend. Do you judge him by his words or actions?

  3. Having one or two dogs is great. Having 100 dogs who are all undernourished and sick because you can’t take care of them all is hoarding.

    Having a well-run legal immigration system is great. We can match the allocation of immigrants to the jobs and housing markets, adjusting the distribution from year to year. Some years, we could need more STEM, and others, more unskilled labor. The influx should never be so great as to overburden the benefits infrastructure. Most legal immigrants are not white, so the claim that if you support only legal immigration, you’re a racist or xenophobe is demonstrably false, and should be obvious to the meanest understanding. Legal immigrants are our honored, invited guests.

    Illegal immigration is bad for any nation, which is why all of them have immigration laws. A nation with open borders is a region, not a country. By breaking immigration laws, illegal immigrants show a disregard for American law with their very first act on our soil. They come in numbers far too great for our schools, housing, and jobs markets to absorb without being to the detriment of legal residents and citizens. They skip the background check, so in among the good, hardworking people released into the country are criminals and terrorists. Illegal immigration runs the sex trafficking, gun running, and drug muling trades, and is responsible for the fentanyl crisis decimating the youth of the US. It’s bad for kids, because as soon as it became clear that unaccompanied minors would be allowed to stay, and send for their families, it incentivized people to send their kids unaccompanied with the cartel smugglers, too often with tragic results. Don’t create a system in which a child is worth more to a parent alone in the hands of a cartel, than at home with the family. There were exactly the same issues in South America before, and after, the enormous surge in unaccompanied minors. The only difference was that they became a ticket to skip the legal system. It’s bad for schools, because it floods the education system with too high a concentration of ESL students, often with gaps in their education. The quantity is far too great for schools to handle, which then denies the education promised to the existing legal residents and citizens.

    There are 7.5 billion people on Earth. We can’t take all of them. If we take too many, then those who believe in individual rights, gay rights, and women’s rights will be far outnumbered by those who don’t. Western values are the exception, not the norm, globally. It’s not skin color that matters, but rather preserving the culture of the US. Some might jump to call that xenophobic, yet it can’t be xenophobic if legal immigrants are welcomed. If you travel overseas, you will encounter places where women cannot uncover their heads, cannot wear shorts, and/or cannot travel alone. You will find political unrest, that leads to massacres. Gay men are thrown off buildings. Women are beaten for going to the market without a male relative. Already, in France, there are places where it is now unsafe for Jews to tread, because so many migrants and refugees arrived from parts of the world infamous for anti-semitism. Now Belgium is a terrorist hot bed, and Sweden and Germany have covered up mass sexual assaults from migrants raised to think women ask for it. Public pools in Sweden have become unsafe for Swedish women.

    We should be letting in Afghan girls who want an education, not the Taliban who prevents them. That’s what the legal immigration is supposed to do – be selective, and bar criminals or abusers.

    It’s math. There is an ideal amount of legal immigrants who can be absorbed. Beyond that, and you get a Balkanized country where people bring their prejudices and problems here. If we’re going to import 5 million illegal immigrants every year, then by next year, we will have the same problems as Europe. Public pools will become unsafe for women, neighborhoods will become unsafe for Jews, and the gay community will become terrorized. Border towns are already unsafe. Residents sleep with guns by their beds, due to all the violence and break-ins.

    The Democrat Party keeps making decisions, including defunding police, releasing prisoners early, and open borders, which has caused an increase in crime and poverty.

    Make this mistake at the nation’s peril.

    Don’t be foolish and allow the next terror cell to stroll on in.

  4. QUOTE:” The splattering of claims face considerable legal barriers based on the consent of the migrants, as shown in a waiver released by Florida.”

    Did the “Lawyers for Civil Rights” et. al. include in the action they filed an accusation that DeSantis makes bad coffee? If not, why not? It would match the seriousness of the claims they’re making.

  5. If we don’t have a “First Entry” agreement with Mexico, then what stands in the way of mass migration overwhelming our country? Our wealth? Land Mass? We’re about $31 trillion in debt. We have a homeless crisis. Mental health crisis. Illegal drug crisis. Suicide crisis. Violent crime crisis. Our infrastructure is in shambles. What prevents any country from emptying their prisons and transporting them for migration into our country? We’re told that the Great Replacement Theory is just a racist conspiracy theory. How is this not a massive redistribution of wealth?

    Did you know the poem “The New Colossus,” written by Emma Lazarus, was contributed by her for an auction to raise money for the statue’s pedestal? It wasn’t intended to be our national motto on immigration.

    Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
    With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
    Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
    A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
    Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
    Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
    Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
    The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

    “Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
    With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    If our immigration policy is to welcome all asylum seekers to remain in the United States to await their hearing, then they should be required to be held in facilities located in declared sanctuary cities and supported by the taxpayers of those cities.

      1. Estovir,

        We thought Venezuela’s government is communist. So their prisons are probably full of people opposed to communism. Why are you calling them ‘scum’??

    1. If you’re going to require that they be held, then you and other people who want them held pending the hearing should be the ones who pay the cost of holding them.

      The majority of the people in the country illegally entered legally and overstayed their visas. Where do you want them held? Or is it only asylum seekers that you want held pending a hearing?

      1. If you’re going to require that they be held, then you and other people who want them held pending the hearing should be the ones who pay the cost of holding them.

        And that makes sense to you how?

          1. Actually I don’t want anyone in this country that did not come in through a legally-recognized port of entry…period. The municipalities that actively support these incursions should bare the burden of hosting them.

  6. OT

    Where is the Supreme Court?

    Why Doesn’t the Supreme Court Keep America on the Constitution?

    The Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve Board are unconstitutional.

    Redistribution of wealth and the welfare state are unconstitutional.

    Regulation is unconstitutional.

    “Emergency Powers” are unconstitutional.

    FREE ENTERPRISE IS CONSTITUTIONAL.
    ___________________________________

    JUDICIAL REVIEW

    Call the cops on the anti-constitution communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) – all they do is cheat.

    The Supreme Court must now put on the docket the “Achilles Heel” case and strike down all unconstitutional acts in one fell swoop through its charge, Judicial Review.

    Once Americans perceive that the literal clear and evident meaning and intent of the Constitution will be vigorously supported, the desire to ignore, violate and nullify the Constitution will soon self-resolve.

    There is no Praetorian Guard for the Constitution.

    There is Judicial Review.
    ____________________

    The Power of Judicial Review

    Marshall’s opinion established that the Supreme Court has the authority, under the Supremacy Clause and Article III, § 2 of the Constitution, to review legislative or executive acts and find them unconstitutional, i.e., the power of judicial review.

    – Cornell Law School
    _________________

    Judicial Review in the United States

    The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.

    – DOJ, Office of Justice Programs

    1. Why would anyone want to make the effort to amend the constitution, when all you have to do is ignore it.

  7. They are here ILLEGALLY!! Meaning that they have broken our immigration laws! Since WHEN does committing a criminal act to get here, automatically give them standing to sue another in court?!?! This is akin to someone breaking into your home, and then trying to sue you for not fixing them a three course steak dinner for their troubles!! They are damn lucky that they weren’t shot on sight as a war time invader!! But they are too stupid to see that! Boy, that’s the IQ level we’re looking for in illegal immigrants, isn’t it? (Sarc)

  8. Did it never occur to virtue-signaling Democratic cities and states that declared themselves ‘sanctuaries’ that open borders could blow up in their faces one day? Martha’s Vineyard, Chicago and New York have revealed how much ‘sanctuary’ migrants can really expect from Democrats. What hypocrites they are!

        1. Who is “they”?

          Martha’s Vineyard is an island. There are 6 towns on the island. There is no city called Martha’s Vineyard. Are you suggesting that one of the town councils approved something? Or are you talking about some local resident?

    1. Declarations of “sanctuary city” status are illegal, unconstitutional and actionable; they are likely treasonous.

        1. Sanctuary cities illegally harbor illegal aliens who are in the act of committing crimes.

          If those perpetrators aren’t traitors committing treason, nobody is.

          Obama has expressed a compulsion to “fundamentally transform” (i.e. overthrow) the U.S.

          Isn’t that what an enemy does?

          Does the U.S. president owe fealty to the U.N.?
          ______________________________________

          Merriam-Webster

          treason
          noun
          trea·​son ˈtrē-zᵊn
          1
          : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family
          2
          : the betrayal of a trust : treachery

  9. The hate-filled rhetoric by Democrats is killing Americans

    Since I am not a lawyer, I wonder why it is that President Joseph Biden is not held responsible for inciting the death of a teen by Mr Shannon Brandt of North Dakota. Brandt killed 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson because Brandt confessed to assessing the teen as a “Republican extremist”, which is Biden verbiage. This is worse than the murdering of Miss Heather Heyer by a neo-Nazi in Charlottesville, VA. Miss Heyer’s death was not preceded by a US President demonizing political followers like Biden has done. What is more is that Biden’s Philadelphia speech, drenched in blood red, has been characterized as a divisive speech by most Americans, some comparing it to Adolf Hitler. Biden should face the same charges as the Unite the Right organizer Richard Spencer.

    Memo to Republicans: impeach Biden as many times as it takes until he is removed from office because of the clear and present danger he has proven to be to Americans like 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson.

    Suspect Claims Teen He Hit With His Vehicle Was After Him After A Political Dispute
    FOSTER CO., N.D. (KVRR) — Court documents show 41-year-old Shannon Brandt told State Radio that he hit a pedestrian who he claimed was part of a Republican extremist group. Brandt is accused of hitting 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson, of Grace City, with his SUV in an alley just before three a.m.

    https://www.kvrr.com/2022/09/20/suspect-claims-teen-he-hit-with-his-vehicle-was-after-him-after-a-political-dispute/

  10. Has anyone seen an explanation of how MA got every single migrant to agree to be moved to a military base and how they are being kept there?

    1. Wouldn’t you also choose to go someplace that makes it easier for you to get to your required court hearing?

      1. RE:”Wouldn’t you also choose to go someplace that makes it easier for you to get to your required court hearing?” Seriously!?!?!? Consider changing your screen name to “Optimist’.

      2. Anonymous:

        Actually, most illegal immigrants skip their court dates. In 2019, DHS reported that 90% of illegal aliens who claimed asylum at the border, failed to show up for their court appearance. ICE officials testified about it before Congress. In 2021, so many illegal aliens crossed the border that they released without court dates, and instructed to show up at an ICE office within 60 days to get their NTA. DHS reported that 75% never showed up.

        https://www.scribd.com/document/508491153/5-19-2021-Letter-From-Biggs-to-Secretary-Mayorkas-on-NTAs#from_embed

        All actual data indicates that the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens do not show up at court at all, or not for their final court date.

        The open borders organization, American Immigration Council, released a study claiming that 95% of migrants show up to court. They will not release the source of their data. In addition, they include people who show up for the initial hearing, but then fail to appear for the subsequent court dates.

        https://www.immigrationreform.com/2021/02/17/do-aliens-show-for-court-dates-immigrationreform-com/

        Finally, rural areas in CA, TX, NV, and AZ have an extraordinary high percentage of illegal aliens. Rural areas do not typically have a courthouse. Proximity to a court house has nothing to do with where illegal aliens congregate. After all, by nature of being an illegal alien, they have already shown a willingness to break the law to get what they want.

        Citizenship in the US is not a basic human right. If living in a dangerous neighborhood qualified for asylum, then the entire neighborhoods of Watts, Compton, and Crenshaw could then seek asylum in Sweden. If Sweden handled their cases like the US appears to do, then the gang members would be granted asylum alongside their victims.

        1. Karen, I see that you ignored the question I asked: Wouldn’t you also choose to go someplace that makes it easier for you to get to your required court hearing?

          Is your personal answer “no”?

          And Venezuelans have Temporary Protected Status, so if you’re going to start introducing data, make sure that you’re limiting your data to those with TPS.

    2. From Cape Cod: They will not say how many of the people flown north are at the former AF base fit each category but
      — some of the people left MV Wed or Thu 9/14 and 9/15 even before being kicked out because they knew where they were going from the get go
      — of the remaining, once kicked out, some simply reached the mainland and headed off to whereever they always intended to go anyways (the Vineyard was just a little vacation after the three days all expenses paid at the hotel in San Antonio)
      — of the ones that actually ended up in the former AF base on Friday 9/16, at least a half dozen have already headed off to whereever they always intended to go

  11. Picture if you will the scene in the court room when the defense presents the following information from the Massachusetts mass.gov web sight. “PRESS RELEASE
    Press Release Massachusetts Office for Refugees and Immigrants Receives Federal Funding For New Program To Support Low Income Refugee and Immigrant Families.” DeSantis was informing the illegal immigrants of all the help they will receive from the good state of Massachusetts. The judge will either be amazingly amused or amazingly angry. My bad. The judge will be both. Perhaps the party making the assertions would be better off just spending the money that it cost to litigate the matter on one charity or another that would do some good. Then again such a decision would not result in getting more votes in November for those who are so heart wrenchingly offended. Cry me a river.

  12. The Plaintiffs’ participation in the federal immigration processes—to which they are constitutionally entitled

    OK, this needs to be laughed out of court for this line alone. No one has a constitutional right to illegal immigration; there’s a reason it’s called illegal!

  13. Jonathan: In an unrelated story Trump became a successful real estate developer in NY because he followed the mantra “LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION” But yesterday, on his Truth Social, Trump was complaining about a different kind of LOCATION–the seating arrangements for Queen Elizabeth’s funeral. President Biden and first lady Jill Biden had to sit about 10 rows back because they were late because of traffic congestion. Trump is notorious for being late for public functions. He kept Queen Elizabeth waiting on his only visit in 2018. And Trump’s complaint about the seating at the Queen’s funeral? “No respect! However, a good time for our President [Wow, what an admission!] to get to know the leaders of certain Third World countries. If I were president, they wouldn’t have sat me back there…”. Nope, we know Donald. He would have stopped everything and shouted: “I demand, as President of the United States, to be seated up front! Come on Melania”. As to Black third world leaders, well, they belong in the back!

    As Trump’s legal woes mount NY state AG Letitia James, who is Black, just announced she is suing Trump and three of his children for business fraud. The civil suit, long coming, is seeking at least $250 million in damages. Alina Habba, Trump’s attorney, said the AG’s suit was an “unchecked abuse of authority”. Habba is not exactly the brightest bulb in Trump’s legal arsenal. She is now being sued by the only Black female employee in Habba’s law firm–claiming Habba often used the N-word and demeaning references to women. When Habba got shot down over her refusal to comply with discovery requests in James’ investigation she shouted “I hate that Black b**ch!”. One lawyer, who knows Habba, says her “mere presence on the team increases the likelihood of Trump and his family facing court losses and legal peril”. Facing “legal peril” from all sides where is Trump going to find competent legal representation that doesn’t require an up front $3 million retainer?

    1. Actually, according to the Times of London, seating at the funeral was according to the following official royal protocol: members of the Queen’s family first– after them, current and former living prime ministers and their spouses– after them, heads of state of nations under the Commonwealth,–and after that, other world leaders, which includes Biden. It wouldn’t matter who was in office as the POTUS–the seats were assigned based on long-standing royal protocol. They would NEVER put the US President in a more prominent location than family members, the PM or leaders of Commonwealth countries, nor would it be reasonable to expect them to do so. The reason the Bidens were seated behind what Trump calls “third-world leaders” is because these leaders are the heads of British Commonwealth countries, and they rank ahead in importance than leaders of Britain’s allies such as the US. Seating was settled long before the Bidens arrived. So, no, Trump would NOT have gotten a better seat than Biden, the seating was not a snub, and seating was based on pre-arranged protocol, NOT Biden being late. Just another example of Trump shooting off his mouth and his malignant narcissism.

      1. Blow it out your hat, Natacha (how’s Boris, BTW?). The ever-classy Bidens were late on top of fact that US presidents don’t always get front-row center. Trump was being ironic, but, as a leftie, you have have no sense of humor. Of course, just the fact you’re a leftie is pretty funny in my book.

        1. PJK: every single time Trump gets caught lying or shooting off his mouth, you Trumpster fans claim it was deliberate–to bait those who find him repulsive. Did it occur to you that calling leaders of British Commonwealth countries “third-world” is insulting to the Brits?

          1. Biden was not only late to the Queen’s funeral but his cheap wife, the “dr” was wearing a ridiculous headband with a cheery swirly bow on her head. She looked cheap and classless because she is. What a global embarrassment the Biden’s are.

            1. “cheap and classless”–really? The woman earned an Ed.D. and teaches at a community college. And, since when is a woman’s worth determined by her headgear, anyway? Want to talk about “cheap and classless”? How about former-stripper, nude model and soft-core lesbian porn actress Melania? She has NO post-secondary education, and she consorts with a chronic, habitual liar who brags about assaulting women, who’s on his third marrage and who has cheated on her with nude models and a porn performer.

              1. RE:”“cheap and classless”–really?.”Judging from that post, you must have led a comparatively boring life.

              2. ““cheap and classless”–really?” Really.

                “The woman earned an Ed.D.” Yes, we know. She’s Dr. Jill. The world knows all about it. And as Whoopi Goldberg told the idiot viewers of The View, “She’s one h*ll of a doctor, she should be named Surgeon General.” Precisely the pretentious, phony prestige “Dr” Jill was hoping for when she “earned” her cheap and shoddy online degree.

                1. RE:”Yes, we know. She’s Dr. Jill..” There’s absolutely no reason, when acting outside her area of expertise, wherein in her degree has relevance, that she should be using the imprimatur ‘Doctor’. There’s Juris Doctor degrees aplenty amongst those graduated in the law who serve in Congress and that title is not employed in the practice. As well, there are health care providers in the Congress. Personally, they should lose that title in their regular course of unless dealing with an issue specific to their area of expertise.

          2. Watch the embarrassment of disrespect that is “dr” Jill and her ridiculous head piece and demented husband arriving LATE to the funeral of Her Majesty The Queen. Utter and total disgrace.

            1. “Sorry we’re late! Sorry to needlessly mess seating things up for you guys, but OMG, there were huge traffic jams!” — is NOT an excuse for President of the United States of America being this embarrassingly, disrespectfully, disgracefully LATE to the funeral of The Queen. Complete and total foreign policy FAIL.

          3. What is is insulting to the Brits is the President of the United States of America and his nurse maid arriving disrespectfully and disruptively LATE to the funeral of Her Majesty The Queen. It doesn’t get any worse.

          4. It must be said again: What is INSULTING to the Brits, is the President of the United States of America and his nurse maid arriving disrespectfully and disruptively LATE to the funeral of Her Majesty The Queen. It doesn’t get any worse.

            Of course YOU, Natacha, would not know this because the news media you listen to is ‘fake and corrupt’ and ‘in the tank’ for any Democrat loser like Joe freakin’ demented Biden. A total fail. A total disgrace. A total embarrassment on the world stage.

  14. I absolutely love it. Biden flies illegal immigrants to who knows where all over the country. We need a reporter to find the consent agreements required by good ole Joe. My bet would be that the consent agreements used by good ole Joe would be very similar to those used by the state of Florida. Why do I absolutely love it? Because it exposes the belief by good ole Joe that you are just to stupid to see the hypocrisy. This is proof that it is not you but they who are stupid. Good ole Joe thinks he hears you say “Duh okay good ole Joe, duh okay”

  15. Are the migrants now going to sue the Massachusetts authorities for the additional trauma of being kidnapped a second time and removed to some unpleasant place? Were they informed about how their new location would be totally inferior to Mather’s Vineyard?

  16. Easy out court settlement. de Santis could keep it simple by admitting no facts but agreeing to just fly any one of them that “volunteers” back to San Antonio.

    After all, the governor of Massachusetts has mentioned five times in the last five days that the subset of migrants (those that had not already found their own way to the places they had previously arranged while waiting in the hotel in San Antonio for three days) had “volunteered” to live in the old barracks on the military base 10-12 miles or so from the nearest town.

Leave a Reply