Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Immigration

Immigration Immigration Political Forum - For topics and discussions about illegal immigrants and immigrant rights


Thanks Tree19Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 14th, 2018, 08:20 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post
I answered your questions above. Now, let us get to the real question. But, let's get to the truth here:
oh goody!
Quote:
The loaded question "Are you for open borders?" is an emotion laden buzz term that is used by white supremacists to separate the White Nationalist from the liberals. So, the simple answer is one of those garden variety, have you stopped beating your wife? kinds of questions.
Why didn't you just scream nazi and type less?

Quote:
Do I support open borders? What is the alternative? That is what you don't want to answer. The radical right wants the atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, give a hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver's license, National ID Card, Socialist Surveillance Number ...ooops, "Social Security Number," occupation license, proof of insurance, and a valid voter ID just to get a cell phone or a job in a warehouse or fast food dump.
That is a giant turd of hyperbolic manure. The right that I support wants legal immigration and non-citizens who are in our nation to be here legally.

Quote:
Those who want a border wall would erase the notion of jurisdictions, forcing state and local LEOs to enforce potentially unconstitutional laws against the citizenry, and keeping armed drones over our heads 24 / 7 / 365. Those who envision a border wall want a government that NO group of people (including the citizenry) could ever resist its might. Those people are oblivious to the fact that a government big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take all you have. The border wall people would subject this country to a complete and total POLICE STATE.
Actually the border wall would federal agents patrolling the border. I am not even sure what points you are arguing in regards to immigration. You are just throwing out libertarian catch phrases.
Quote:
Most of the laws that were aimed against so - called "illegal aliens" have been employed against the citizenry of the United States and the impact has gutted most of our Constitution. Innocent Americans have already been murdered; many people have gone to prison without the advantage of Due Process... all because non-thinking people got swayed by white supremacist talking points.
I vehemently oppose how citizens are treated when returning the United States. The fact that the court has ruled that citizens do not have Constitutional rights when coming back into our nation of citizenry is as fucked as it can be. But, I do not think that non-citizens should be able to claim such rights. Thats about as far as I can even go with the crap you are rattling about.

Quote:
As if all that were not enough, the build the wall types don't have the moral courage to admit who the people were that began all of this man the border, build a wall rhetoric in the first place. The fact that you would condemn me for putting MY FAMILY AND THEIR needs above some guy wanting to charge outrageous prices that I cannot afford says two things:

1) Race above God. Race above family

2) The job you create is not yours. It belongs to the almighty State
Your now full on in meltdown crisis mode. Basically you are attempting to blame me because you can not afford to pay for legal qualified work, so you think that because of your financial situation you should be able to hire whoever you damn well please in regards to legal citizenry. You are wrong and selfish.
Quote:
These are the two first tenets of the NATIONAL SOCIALIST WHITE PEOPLE PARTY PLATFORM
Yep, melt down is in full swing now. I told you earlier, you should have just typed nazi in really big letters with color. It would have saved us both a lot of time.
Quote:
Those who yap about the wall try to hide behind a cloak of respectability, but when they expect you to lose your home because you can't afford to keep it up under the terms of what the white supremacists expect AND they think you screw someone out of a job because they want more than the job is worth is a dead giveaway as to what they are REALLY about.
Yeah, ok. Sorry you could not realize that a simple pop off pressure valve just screws into the top of your water tank. Sorry the plumber decided to charge you a lot of money. Maybe he thought you was really dumb and was trying to take advantage of you. I have no idea. Bad plumber, but not illegal plumber. See the difference? No, probably not

Quote:
The difference between them and myself, I don't try to beat around the bush. So, let me spell it out for you.

I, like my forefathers (beginning with those who landed at Plymouth Rock in 1620) believe America to be the New Jerusalem prophesied in the Bible. It is the spot for the regathering for biblical Israel.
Oh boy..
Quote:
Our history attests to the fact that our position is unique, above that of any other nation in the annals of history. Period. Anything short of making America all white again can be accomplished by removing the barriers to Liberty and Freedom, allowing the free market to do that which it was designed to. Whatever the goose stepping nazis are promising, you can do it with citizen initiatives (NO government involvement necessary.)
Seriously, just scream nazi
Quote:
The mass deportation thing has been tried and failed. Currently, you're gutting the Constitution trying to create the ultimate POLICE STATE. NOBODY who appreciates Freedom and Liberty wants a wall. NOBODY who supports the foundational principles upon which this nation was founded wants a wall. NOBODY who understands our Constitution and our history wants to force people to become citizens on the mistaken premise that a government / God grants us our Rights.
Actually, well no not in the United States, but surprisingly enough did you know that from 1924 to 1965 the United States had a trickle of immigration. Actually it was limited to 2% of each nationality.
Quote:
I wonder how many of these white supremacists pretending to be concerned about the future will actually tell their wives, they would put their family last if some American wanted to do work for them they couldn't afford, but COULD afford it if they could hire who they wanted... I wonder if their family knows how low on the scale they really rate.
I give up, you tell me. Better yet, just scream nazi. Seriously, it would save us all a lot of time.
Quote:
"He who would give up essential Liberty for the promise of temporary Safety deserves neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Yeah, nice quote. Your a Gary Johnson libertarian. You may not realize it but you are. I like libertarians. Gary Johnson on the other hand is another matter. I remember he got mad as hell during an interview because the interviewer kept saying illegal aliens and good ole Johnson kept on correcting him by saying undocumented worker. Gary Johnson at first seemed like a reasonable choice. Then he started sounding like you minus the second coming of Israel in Minnesota or whatever crap.
Thanks from TreeDoc

Last edited by imaginethat; January 16th, 2018 at 10:03 PM.
guy39 is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 07:28 AM   #52
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 808
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post


oh goody!
Why didn't you just scream nazi and type less?


So you understood who and what you are the whole time

That is a giant turd of hyperbolic manure. The right that I support wants legal immigration and non-citizens who are in our nation to be here legally.

Then create a credible and proper way... BTW, the law states IMPROPER.

Actually the border wall would federal agents patrolling the border. I am not even sure what points you are arguing in regards to immigration. You are just throwing out libertarian catch phrases.
I vehemently oppose how citizens are treated when returning the United States. The fact that the court has ruled that citizens do not have Constitutional rights when coming back into our nation of citizenry is as fucked as it can be. But, I do not think that non-citizens should be able to claim such rights. Thats about as far as I can even go with the crap you are rattling about.

You need to read YOUR Constitution. May I direct you to the 14th Amendment?

Your now full on in meltdown crisis mode. Basically you are attempting to blame me because you can not afford to pay for legal qualified work, so you think that because of your financial situation you should be able to hire whoever you damn well please in regards to legal citizenry. You are wrong and selfish.

I'm not going to pay a guy a surgeon's wages to perform a skill he learned in under six months. There are MILLIONS of people that do not have the money it takes to pay those outrageous amounts of money. So, what YOU'RE expecting is that people (like the elderly and handicapped) choose between medicine / food OR paying Bubba a surgeon's wages to do minor handyman work around the house when they can get it done affordably.

Yep, melt down is in full swing now. I told you earlier, you should have just typed nazi in really big letters with color. It would have saved us both a lot of time.
Yeah, ok. Sorry you could not realize that a simple pop off pressure valve just screws into the top of your water tank. Sorry the plumber decided to charge you a lot of money. Maybe he thought you was really dumb and was trying to take advantage of you. I have no idea. Bad plumber, but not illegal plumber. See the difference? No, probably not

I wasn't dumb enough to pay him and I was well aware of what it entailed... though not everybody that needs a plumber is. While you're trying to be holier than thou, you just exposed yourself. You would let a plumber take advantage of the elderly because they're stupid? What if it were your mother and you were five states away? You know what. Forget it. You would have a dumb ass answer not in line with common sense.

Oh boy..

Seriously, just scream nazi

Actually, well no not in the United States, but surprisingly enough did you know that from 1924 to 1965 the United States had a trickle of immigration. Actually it was limited to 2% of each nationality.

I give up, you tell me. Better yet, just scream nazi. Seriously, it would save us all a lot of time.
Yeah, nice quote. Your a Gary Johnson libertarian. You may not realize it but you are. I like libertarians. Gary Johnson on the other hand is another matter. I remember he got mad as hell during an interview because the interviewer kept saying illegal aliens and good ole Johnson kept on correcting him by saying undocumented worker. Gary Johnson at first seemed like a reasonable choice. Then he started sounding like you minus the second coming of Israel in Minnesota or whatever crap.
NAZI Happy now?

Now that you have exposed yourself as a NAZI, with the accolades of a fellow traveler to prove it, let's move forward.

You're right; I don't know Gary Johnson. But my stance on this is built off of good old fashioned experience. You earned the benefit of it by trying to grandstand:

Whether you like it or not or agree with it or not, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers. You, siding with neo-nazis have either shown you are wholly ignorant of this OR you don't give a rip.

Secondly, whether you like it or not, believe it or not the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution absolutely guarantees the "equal protection of the laws" to ALL PERSONS. Again, either you didn't take high school civics OR you are a NAZI. Since you insist that we put it in those terms, let's do so.

Whether you believe a person to be here legally or illegally, without them having a presumption of innocence, then NOBODY has a presumption of innocence. Therefore, people on YOUR SIDE can be labeled an enemy combatant / domestic terrorist, etc. and pursued without the benefits of Due Process. That happens to be my primary interest in the case.

Now, you can follow those delusional idiots around that will slap you on the back, laughing - even willing to throw your own under the bus, but the precedent can reach to the most innocent of all people. For example, when a 90 something year old grandmother had her door kicked down and murdered by LEOs while they were acting on information provided bya low life snitch, they tried to justify it via the so - called "Patriot Act."

The point being, you cannot craft the law to treat any one class of alleged criminal any different than another. The law you pass to pursue people on account of their immigration status is applicable in ALL alleged criminal actions.

Adding insult to injury, improper entry is a civil statute. Sooo... the long term ramifications, should you get what you want is that the LEOs could apply felony consequences to minor infractions of the law. I guess if they shot down your son or daughter for smoking a joint, you'd catch on.

You're very short sighted. I came from the side you're on. And I don't give two hoots in Hell about the immigration issue, for the most part. My interest in it is purely mercenary. I have far too much experience with the LEO community presuming people to be criminals and denying them Due Process while relying on the precedents that were made over immigration laws that I cannot allow incompetent, self absorbed hate mongers to destroy our Liberties under this delusional belief that they can pass laws that only affect one segment of our society.

I'm a bit sensitive to the precedents that allowed people like Scott Woodring, William Cooper (author of Behold a Pale Horse and personal friend of mine), Kathyrn Johnson, and many others too numerous to mention to be killed without Due Process simply because narrow minded NAZIS did not understand the Constitution, stare decisis, nor the 14th Amendment (albeit unconstitutional.)

So, are you going to support National Socialism deliberately OR do you do so via ignorance?

Last edited by imaginethat; January 17th, 2018 at 12:03 AM.
discollector is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 08:01 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In a House
Posts: 224
The 14th states: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That says the individual state itself can not deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. That doesn't mean illegals are entitled to equal protection at the federal level. Since only Congress has jurisdiction over immigrants only they can make law regarding immigrants. At the Federal level they get Due Process according to the 5th and 6th Amendments, provided they are charged with a crime, i.e. Improper Entry.

Funny thing about Improper Entry is that that person rarely has any ID such as a Passport with an entry stamp, an I-94 which is supposed to be carried at all times, a valid drivers license, etc. Once the illegal is detained (say in South Dakota), they are ran through the feds databases and are determined to be illegally here, they are afforded the ability to prove they are citizens of the US. The govt then has the choice to simply deport them or to charge them with Improper Entry which places a criminal misdemeanor charge in their file, not a minor infraction. If they get caught a second time they can be charged with a criminal felony, the more times they are caught the greater the felony charge becomes and longer they can be jailed for.

The Patriot Act deals with Domestic Terrorists, those that are gun nuts/so-called "Patriots"/Private Militia morons/etc. It has nothing to do with illegal immigrants being deported.

Kathryn Johnson, 92 y.o., was killed via a "no-knock" warrant. At no point is the Patriot Act ever mentioned in the news stories nor the court documents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston_shooting
Former Atlanta Police Officer Admits Covering Up Botched Raid that Killed Elderly Woman | Fox News

Conspiracy nuts, Scott Woodring, William Cooper, killed due to shooting at police doesn't constitute being killed without due process. SMFH

Last edited by TreeDoc; January 15th, 2018 at 08:08 AM.
TreeDoc is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 08:30 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 4,007
[QUOTE=discollector;1134159][QUOTE=guy39;1134083][QUOTE=discollector;1134030]

Quote:
NAZI Happy now?
Nope, different color and much larger.

Quote:
Now that you have exposed yourself as a NAZI, with the accolades of a fellow traveler to prove it, let's move forward.
LOL, yeah lets see how many different subjects that has nothing to do with immigration you can rattle off while avoiding the fact you feel you should be able to hire people in the US who are here illegally.
Quote:
You're right; I don't know Gary Johnson. But my stance on this is built off of good old fashioned experience. You earned the benefit of it by trying to grandstand:
YAYYY
Quote:
Whether you like it or not or agree with it or not, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of his peers. You, siding with neo-nazis have either shown you are wholly ignorant of this OR you don't give a rip.
Great.
Quote:
Secondly, whether you like it or not, believe it or not the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution absolutely guarantees the "equal protection of the laws" to ALL PERSONS. Again, either you didn't take high school civics OR you are a NAZI. Since you insist that we put it in those terms, let's do so.
Quote:
Whether you believe a person to be here legally or illegally, without them having a presumption of innocence, then NOBODY has a presumption of innocence. Therefore, people on YOUR SIDE can be labeled an enemy combatant / domestic terrorist, etc. and pursued without the benefits of Due Process. That happens to be my primary interest in the case.
Thats great. We have deportation hearings. That is due process.
Quote:
Now, you can follow those delusional idiots around that will slap you on the back, laughing - even willing to throw your own under the bus, but the precedent can reach to the most innocent of all people. For example, when a 90 something year old grandmother had her door kicked down and murdered by LEOs while they were acting on information provided bya low life snitch, they tried to justify it via the so - called "Patriot Act."
Has nothing to do with immigration. That has to do with totalitarian laws that are forced on to the citizens of the United States. This is a really long stretch your trying to come up with in order to justify open borders.
Quote:
The point being, you cannot craft the law to treat any one class of alleged criminal any different than another. The law you pass to pursue people on account of their immigration status is applicable in ALL alleged criminal actions.
Thats great. Before you are deported you get a trial.
Quote:
Adding insult to injury, improper entry is a civil statute. Sooo... the long term ramifications, should you get what you want is that the LEOs could apply felony consequences to minor infractions of the law. I guess if they shot down your son or daughter for smoking a joint, you'd catch on.
Why are you even on a immigration thread?
Quote:
You're very short sighted. I came from the side you're on. And I don't give two hoots in Hell about the immigration issue, for the most part. My interest in it is purely mercenary. I have far too much experience with the LEO community presuming people to be criminals and denying them Due Process while relying on the precedents that were made over immigration laws that I cannot allow incompetent, self absorbed hate mongers to destroy our Liberties under this delusional belief that they can pass laws that only affect one segment of our society.
What the fuck are you talking about? This is a thread about immigration
Quote:
I'm a bit sensitive to the precedents that allowed people like Scott Woodring, William Cooper (author of Behold a Pale Horse and personal friend of mine), Kathyrn Johnson, and many others too numerous to mention to be killed without Due Process simply because narrow minded NAZIS did not understand the Constitution, stare decisis, nor the 14th Amendment (albeit unconstitutional
.)
What the fuck does this have to do with immigration? Sometimes I can see some thread jump but this is ridiculous. You literally gave up trying to talk about immigration issues.
Quote:
So, are you going to support National Socialism deliberately OR do you do so via ignorance?
Yeah yeah yeah. You can not even stay on point or subject but you can scream nazi.

You bring up points that have no place in this thread. Albeit they are valid points that i even tend to agree with. The manner that you brought them up in was the same as saying look its a squirrel
guy39 is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 09:58 AM   #55
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In a House
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Thats great. We have deportation hearings. That is due process.
Expedited Removal doesn't require any due process at all. About 140,000 are deported this way yearly. If an EWI is found to have been in the US for 2 years or less, they can be removed without due process, and the removal still goes on their record, where in if they are caught a second time it will be a felony charge.
Expedited Removal - Border Immigration Lawyer
and
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...t-hearing.html

Last edited by TreeDoc; January 15th, 2018 at 10:21 AM.
TreeDoc is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 11:44 AM   #56
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 808
[QUOTE=guy39;1134187][QUOTE=discollector;1134159][QUOTE=guy39;1134083]
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post


Nope, different color and much larger.


LOL, yeah lets see how many different subjects that has nothing to do with immigration you can rattle off while avoiding the fact you feel you should be able to hire people in the US who are here illegally.

YAYYY

Great.


Thats great. We have deportation hearings. That is due process.

You want round ups without probable cause

Has nothing to do with immigration. That has to do with totalitarian laws that are forced on to the citizens of the United States. This is a really long stretch your trying to come up with in order to justify open borders.
Thats great. Before you are deported you get a trial.

You want people pursued without probable cause.

Why are you even on a immigration thread?

I don't like the precedents you are promoting

What the fuck are you talking about? This is a thread about immigration
.)
What the fuck does this have to do with immigration? Sometimes I can see some thread jump but this is ridiculous. You literally gave up trying to talk about immigration issues.
Yeah yeah yeah. You can not even stay on point or subject but you can scream nazi.

Stare decisis

You bring up points that have no place in this thread. Albeit they are valid points that i even tend to agree with. The manner that you brought them up in was the same as saying look its a squirrel
Pure idiocy on your part

Once again, we have come up on a real live supporter of National Socialism. This one pretends that the rest of you are too stupid to reason; therefore, he lobs false accusations against me.

Let's put this into perspective:

Back in the 1960s a day laborer named Arturo was convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping, and rape of a mentally handicapped young woman. Because Arturo had not been informed that he could have remained silent, his conviction was over-turned and he got a new trial. Arturo was Ernesto Arturo Miranda... you have a right to remain silent. The point?

Miranda was arrested for armed robbery, kidnapping, and rape. In subsequent years later, a person arrested for murder was informed that they had a right to remain silent. If someone were caught dealing in drugs or using them, they were arrested and informed that they had a right to remain silent. Burglars, when captured were told they had a right to remain silent. Why?

The reason is that the case of Ernesto Arturo Miranda established the legal precedent that a criminal was entitled to be informed of their rights. After that all persons arrested for a crime had to be read their rights. That is how the 14th Amendment's "equal protection clause" works.

In 2006, 92 year old grandmother Kathyrn Johnston was killed by local LEOs in the Atlanta area on a no knock warrant based upon information provided by a snitch in the drug trade. In order to justify their actions, the LEOs used the so - called "Patriot Act" as justification for killing an American without Due Process.

What does the "Patriot Act" have to do with domestic criminal law involving only American citizens? Directly, not a damn thing. But, you cannot have a precedent that is specific to only one segment of criminals.

Also, check out this link:

The PATRIOT Act Does Target American Civilians, page 1

I think that guy39 and I have tangled before. His arguments were developed and perfected by David Duke back in the 1970s and they prey upon the ignorant. The fact that guy39 pretends not to understand American jurisprudence says that he's either not smart enough to judge me OR he is a pathological liar, preying upon the ignorance of the average reader. I'm not going to try and guess which.

I have information from an unpublished court case (it never went into an appeals court.) This is a few sentences from and exchange during the discovery process:

"Defendant: When in the Hell did the government start playing judge, jury and executioner presuming people to be guilty without their basic rights being acknowledged

Gov't attorney: We do it all the time sir. Haven't you ever heard of an illegal alien?
"

While I'm not at liberty to cite this case on a board, you can see it in my office with the principals present if you agree not to publicize what you read.

The link I left should be sufficient to establish that what I'm telling you is honest and the way the laws of this country are enforced. If you doubt me, you should take this to an attorney and ask.

Last edited by discollector; January 15th, 2018 at 11:48 AM.
discollector is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 12:32 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In a House
Posts: 224
When illegals are "rounded-up" it is because the government has already done the research and has warrants to go and either look at company records and arrest those the warrant covers or they have a warrant already for a specific person or people. They can't get a warrant without probable cause. Even the "no-knock' warrant is issued by a judge before it can be carried out.

Miranda falls under both the 5th and 14th Amendments Due Process clauses. When a person is detained they get read their rights, whether they are legally here or illegally. SHRUG

Nothing in the Katheryn Johnston case had to do with the Patriot Act, no news stories reported it and its not in the court documents.

Yes, the Patriot Act targets some American Civilians, namely Militia morons, Conspiracy dumb shits, etc. Do we really need a conspiracy web link to tell us that?

Expedited Removal doesn't require a person be given due process in order to be removed from the US. SHRUG

"We do it all the time sir. Haven't you ever heard of an illegal alien?" - This seems to be plastered all over the web.
https://www.google.com/search?client....0.DlnOrH_0ufc

Last edited by TreeDoc; January 15th, 2018 at 01:51 PM.
TreeDoc is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 01:28 PM   #58
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 4,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeDoc View Post
Expedited Removal doesn't require any due process at all. About 140,000 are deported this way yearly. If an EWI is found to have been in the US for 2 years or less, they can be removed without due process, and the removal still goes on their record, where in if they are caught a second time it will be a felony charge.
Expedited Removal - Border Immigration Lawyer
and
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...t-hearing.html
That is true, but that is when they are caught at the port or in the process of entry. It does not apply to the illegal alien putting on your roof that you hired.
guy39 is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 01:34 PM   #59
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kekistan
Posts: 4,007
[QUOTE=discollector;1134292][QUOTE=guy39;1134187][QUOTE=discollector;1134159]
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Pure idiocy on your part

Once again, we have come up on a real live supporter of National Socialism. This one pretends that the rest of you are too stupid to reason; therefore, he lobs false accusations against me.

Let's put this into perspective:

Back in the 1960s a day laborer named Arturo was convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping, and rape of a mentally handicapped young woman. Because Arturo had not been informed that he could have remained silent, his conviction was over-turned and he got a new trial. Arturo was Ernesto Arturo Miranda... you have a right to remain silent. The point?

Miranda was arrested for armed robbery, kidnapping, and rape. In subsequent years later, a person arrested for murder was informed that they had a right to remain silent. If someone were caught dealing in drugs or using them, they were arrested and informed that they had a right to remain silent. Burglars, when captured were told they had a right to remain silent. Why?

The reason is that the case of Ernesto Arturo Miranda established the legal precedent that a criminal was entitled to be informed of their rights. After that all persons arrested for a crime had to be read their rights. That is how the 14th Amendment's "equal protection clause" works.

In 2006, 92 year old grandmother Kathyrn Johnston was killed by local LEOs in the Atlanta area on a no knock warrant based upon information provided by a snitch in the drug trade. In order to justify their actions, the LEOs used the so - called "Patriot Act" as justification for killing an American without Due Process.

What does the "Patriot Act" have to do with domestic criminal law involving only American citizens? Directly, not a damn thing. But, you cannot have a precedent that is specific to only one segment of criminals.

Also, check out this link:

The PATRIOT Act Does Target American Civilians, page 1

I think that guy39 and I have tangled before. His arguments were developed and perfected by David Duke back in the 1970s and they prey upon the ignorant. The fact that guy39 pretends not to understand American jurisprudence says that he's either not smart enough to judge me OR he is a pathological liar, preying upon the ignorance of the average reader. I'm not going to try and guess which.

I have information from an unpublished court case (it never went into an appeals court.) This is a few sentences from and exchange during the discovery process:

"Defendant: When in the Hell did the government start playing judge, jury and executioner presuming people to be guilty without their basic rights being acknowledged

Gov't attorney: We do it all the time sir. Haven't you ever heard of an illegal alien?
"

While I'm not at liberty to cite this case on a board, you can see it in my office with the principals present if you agree not to publicize what you read.

The link I left should be sufficient to establish that what I'm telling you is honest and the way the laws of this country are enforced. If you doubt me, you should take this to an attorney and ask.
Really? What names was you posting under when we tangled?
You realize, that as a black man, calling me David Duke makes me laugh
Seriously, your personal insults are hilarious. Keep them coming.

Again, your all over the place when were supposed to be having a immigration discussion. I am very aware of the ATL case of the 92 year old being shot. This would be a great point in a subject about the police, sovereign immunity, etc. But it has not got a damn thing to do with illegal immigrants or immigration. This is not putting the subject in perspective. This is yelling look a squirrel. The crux of it all is this

1. You argue you should be able to hire anyone you damn well please including illegal aliens.
2. You claim because you cant afford American labor and/or they are to expensive and want to charge to much.
3. That is the points you made at first. I fully expect if we keep going you will be yammering on about the fake moon landings or something and no due process for the man on the moon as told to you from your church of Israel at Plymouth Rock or something
4. Peace out

Shadilay,
KeK be upon thee
guy39 is offline  
Old January 15th, 2018, 01:36 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In a House
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
That is true, but that is when they are caught at the port or in the process of entry. It does not apply to the illegal alien putting on your roof that you hired.
Expedited Removal is used on illegals that have been in the US for less than 2 years.

From the first link:
Quote:
Undocumented Immigrants Who Entered the U.S. Less Than Two Years Ago

Any undocumented immigrant who entered the U.S. unlawfully may be placed into expedited removal proceedings unless the person can demonstrate to immigration authorities that he or she has been continuously present in the United States for at least two years preceding the encounter. Expedited removal was expanded by the Trump Administration to include immigrants who are apprehended anywhere in the United States.

DHS previously used expedited removal procedures only for people found less than 100 miles from the border from either Mexico or Canada and who had illegally entered within 14 days or less. See "Expedited Removal No Longer Just a Border Procedure, Says DHS Memo" for more information about these recent changes.
What you are describing is "Returns", not "Removals".

Last edited by TreeDoc; January 15th, 2018 at 01:41 PM.
TreeDoc is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Immigration

Tags
show, state



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swing State Polls Show Close Race Between Clinton, Trump excalibur Current Events 17 June 21st, 2016 09:16 AM
Showdown in the "Show Me" State LongWinded Current Events 0 September 14th, 2015 03:11 PM
FACT SHEET: The Economic Case for Increasing the Minimum Wage: State by State Impact The White House The White House 0 March 20th, 2014 09:10 AM
Plan To Repeal Doma State By State Ray Kaye Gay and Lesbian Rights 2 April 7th, 2011 01:36 AM
Boehner a no-show at White House state dinner msnbc.com Current Events 3 January 22nd, 2011 10:58 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.