Trump DOJ sues California over 'interference' with immigration enforcement

Trump DOJ sues California over 'interference' with immigration enforcement
Via:   heartland-american
Created:   4 months ago
Comments:   301

Tags


On the heels of Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warning local residents of imminent ICE raids, potentially allowing several dangerous criminals to escape, Lieutenant Gov. Gavin Newsom, who's running to replace Gov. Jerry Brown, is calling for other local leaders to do the same thing. 

The Trump Justice Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday night against California, saying three recently-passed state laws were deliberately interfering with federal immigration policies.

It marked the latest legal and political confrontation with the nation's most populous state, which the federal government says has repeatedly stood in the way of its plans to step up enforcement actions in the workplace and against criminal aliens.

"The Department of Justice and the Trump Administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies," Attorney General Jeff Sessions was expected to tell California law enforcement officers on Wednesday. "We are fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America."

The state's Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, fired back: “At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America. Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!”

Sessions and Rosenstein were spotted dining together hours after the president's criticism. Republicans say a special counsel is warranted because of the high legal standard for obtaining a surveillance warrant.
Federal officials are seeking an injunction to immediately block enforcement of the three California laws, each enacted within the past year.

One of those laws offers additional worker protections against federal immigration enforcement actions. Senior Justice Department officials have said it's prevented companies from voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.

Employers are mandated under the law to demand ICE agents present a warrant or subpoena before entering certain areas of the premises, or when accessing some employee records.

Some companies have complained they've felt torn between trying to comply with seemingly contradictory state and federal statutes, since penalties for non-compliance can be steep from both entities.

Another state law dubbed known by critics as the "sanctuary state" bill protects immigrants without legal residency by limiting state and municipal cooperation with the feds, including what information can be shared about illegal-immigrant inmates.

A third law gives state officials the power to monitor and inspect immigrant detention facilities either run directly by, or contracted through, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The Justice Department has said it's confident the Constitution's Supremacy Clause gives it broad authority to supersede state laws that it says interfere with its immigration enforcement obligations.

President Trump threatens to pull ICE agents out of California over the state's sanctuary state police; retired Marine Corps sergeant Tommy Kilbride reacts.
Still, state officials in the past have cited the 10th Amendment’s guarantee of states not being compelled to enforce federal laws.

“We’ve seen this B-rated movie before. So we’re not totally surprised,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in response to the new lawsuit.

An estimated 2.5 million immigrants are believed to be in California illegally. In the most recent figures, ICE has reported about 16 percent of its enforcement apprehensions take place in that state.

The latest legal action by the Trump administration is part of an aggressive push to enforce existing immigration laws, with Sessions in previous remarks citing a porous U.S. border with Mexico, and the threat of criminal activity by immigrant gangs.

Federal officials repeatedly cite the case of Kate Steinle, shot to death by an illegal alien and seven-time felon in San Francisco, one of 35 communities in the state declaring itself a "sanctuary city."

The Justice Department in January threatened California and other states with subpoenas and a loss of grant money for repeatedly failing to respond to requests for immigration compliance under a federal law known as Section 1373.

Federal officials would not say whether other states were at risk of similar lawsuits over their alleged non-compliance with immigration laws.

A coordinated ICE enforcement action last month on businesses in the Los Angeles area netted 212 people arrested for violating federal immigration laws, 88 percent of whom were convicted criminals, officials said.    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/06/trump-doj-sues-california-over-interference-with-immigration-enforcement.html

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_profile_id: user_id parameter required
Heartland American
1  Heartland American    4 months ago

Go DOJ!  This is exactly what those of us in Jefferson and New California are looking for.  The instant that the feds win this court case we in non sanctuary cities and counties will give the state the middle finger and support ICE openly and with pride while mocking our urban coastal areas and legislature, Governor.  

 
 
Heartland American
1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Heartland American @1    4 months ago

This snipet adds to Trumps case on immigration.  

“Yesterday, a federal judge in Maryland ruled that President Trump indeed does have the constitutional authority to end the so-called DACA program. Judge Roger Titus also admonished those of his colleagues who've allowed their personal views to influence their decisions, writing:

"This Court does not like the outcome of this case, but is constrained by its constitutionally limited role to the result that it has reached... it is not the province of the judiciary to provide legislative or executive actions when those entrusted with those responsibilities fail to act."

The decision follows two more legal victories for President Trump from unlikely sources, as well.The Obama-appointed Judge Orrick ruled that the Trump administration has the power to withhold from the state of California a million-dollar federal grant over the issue of sanctuary policies.

And last week, Judge Curiel, also an Obama appointee, ruled that the border wall can proceed, ruling against environmental groups and the state of California and deferring to the president's powers on any matter of national security.”    https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/judges-siding-with-trump-on-border-wall-immigration-dobbs

 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Heartland American @1    4 months ago

The feds absolutely win the lawsuit and once a Trump budget is in place we can go even further in withholding funds to lawless, rebellious states like California

 
 
Randy
1.2.1  Randy  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2    4 months ago
The feds absolutely win the lawsuit and once a Trump budget is in place we can go even further in withholding funds to lawless, rebellious states like California

You do realize, don't you, that California pays considerably more to the Federal Government in Taxes then we get back in services and benefits? New York is the same. In fact most of the major Blue States are. The states that are the ones that pay less in Taxes and who get back more in services and benefits then their Taxes paid tend to be Southern Red states. In fact many of the Southern Red states would be in a near constant state of bankruptcy were it not for the extra money the Federal Government collects from places such as New York and California. We support many Red states financially.

So before you talk of "withholding funds" you should realize that if California were an independent country it would be the 6th largest economy in the world.  Before you even think of any financial threats toward us you should really, really remember that. I really don't like to put it this way, but it is true. You need us more then we need you.

 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Randy @1.2.1    4 months ago
So before you talk of "withholding funds" you should realize that if California were an independent country it would be the 6th largest economy in the world.  Before you even think of any financial threats toward us you should really, really remember that. I really don't like to put it this way, but it is true. You need us more then we need you.

California will obey the law or they will be denied Federal funds and/or face lawsuits. As for who needs who - CA isn't going anywhere - Just like the old south came to realize.

 
 
nightwalker
1.3  nightwalker  replied to  Heartland American @1    4 months ago

You're not a state or even close to one by a long shot for all your boasting. Bundy must be your HE-row.

 
 
Heartland American
2  Heartland American    4 months ago

“Federal officials are seeking an injunction to immediately block enforcement of the three California laws, each enacted within the past year.

One of those laws offers additional worker protections against federal immigration enforcement actions. Senior Justice Department officials have said it's prevented companies from voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.

Employers are mandated under the law to demand ICE agents present a warrant or subpoena before entering certain areas of the premises, or when accessing some employee records.

Some companies have complained they've felt torn between trying to comply with seemingly contradictory state and federal statutes, since penalties for non-compliance can be steep from both entities.

Another state law dubbed known by critics as the "sanctuary state" bill protects immigrants without legal residency by limiting state and municipal cooperation with the feds, including what information can be shared about illegal-immigrant inmates.

A third law gives state officials the power to monitor and inspect immigrant detention facilities either run directly by, or contracted through, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The Justice Department has said it's confident the Constitution's Supremacy Clause gives it broad authority to supersede state laws that it says interfere with its immigration enforcement obligations.”

 
 
Heartland American
3  Heartland American    4 months ago

Hello all.  OSM and I seeded different articles on this same topic yesterday unbeknownst to each other.  His took off this morning and is now locked due to his procedure. Let’s wish him well and keep him in our prayers.  Until he returns to monitor his seed, feel free to support ICE and the Trump administration while roundly bashing The Californication regime with no mercy to your hearts content here.  

 
 
Thrawn 31
4  Thrawn 31    4 months ago

Yawn, unless they can show that state level authorities are actively preventing federal authorities from doing their jobs, the feds have no case. Immigration law and enforcement, per the SCOTUS, is 100% a federal responsibility. 

 
 
Old School Marine
4.1  Old School Marine  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4    4 months ago
Yawn, unless they can show that state level authorities are actively preventing federal authorities from doing their jobs, the feds have no case. Immigration law and enforcement, per the SCOTUS, is 100% a federal responsibility.

Aiding and abetting a criminal in the commission of a felony is a prosecutable crime as is obstruction of justice and accessory before the fact.

 
 
Thrawn 31
4.1.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Old School Marine @4.1    4 months ago

Again, unless the feds can show state authorities actively impeding federal arrests or investigations.... no case.

 
 
Dulay
4.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Old School Marine @4.1    4 months ago
Aiding and abetting a criminal in the commission of a felony is a prosecutable crime as is obstruction of justice and accessory before the fact.

That argument isn't cited in the DOJ's complaint, wonder why? Perhaps you can cite what felony you're talking about. Doubt it. 

 
 
Heartland American
4.1.3  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @4.1.2    4 months ago

Because the DOJ in its suit is targeting three California “laws” that impede or interfere with the federal government in it doing the job its commissioned to do nationwide regarding immigration.  

 
 
Dulay
4.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @4.1.3    4 months ago
Because the DOJ in its suit is targeting three California “laws” that impede or interfere with the federal government in it doing the job its commissioned to do nationwide regarding immigration.

Is that just your opinion or do you have a factual basis for making that comment? 

A quick search of the DOJ complaint shows that it DOES NOT claim that the State laws 'impede or interfere' with the Federal government. Neither of those words are even mentioned in the complaint. 

 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @4.1.4    4 months ago

A quick search of the DOJ complaint shows that it DOES NOT claim that the State laws 'impede or interfere' with the Federal government.

Well, yes it does. Paragraph 35 for instance.  

Moreover in paragraph 3 it alleges California engaged in a deliberate effort to obstruct the US enforcement of immigration law. 

Did you even look at the complaint?  

 
 
Dulay
4.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.5    4 months ago
Well, yes it does. Paragraph 35 for instance.

Ooooo Sessions claimed that the provisions have the effect of 'interfering' with the INA and IRCA. He didn't cite ANY proof but hey, it's Sessions. 

Moreover in paragraph 3 it alleges California engaged in a deliberate effort to obstruct the US enforcement of immigration law.

"Obstruct" isn't 'impede or interfere' is it? Oh and again, no proof was cited in the complaint. 

Did you even look at the complaint?

I didn't just look at it or SEARCH it, I READ it. 

 
 
nightwalker
4.1.7  nightwalker  replied to  Old School Marine @4.1    3 months ago

Wouldn't you have to produce at least one known criminal that ran off specifically because of the warning?

 
 
Texan1211
4.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @4.1.6    3 months ago

Do you know what obstruct means?

 
 
Dulay
4.1.9  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.8    3 months ago

Why yes. YES I do. I ALSO know how the LAW defines it in the obstruction statute. I've asked more than once for someone to cite the part of that statute that CA of the Mayor has violated. No takers, including you. 

 
 
Heartland American
4.1.10  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @4.1.9    3 months ago

I will be fine with waiting for the justice department to research the matter and decide whether to press a federal obstruction charge against her or not.  I just hope that they can. 

 
 
Dulay
4.1.11  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @4.1.10    3 months ago

Why wait? There are plenty of legal experts here that are certain that they can. Of course none of them can support their claim but hey, that never stopped y'all.

 
 
Heartland American
4.1.12  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @4.1.11    3 months ago

Because we have to obey the law.  As long as it is. Once it’s cast off, we will with great pleasure give the state the middle finger as we leap to the support of ICE and federal immigration laws.  

 
 
Dulay
4.1.13  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @4.1.12    3 months ago

Obtuse.

 
 
lennylynx
4.1.14  lennylynx  replied to  Dulay @4.1.13    3 months ago

Insane too!

 
 
Heartland American
4.1.15  Heartland American  replied to  lennylynx @4.1.14    3 months ago

Nothing insane about it.  We win the court case and we become non sanctuary and support ICE ASAP.  

 
 
Landshark
4.2  Landshark  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4    4 months ago

 Is there any freaking doubt  that is what is occurring. 

 
 
Thrawn 31
4.2.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Landshark @4.2    4 months ago

Prove it.

 
 
Heartland American
4.2.2  Heartland American  replied to  Landshark @4.2    4 months ago

No.  

 
 
Dulay
4.2.3  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @4.2    4 months ago
Is there any freaking doubt that is what is occurring. 

Is there any empirical proof that it is? 

 
 
Randy
4.2.4  Randy  replied to  Heartland American @4.2.2    4 months ago

Thrawn 31

Prove it.

Dulay  replied to  Heartland American


These provisions are almost certainly unconstitutional.

Is that just you opinion or can you cite the relevant Article or Amendment?

Notice the "almost" in that statement. That's a half-assed way of saying he has no fucking idea at all.

 
 
Dulay
4.2.5  Dulay  replied to  Randy @4.2.4    4 months ago

Obfuscation at it's worst. 

 
 
Sean Treacy
4.2.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  Randy @4.2.4    4 months ago
Notice the "almost" in that statement. That's a half-assed way of saying he has no fucking idea at all.

If nothing else, given that you spent how many months guaranteeing that Hillary Clinton would beat Jeb Bush in 2016, you'd appreciate someone recognizing the absurdity of guaranteeing  a future  outcome. You'd think your own track record of glaring  mistakes would open your eyes to the wisdom of moderating predictions. 

Even more specifically, it's folly in particular to guaranty  how  a Court will rule when a significant portion of our judiciary believes in a "living Constitution" that "evolves."  Thanks to that standard, what the Constitution means today, it might not mean tomorrow,  and that applies to this issue as well any other.  Thanks to that doctrine, our Constitution hinges upon the whims of Anthony Kennedy. 

 
 
96WS6
4.2.7  96WS6  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4.2.1    4 months ago

Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, who has called for working more closely with immigration agents, believes public safety is being hindered by current state law, and the federal lawsuit could spark what she views as necessary change.

“I really think we should be able to notify ICE of individuals who have committed serious crimes and who are in our custody and let them know when they are going to be released,” Hutchens said in an interview Wednesday.

Currently, local law enforcement is not allowed to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, when a criminal who is an unauthorized immigrant has served his or her time and is about to be released — though there are exceptions for immigrants who have committed violent crimes and other serious offenses. Previously, local law enforcement could tell ICE about the release of any immigrant from a local jail. ICE agents could then be on hand to detain them again on an immigration hold.

“This is tying my hands behind my back in areas where I think I should notify ICE,” Hutchens said of the current state law.  She said the current law forces ICE agents to search and arrest immigrants in the community, which can boost the odds of deportation for other unauthorized immigrants who have not committed any other crime.

“Local law enforcement has no desire to enforce immigration law,” Hutchens said. “However, we must have the ability to work with our federal partners to remove dangerous criminals from our community.”

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/03/07/trump-administration-sues-california-over-sanctuary-state-laws/

 
 
Landshark
4.2.9  Landshark  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4.2.1    3 months ago

 I cannot prove that you have sufficient  intelligence to understand the reasoning.

 
 
Heartland American
4.2.10  Heartland American  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.2.6    3 months ago

I bow to youapplausethumbs up

 
 
Heartland American
4.3  Heartland American  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4    4 months ago

Their “law” literally not only doesn’t support the feds in any way, it prevents businesses from voluntarily co operating with ICE and related federal law enforcement and it literally prevents local county and city sheriffs and police as well as their jails from spending their own funds to do anything to assist ICE. These provisions are almost certainly unconstitutional.  California also wants very much different treatment from the feds compared to how they ran rough shod over local counties.  As soon as the feds court case prevails the far north inland counties will tell the state what it can do with itself and rush in with cooperation with ICE.  Where we live, with Congress the way it is, we are treated much better by the national government than our state government. 

 
 
Dulay
4.3.1  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @4.3    4 months ago
These provisions are almost certainly unconstitutional.

Is that just you opinion or can you cite the relevant Article or Amendment? 

 
 
Greg Jones
4.3.2  Greg Jones  replied to  Dulay @4.3.1    4 months ago

Invalid argument. Sessions and his team know how the state of California, and many municipalities are obstructing Federal law, as regards illegal immigration.

 
 
Dulay
4.3.3  Dulay  replied to  Greg Jones @4.3.2    4 months ago
Invalid argument.

How is requesting empirical evidence for a statement an invalid argument? Please be specific. 

Sessions and his team know how the state of California, and many municipalities are obstructing Federal law, as regards illegal immigration.

Judging from the bullshit they cited in their complaint, that statement is false. 

 
 
Sean Treacy
4.3.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @4.3.1    4 months ago

that just you opinion or can you cite the relevant Article or Amendment? 

Supremacy Clause. 

And thanks to the Arizona case, we know that Congress intended to clear the field and even laws that complement existing federal immigration laws are invalid. 

 
 
Landshark
4.3.5  Landshark  replied to  Dulay @4.3.3    4 months ago

The CA is in direct violation of Federal law on this matter. The 9th circus court of appeals is a clown car that will again have their heads handed to them.

 
 
Dulay
4.3.6  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.3.4    4 months ago
Supremacy Clause.

What part of the CA laws cited in the complaint violate the Supremacy Clause? Please be specific. 

And thanks to the Arizona case, we know that Congress intended to clear the field and even laws that complement existing federal immigration laws are invalid.

None of the CA laws complement or detract from Federal immigration laws. 

 
 
Dulay
4.3.7  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @4.3.5    4 months ago
The CA is in direct violation of Federal law on this matter.

Another proclamation! Perhaps you can do a better job of supporting that posit than the DOJ did in their complaint. Give it a shot. 

The 9th circus court of appeals is a clown car that will again have their heads handed to them.

Sessions' DOJ are the ones that have had their heads handed to them in connection to this issue and many others in virtually every jurisdiction. Their arguments are a joke and many a Judge has eviscerated their briefs and complaints. I've already done so in this seed and I don't have a law degree. 

 
 
Sean Treacy
4.3.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @4.3.6    4 months ago
What part of the CA laws cited in the complaint violate the Supremacy Clause? Please be specific

If you really don't understand the Supremacy Clause or preemption, you should probably read the 2012 Arizona case. 


None of the CA laws complement or detract from Federal immigration laws

Another proclamation!

 
 
Dulay
4.3.9  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.3.8    4 months ago
If you really don't understand the Supremacy Clause or preemption, you should probably read the 2012 Arizona case.

You made the assertion that the Supremacy Clause is the relevant Article that makes the provisions Unconstitutional.

Prove it. 

Another proclamation!

Yep and unless you can refute it, it stands. 

 
 
Dulay
4.3.10  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.3.8    4 months ago

Am I surprised that all I now hear from you is crickets? No I am not. 

 
 
Heartland American
4.3.11  Heartland American  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.3.8    3 months ago

They very much constrict the feds activity in enforcement by dictating the conditions that private business may cooperate with ICE under penalty of state law if the cooperate too much.  The same constriction occurs where the state law severely limits the ability of local governments and local law enforcement to interact with ICE and prevents locals from spending local funds in any cooperation with that federal law enforcement agency.  

 
 
MrFrost
5  MrFrost    4 months ago
The Trump Justice Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday night against California, saying three recently-passed state laws were deliberately interfering with federal immigration policies.

"States Rights". At least that's what the right is always saying is more important. 

 
 
Texan1211
5.1  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @5    4 months ago

Why can't Cali just let the feds do their jobs without interfering?

 
 
MrFrost
5.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1    4 months ago
Why can't Cali just let the feds do their jobs without interfering?

Like I said, the right is constantly screaming about states rights, how is it that NOW, in THIS case, it's suddenly not ok? Can you answer that? No, you can't. Cali has every right to govern their state the way they want. 

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.1    4 months ago

Democrats are constantly screaming against states rights. Can you explain the 180 you just did?

Only idiots would think letting people who are about to be arrested know beforehand.

SMDH at the SHEER, MONUMENTAL stupidity of that.

 
 
Heartland American
5.1.3  Heartland American  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.1    4 months ago

The state is free to not support the feds or ICE.  That’s not the issue.  Their interference with ICE carrying out federal law as passed and signed by various congresses and presidents over time is the issue.  Also they interfere by coercing private business and local governments to not comply even if they want to.  Californication wants kid glove treatment from the feds while being a jack booted thug to local counties and cities.  

 
 
Dulay
5.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @5.1.3    4 months ago
The state is free to not support the feds or ICE. That’s not the issue.

Except that is exactly what the DOJ is demanding in it' complaint. The complaint is overtly misleading in multiple ways. 

Their interference with ICE carrying out federal law as passed and signed by various congresses and presidents over time is the issue.

Is that just your opinion or can you post a cogent example of how are they interfering? 

Also they interfere by coercing private business and local governments to not comply even if they want to.

California has the same rights as every other sovereign state to regulate the actions of businesses and local governments.  

 
 
Randy
5.1.5  Randy  replied to  Dulay @5.1.4    4 months ago

The state is free to not support the feds or ICE.  That’s not the issue. Their interference with ICE carrying out federal law as passed and signed by various congresses and presidents over time is the issue.

Bull-fucking-shit and you goddamn well know that statement is a complete fucking LIE!

California is not interfering with ICE to carry out it's duties at all and you fucking well know so tell the goddamn truth!!!

We are just refusing to cooperate with them when it comes to non-violent Undocumented workers. If a non-documented worker is here in California and they have committed a felony, then we will be more then happy to help ICE get rid of them. However if, as is happening all of the time because they are easy prey and jack off lazy work for DOJ, ICE wants to go after hardworking undocumented workers who have been in this state for 10, 20 or even 30 years, by skulking around schoolyards like perverts or dragging women out of hospital ER's (and yes, that is EXACTLY WHAT SESSION'S ASSHOLES ARE DOING OUT HERE JUST TO PISS US OFF AND TO BE PRICKS!!!) seeking medical treatments, then when it comes to help from us, they can fuck the hell off and expect less and less cooperation going forward and if they don't like it then they can fucking piss up a rope and pull their officers out of California for good. We don't want their interfering, nosy asses here anyway and they will not be missed. So Trump and Sessions, fuck off and stay out of California. You both have far worse violent crime problems in your own home states to deal with, so stay the fuck out of the Nation of California unless you are politely asked to visit!

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago

Sure you will, just like Cali did with Kate Steinle's murderer?

You aren't fooling anyone with rhetoric-we have seen the actual actions.

 
 
Landshark
5.1.7  Landshark  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago

Absolutely untrue. Just recently they released a rapist instead of turning him over to the feds.

 
 
Landshark
5.1.8  Landshark  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago

There are many more measures that be taken against CA just as they did against the confederacy.

 
 
Dulay
5.1.9  Dulay  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago
You both have far worse violent crime problems in your own home states to deal with, so stay the fuck out of the Nation of California unless you are politely asked to visit!

Hey I completely oppose Session's and his ham handed complaint. When I said obfuscation, I meant HA and his constant and overt attempt at diversion and deflection. 

I just finished READING the DOJ complaint. It's almost as bad as the amicus brief that they filed in the Masterpiece case. Here is an example:

Congress also authorized states and localities “to cooperate with the [Secretary] in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States.” Id.§ 1357(g)(10)(B)

Take a look @ 8 U.S. Code § 1357 (g)(10)(B): 

(g)Performance of immigration officer functions by State officers and employees

(10)Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to require an agreement under this subsection in order for any officer or employee of a State or political subdivision of a State—

(A)to communicate with the Attorney General regarding the immigration status of any individual, including reporting knowledge that a particular alien is not lawfully present in the United States; or

(B)otherwise to cooperate with the Attorney General in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States.

So in the REAL WORLD, the section they cited in the complaint means the exact OPPOSITE of the posit of their argument. That section IN FACT makes it abundantly clear that UNLESS their is an agreement with the state, officers and employees of the State are under NO obligation to communicate or cooperate. 

Here's the next paragraph:

Federal law also explicitly recognizes the United States’ authority to “arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal,” including the lease or rental of state, local, and private facilities. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g); accord 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(11).

See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)

(g)Places of detention
(1)In general
The Attorney General shall arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal. When United States Government facilities are unavailable or facilities adapted or suitably located for detention are unavailable for rental, the Attorney General may expend from the appropriation “Immigration and Naturalization Service—Salaries and Expenses”, without regard to section 6101 of title 41, amounts necessary to acquire land and to acquire, build, remodel, repair, and operate facilities (including living quarters for immigration officers if not otherwise available) necessary for detention.
(2)Detention facilities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Prior to initiating any project for the construction of any new detention facility for the Service, the Commissioner shall consider the availability for purchase or lease of any existing prison, jail, detention center, or other comparable facility suitable for such use.

So WHERE is the "lease" and/or "rental" agreement that this subsection is predicated by? The answer is, there is NONE. Sessions is just flapping his gums. 

The FACT is that the Federal government fails to reimburse states for the cost to detain 'immigration holds'. The costs are in the hundreds of millions of dollars. All of the southern border states have been trying to get the Feds to reimburse them for YEARS! 

8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(11).

(11)The Attorney General, in support of persons in administrative detention in non-Federal institutions, is authorized—
(A)to make payments from funds appropriated for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and alien registration for necessary clothing, medical care, necessary guard hire, and the housing, care, and security of persons detained by the Service pursuant to Federal law under an agreement with a State or political subdivision of a State;

See that part about 'an agreement with the State'? HA and his fraternity want to pretend that Federal law coerces facilitation by the state. It DOES NOT. 

 
 
Randy
5.1.10  Randy  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.6    4 months ago
Sure you will, just like Cali did with Kate Steinle's murderer?

Kate was shot by what SF Police ballistics determined was a ricochet off froma slab of concrete about 12 to 15 away from where the pistol was fired from where Zarate said he found it, not by a direct shot from anywhere. After the ricochet (from 12 to 15 feet away from where the pistol was fired) the single round traveled a little more then a mile to where it struck her (Kate) in the back and then into her aorta. It was, by any reasonable analysis, an accidental shooting, or one incredible, unbelievable, no one, not Annie Oakley or Buffalo Bill could have pulled it off, trick shot. I mean shooting 12 to 15 feet away into a concrete (inherently unstable) slab and then purposefully ricocheting it more then a mile a way to hit someone in the heart from the back? No one is that good of a trick shot! Not one single person! Plus the weapon was reported lost/stolen by a BLM Ranger miles away in the downtown area of SF. ICE had issued a detainer for him, but he was not wanted on any violent felony warrants and had no previous violent felony convictions, so there was no reason for SF to hold him. I would have kicked him lose also and I don't see why not. Besides the weapon in question (.40 Caliber SIG Sauer P239) had no safety on it and a reputation of going off on it's own when mishandled or roughly handled. Quite frankly I just don't see what the problem is?

 
 
Randy
5.1.11  Randy  replied to  Landshark @5.1.8    4 months ago
There are many more measures that be taken against CA just as they did against the confederacy.

What measures can be taken against California just like during the confederacy? California was a Union state during the Civil War.

 
 
Dulay
5.1.12  Dulay  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago
That’s not the issue. Their interference with ICE carrying out federal law as passed and signed by various congresses and presidents over time is the issue.

I block quoted that from HA's comment Randy. You seem to having an issue with following the thread...

 
 
Randy
5.1.13  Randy  replied to  Dulay @5.1.12    4 months ago

No, not at all. I already block quoted that myself and answered it. So I went ahead and answered a couple others from Trumps brigade of human want to be's

 
 
Dulay
5.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Randy @5.1.13    4 months ago
So I went ahead and answered a couple others from Trumps brigade of human want to be's

Perhaps it would be more appropriate if you replied to their comments then. By block quoting someone else's comment in a reply to me, it confuses the source of the original comment. 

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @5.1.10    4 months ago

He had PLENTY of felonies (7). How ELSE could he have POSSIBLY been convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm?

He shouldn't have been in the US at ALL.

He was deported FIVE times. Cali harbored him.

Don't talk about how Cali will turn over felons because it isn't true.

 
 
Heartland American
5.1.16  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago

I’m a Californian and I want Trump and Sessions here and I want them doing exactly what they are doing.  In this part of what you want to still be part of California we support the President and that you all feel blanked over by him makes it all the better.  

 
 
Heartland American
5.1.17  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @5.1.5    4 months ago

Nation of Ca?  Please go for it!  Then not only would we not have to be in the same state as you, we wouldn’t share the same country either as most of New California would stay in the union and rely on its military forces to stay and separate from the rest.  

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.1.18  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.15    4 months ago
Don't talk about how Cali will turn over felons because it isn't true.

You produce nothing but anecdotal evidence claiming one case proves CA is somehow intentionally releasing felons and hardened criminals back on the streets regardless of their immigration status. Total BS. The only things the sanctuary laws do is to allow local police departments to do their own jobs instead of having to do ICE's job for them. They don't automatically turn over any undocumented person and they don't have to inform ICE of their interactions with undocumented witnesses and others in the community. ICE has never been blocked from doing their jobs by any sanctuary city legislation.

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.19  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @5.1.10    4 months ago

Not sure where you get your info at, but if you are right, please notify former Officer John Evans that he lied during his testimony in that case. He testified that the bullet traveled about 100 feet after ricocheting before striking Steinle. Not a mile as you claimed.

Of course, he was an experienced officer assigned to the case and investigated and everything while you are an internet god and probably have better info than some cop, right?

SMDH

 
 
Split Personality
5.1.20  Split Personality  replied to  Randy @5.1.10    4 months ago

The bullet that killed Kate Steinle on Pier 14 last month as she walked with her father was fired accidentally, a ballistics expert testified Thursday on behalf of the man charged with her murder.
“The gun was pointed at the ground,” James Norris, the former head of the San Francisco Police crime lab, said repeatedly on the stand Thursday during the preliminary hearing of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, a Mexican national and five-time deportee who has ignited a national debate on illegal immigration and drawn the ire of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.
Out of court, Norris called the shooting an accident. “You couldn’t do this on purpose,” he said of intentionally ricocheting a shot and hitting a person roughly 100 feet away.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2015/08/27/kate-steinle-killing-ballistics-expert-calls-fatal-shot-accident/

 
 
Split Personality
5.1.21  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.19    4 months ago

There's absolutely no reason to be rude or snarky Tex.

Find the info on the net and post the link.

Easy peasy.

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @5.1.18    4 months ago

Not asking them to do ICE's job. What I am asking for is the MINIMUM of cooperation. Aren't they supposed to be on the SAME side--law and order?

How is NOT announcing ICE raids prior to them happening HELPING anyone in law enforcement? The mayor was wrong, period.

Would it be okay if a district attorney announced that a subject of a police investigation would have his offices raided prior to the raid?

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @5.1.21    4 months ago

There is no reason to post such bullshit, either. I didn't want to parse every source and make sure it was acceptable to him.

Thanks for posting it for me. Appreciate that.

 
 
Randy
5.1.24  Randy  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.15    4 months ago
He had PLENTY of felonies (7). How ELSE could he have POSSIBLY been convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm?

California will work with ICE in deporting anyone with violent felony. He had no violent felonies so we didn't call ICE in on it. If ICE doesn't like how we do things, too fucking bad. They can just stay out of California then.They won't be missed and this Sessions lawsuit has nothing to do with the law. It's nothing more then Trump and Sessions trying to find ways to harass us in California because he knows that most of the people out here think both of them are lying assholes, so they want to pick a fight with us. They'll lose.

 
 
Texan1211
5.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @5.1.24    4 months ago

So you are okay with felonies for drug trafficking. How nice for the kids he might have been selling to.

He was deported a number of times. He should have remained in jail, California simply fucked up.

Why do you continue to support illegal aliens and policies that enable them to continue to break our laws over the safety and well being of US citizens?

 
 
arkpdx
5.1.26  arkpdx  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.25    4 months ago

So you are okay with felonies for drug trafficking. 

Of they don't have a problem with drug traffickers and dealers. They just think of them as undocumented pharmacists

 
 
bugsy
5.1.27  bugsy  replied to  arkpdx @5.1.26    4 months ago

Or as most of the rest of leftists call them...their "suppliers".

 
 
Texan1211
6  Texan1211    4 months ago

I bet California Democrats would be fine and dandy with disclosing a raid on drug dealers if it was the feds doing the raid.

 
 
Heartland American
6.1  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @6    4 months ago

Especially if it were MS-13 that was being raided.  

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Heartland American @6.1    4 months ago

Heck, if it was them, Democrats would likely give them free bus passes to vamoose!

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.1    4 months ago

Round trip, of course!

 
 
Heartland American
6.1.3  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.2    4 months ago

And then they would make them guests of “honor” at Trumps next state of the union address.  

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Heartland American @6.1.3    4 months ago

Well, that'd be one way to get them to attend!

 
 
Landshark
6.1.5  Landshark  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.1    4 months ago

The Feds could begin to declare CA drivers licenses invalid for TSA I’d.

 
 
Dulay
6.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @6.1.5    4 months ago
The Feds could begin to declare CA drivers licenses invalid for TSA I’d.

Actually, no, NO 'the Feds' can not. Read the Constitution. 

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @6.1.6    4 months ago

Where in the Constitution does it say that a federal agency MUST accept any state ID for anything?

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @6.1.6    4 months ago

Here:

The States Where a Driver's License Won't Work for Air Travel Next Year
www.travelandleisure.com › Travel Tips

Sep 5, 2017 - The passport card is an alternative that will allow travelers from noncompliant states to board a domestic flight; it will not be valid for international air travel. Passport cards are the same size as a driver's license, cost $55 for first time applicants, and $30 for anyone who already has a passport. It costs $110 to ...

DHS Extends Deadline for REAL ID Use at Airports - AARP Travel
https://travel.aarp.org/articles-tips/articles/info-2018/real-id-license-fd.html

Jan 5, 2018 - En español | If you haven't yet received your state's REAL ID compliant driver's license — the new higher-security ID that will be required to board domestic flights — you probably won't need to worry about it for a while: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has pushed the official deadline for ...

Of course, BOTH these and multiple other sources COULD be wrong, and you COULD be right.

You aren't, and they aren't.

 
 
Landshark
6.1.9  Landshark  replied to  Dulay @6.1.6    4 months ago

They already have. skirting the CoC [ph]

 
 
Dulay
6.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.8    4 months ago
The States Where a Driver's License Won't Work for Air Travel Next Year

From your link:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced on December 20, 2013 a phased enforcement plan for the REAL ID Act (the Act), as passed by Congress

Congress isn't 'the Feds'. 

 
 
Dulay
6.1.11  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.7    4 months ago

Full faith and credit clause.

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @6.1.10    4 months ago

Hmmm...........is Congress checking IDs? Is the TSA part of the FEDERAL government?

 
 
Dulay
6.1.13  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.12    4 months ago
Hmmm...........is Congress checking IDs? Is the TSA part of the FEDERAL government?

Your lack of cogency is sad. 

The TSA has NO authority to deny a state license of it's own volition. The Congress passed the legislation that authorizes the TSA to check IDs.

Do you need a pictograph? 

 
 
Dulay
6.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @6.1.9    4 months ago
They already have. As usual you have no frickin clue.

No 'they' [the Feds] haven't.  As usual you have no freaking cogency. 

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @6.1.13    4 months ago

Well, no fucking shit, Sherlock,'

Of COURSE Congress passes the laws. And they passed one whereby if a state didn't conform to certain standards, their state issued IDs would be unacceptable for air travel. And the Feds (any government employee) enforce it.

So California's licenses could be said to be invalid for air travel if they don't meet certain criteria. Like maybe not issuing ID to illegal aliens. If Congress passes such a law.

 
 
Landshark
6.1.16  Landshark  replied to  Dulay @6.1.14    4 months ago

Oh they most certainly have already in fact. You’ll find out the hard way.

 
 
Dulay
6.1.17  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @6.1.16    4 months ago
Oh they most certainly have already in fact.

Prove it. 

You’ll find out the hard way.

Nope. I won't be flying any time soon. 

 
 
Dulay
6.1.18  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.15    4 months ago
Of COURSE Congress passes the laws.

Shot attention span? You must have forgotten where this discussion started. Here you go:

The Feds could begin to declare CA drivers licenses invalid for TSA I’d.

So maybe you should get on chat and tell AI that he is mistaken...

BTW, good to see that you agree with my posit. 

 
 
Split Personality
6.1.19  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.8    4 months ago

So far only American Samoa is non compliant.

Everyone else is either compliant or ok until 2020 by extentions

good info.

 
 
Texan1211
6.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.19    4 months ago

Be interesting if they made it so only states that verified legal status were acceptable.

 
 
Split Personality
6.1.21  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.20    4 months ago

Well honestly it just seems like another government boondoggle.

I have a TX drivers license and a passport and the passport card.

For Californians, the other 26 states and American Samoans if they do not have the passport card

In this case, you may be asked to present at least two other forms of ID, such as:
American Samoa Certificate of Identity
Birth certificate
Social security card
Voter registration card
Vehicle registration
Marriage certificate
W-2 form
Credit card
These alternative forms of ID must have your name and other identifying information such as photo, address, phone number, social security number, or date of birth. If your identity is confirmed, you may be subject to additional screening before you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint.

Anyone under the age of 18 does not need identification (???) when travelling with an adult companion ( who must comply with the ID requirements )

Several of those documents can be easily counterfeited 

 
 
Dulay
6.1.22  Dulay  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.21    4 months ago
Several of those documents can be easily counterfeited

I can get you an IN drivers license for about $300. 

 
 
Randy
6.2  Randy  replied to  Texan1211 @6    4 months ago
I bet California Democrats would be fine and dandy with disclosing a raid on drug dealers if it was the feds doing the raid.

Especially if it were MS-13 that was being raided.  

We deal with our own drug dealers in California and MS13 was and still is a small to small/medium sized Central American/USPrison Gang, except for the great PR that Trump is giving it. Compared to the Bloods, the Crips or bikers like the Mongols or the Hell's Angels, MS13 is very, very, very small potatoes indeed. The Mexican Mafia (prison), along with a dozen or so other L.A Street gangs could eat MS13's lunch with no fear at all. Trump holds them in some sort of mythical high regard that no one else did until someone blew smoke up his ass about how strong they are. They aren't. I don't understand why Trump and his butt-lickers are so scared of MS13. You know, comparatively speaking there really aren't very fucking many of them. Most mid-sized American city street gangs have more and more bad-assed members. Trump has been getting suck-ass info about them or watching too many bad gang movies...shot by MS13 members.

 
 
Texan1211
6.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @6.2    4 months ago

Humph!

Many Mara Salvatrucha gang members from the Los Angeles area have been deported after being arrested.[25] For example, Jose Abrego, a high-ranking member, was deported four times.[26] As a result of these deportations, members of MS-13 have recruited more members in their home countries.[27] The Los Angeles Times contends that deportation policies have contributed to the size and influence of the gang both in the United States and in Central America.[25] According to the 2009 National Gang Threat Assessment, "The gang is estimated to have 30,000 to 50,000 members and associate members worldwide, 8,000 to 10,000 of whom reside in the United States.[28]
Since the first decade of the twenty-first century the gang has expanded into the Washington, D.C. area, in particular the areas of Langley Park and Takoma Park, Maryland.[29]
In 2004 the US FBI started the MS-13 National Gang Task Force. The FBI also began teaming with law enforcement in El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico.[30]
In 2005 the office of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement started Operation Community Shield. By 2011 this operation had made over 20,000 arrests, including more than 3,000 arrests of alleged MS-13 members.[31]
NYPD said that MS-13 were responsible for 17 murders between January 2016 and April 2016 in Long Island.[32]
On July 28, 2017, one day after 113 suspected MS-13 gang members were arrested by Salvadorian authorities,[33] President Donald Trump declared his goal of "eradicating" MS-13, calling them "animals" whose victims "die slowly because that way it's more painful."[34]

 
 
lennylynx
6.2.2  lennylynx  replied to  Texan1211 @6.2.1    4 months ago

Hey Tex, the Trump administration had an actual positive development today in the North Korea situation.  Li'l Kim is even putting denuclearization on the table.  Shouldn't one of you righties be seeding an article?

 
 
Heartland American
6.2.3  Heartland American  replied to  lennylynx @6.2.2    4 months ago

I already seeded one of my two that I can so some other conservative will have to do it.  

 
 
Landshark
6.2.4  Landshark  replied to  lennylynx @6.2.2    4 months ago

We are waiting for one of deranged lefty cohorts to write about how Trump is conspiring with NK now.

 
 
Texan1211
6.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  lennylynx @6.2.2    4 months ago

Shouldn't you be getting ready for bedtime?

 
 
Rmando
7  Rmando    4 months ago

Here's hoping the best for AG Sessions fighting the pro criminal, anti sovereignty leftists.

 
 
Randy
7.1  Randy  replied to  Rmando @7    4 months ago

If Sessions ever had to face any real resistance by anyone, especially anyone on the Left, he'd shit his tiny little green Elf shorts and run back to his Keebler Tree! He has coward tattooed on his forehead.

 
 
Heartland American
7.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @7.1    4 months ago

He came to California, he saw, he will conquer it.  And we will help him do it from within.  

 
 
Randy
7.1.2  Randy  replied to  Heartland American @7.1.1    4 months ago

laughing dudelaughing dudelaughing dude

 
 
lib50
7.2  lib50  replied to  Rmando @7    4 months ago

Lol, Sessions is trying to make brownie points with Trump.  California is not amused by Trump's federal shitshow and we just don't want to be part of that clusterfuck.  We'll let Brown troll Trump's twitter for fun too, we need the laughs.

Meantime, Mueller time is getting closer!  And don't think Sessions and Pence will be clean at the end of this! 

 
 
Rmando
7.2.1  Rmando  replied to  lib50 @7.2    4 months ago

I can't imagine what "smoking gun" or surprise evidence you think Mueller going to pull out of a top hat. The only thing he's uncovered so far are crooked lobbyists and Russian trolls. You lefties are going to be very disappointed in the final results.

 
 
Skrekk
7.2.2  Skrekk  replied to  Rmando @7.2.1    4 months ago
The only thing he's uncovered so far are crooked lobbyists and Russian trolls.

So far most of them were Trump campaign officials, and now the rest of the rats are fleeing his sinking ship.

 
 
Ozzwald
7.3  Ozzwald  replied to  Rmando @7    4 months ago
Here's hoping the best for AG Sessions fighting the pro criminal, anti sovereignty leftists.

I'm just trying to figure out what the right is so upset about.  These 3 laws?

First one does not allowed federal law enforcement to enter private property, without a warrant.  Why would anyone be opposed to that?  Do you want law enforcement to be able to go anywhere they want without warrants?  Isn't this addressed directly in the Constitution.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

2nd one just states that state law enforcement will continue to not do federal's job.

Article I, Section 8, clause 4 of the Con­stitution entrusts the federal legislative branch with the power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” This clear textual command for uniformity establishes that the federal government, specifically Congress, is responsible for crafting the laws that determine how and when noncitizens can become nat­uralized citizens of the United States.

The 3rd law just gives local inspectors the right to inspect local detention facilities.  You don't want California officials to see how you are detaining arrested immigrants?  Take them out of state.  What's the big deal?

 
 
Rmando
7.3.1  Rmando  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3    4 months ago

The only laws I care about are the ones that say you have to be here legally to stay and that employers deserve severe legal consequences for hiring illegals.

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.2  Heartland American  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3    4 months ago

 The Justice Department's decision to sue California for violating the U.S. Constitution by obstructing federal immigration enforcement wasn't made lightly. But given the enormous stakes involved it was necessary, and California deserves to lose, big time.

"California, we have a problem," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a speech Wednesday. "Here's my message — how dare you. How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical, open borders agenda."

Bingo.

California's Democratic Party has moved so far to the left of the political spectrum, it can no longer be considered a mainstream party. But it's nudging the state into a danger zone — one that most of its citizens don't realize could have a major impact on them.

Democrats — California is essentially a one-party state — recently passed three laws that they knew seriously conflicted with federal laws, but were nonetheless favored by the extreme open borders advocates among the Democrats.     https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/in-rejecting-u-s-immigration-law-california-has-a-role-model-the-confederacy/

 
 
Dulay
7.3.3  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.2    4 months ago
"Here's my message — how dare you. How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical, open borders agenda."

Since they allege that the provisions they are arguing against put law enforcement's lives in danger, then they should either adapt to the circumstances or stop carrying out raids until they can ensure law enforcements safety, right? Right? 

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.4  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @7.3.3    4 months ago

I think that anytime an illegal alien sheltered in a sanctuary city commits murder that the mayor who sheltered the alien should be subject to the federal death penalty.  

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.5  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @7.3.3    4 months ago

No.  We intend to compel this sh-t hole state to allow its citizens and businesses to follow their own conscience regarding voluntary  cooperation with our federal law enforcement and to allow local law enforcement at the city and county level the same choice and the ability to spend their funds in doing so.  Part of why the AG was here to sue the state is on behalf of its citizens the new laws trampled upon.  That’s right.  Californians in New California and Jefferson are openly siding with the feds against the rest of you from this hell hole state.  When Sessions was here speaking we were figuratively sticking up a certain finger at the rest of you.  

 
 
Randy
7.3.6  Randy  replied to  Dulay @7.3.3    4 months ago
"Here's my message — how dare you. How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical, open borders agenda."

Since they allege that the provisions they are arguing against put law enforcement's lives in danger, then they should either adapt to the circumstances or stop carrying out raids until they can ensure law enforcements safety, right? Right? 

Right! If ICE Agents are scared of getting hurt on their job then they either need to stay out of California or find a different job, like maybe a florist? They way they are enforcing the laws here are pure harassment to us out here anyway, so we wouldn't miss them if they were gone. They were supposedly going to get just the “Bad Hombres” but the truth is that they going after people who have been here 20 or 30 years, have commit-ed no crimes, are hard working with good jobs that they have had for decades, pay their taxes, pay their bills and are the kind people we want to find a real path to citizenship for. DOJ (meaning Trump and Sessions) knows this and they are intentionally targeting the good people by grabbing them at school, hospitals and workplaces. Sessions and Trump are misusing the ICE Agents out of pure spite.

No “Bad Hombres” though. Just the easiest arrests. And now they say they are scared of getting hurt by arresting these old people? One can only come to one of two opinions about this law suit about that. Either it's a complete pure harassment suit (and a clear abuse of power) or the ICE Agents who work out here in California are complete pussies. Either shove this phony lawsuit up Trump and Sessions ass for the abuse of power that it is or if the ICE Agents really are that big of pussies as Sessions is making them out to be then they're the last thing we need in our law enforcement here. Our Highway Patrol and and most of our local police departments are really top of the line and professional. The last thing they should have to worry about is working with an ICE Agent who is shivering in fear and waving his gun around scared! So keep you're ICE Agents who are too cowardly to do their job because they might hurt (didn't they think of that when they took the job?) and get rid of this abuse of power harassment lawsuit and just leave us the hell alone.

 
 
Randy
7.3.7  Randy  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.5    4 months ago
Californians in New California and Jefferson are openly siding with the feds against the rest of you from this hell hole state.

Go to "new Idaho" instead. Most of the White Supremacists have been driven by losing lawsuits, but they have left their camps behind. skirting the CoC [ph] since there is not a chance in hell that you're ever going to see the mythical state of Jefferson

 
 
Vic Eldred
7.3.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Randy @7.3.7    4 months ago

That's skirting the "code" again. Stop calling people racist's like your filthy pandering representatives, who are totally beholding to immigrant activist organizations.

California loses this lawsuit. The liberal ninth district court might buy it some time, but ultimately the Supreme Court will back the Constitution. BTW most people (American citizens) agree.

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.9  Heartland American  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.3.8    4 months ago

Great post.  It is sad that Californication’s progressives have to resort to shrieking yells of racism any time anyone dares to disagree with them.  There are parts of Ca. Where as soon as the prohibition against businesses and local law enforcement cooperating with ICE is overturned where we will be siding with the rest of America against them in a heartbeat 💗.  In this county, it’s the law that as soon as a court overturns the Jan . 1 effective provisions that we go all in in supporting ICE and defying our coastal urban elites.  

 
 
Dulay
7.3.10  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.4    4 months ago
I think that anytime an illegal alien sheltered in a sanctuary city commits murder that the mayor who sheltered the alien should be subject to the federal death penalty.

You obviously have NO CLUE about Federal law. It's quite hilarious to see all of the fraternity, who not that long ago, were pounding on the table and demanding that 'States rights' be recognized. Now y'all are all about letting the Feds do whatever the hell they want. The hypocrisy is galactic. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.11  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.10    4 months ago

No one said ANYTHING about the Feds doing whatever they want. We are talking about the Feds doing their jobs that we pay them for without active interference from a state who puts illegal aliens above their own citizen constituents.

Why do you continue to support illegal aliens and policies designed to aid them in illegal activities over the well-being of your own fellow American citizens?

 
 
Split Personality
7.3.12  Split Personality  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.9    4 months ago

The city, county, state cannot detain a person  after they have been released by a judge/court order.

Ice is always asking municipalities to detain people for a few hours, a few days, etc until they can pick them up.

That violates the rights of the freed person and runs up costs for the municipality.

There's a ton of paperwork to account for every penny spent and most institutions bill each other to a penny when transferring or holding someone for a different jurisdiction.

Not ICE, their administrative warrants are not signed by a judge - they are simply signed by the senior agent and as such

don't carry much weight with local authorities. 

As is the case when ICE knows a suspect is home and won't come out, ICE can sit outside and wait.

They can sit outside Jails when they suspect illegals are due to be released and arrest them as soon as they exit the building.

Or they can get the laws changed and, 

get the warrants signed by a judge and make arrangements to reimburse any muni's for any expense related to said transfers.

It's no different in CA than it is in PA or anywhere else.

The only differing incident in CA was the Mayor giving an ill advised shout out to the city.

 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
7.3.13  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.11    4 months ago
We are talking about the Feds doing their jobs that we pay them for without active interference from a state who puts illegal aliens above their own citizen constituents.

Have you stopped believing in states rights??? Gosh, I thought you were one of the people who is always saying that states rights should supersede federal rights. Of course I could be wrong here.

 
 
Split Personality
7.3.14  Split Personality  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.2    4 months ago

Clearly identified as an editorial.

The only surprise is that there's no author listed.

Just an anonymous emotional opinion piece.

Nice...

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.15  Texan1211  replied to  Galen Marvin Ross @7.3.13    4 months ago

have you stopped believing in law and order?

Why do you continue to support illegal aliens and policies which enable them to continue to break our laws over the well-being of your fellow US citizens?

 
 
Explorerdog
7.3.16  Explorerdog  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.15    4 months ago

Your continued support of the criminal in chief say plenty.

 
 
Dulay
7.3.17  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.5    4 months ago
No. We intend to compel this sh-t hole state to allow its citizens and businesses to follow their own conscience regarding voluntary cooperation with our federal law enforcement and to allow local law enforcement at the city and county level the same choice and the ability to spend their funds in doing so.

Funny that y'all used to decry the use of the judiciary to 'compel' the states to do what the citizens voted against. It wasn't that long ago that I'm sure y'all were demanding that the Courts uphold Prop. 8, an unconstitutional referendum, because 'STATES RIGHTS!'. Now that the 'worm has turned' y'all beg 'Big brother' to run to the Courts to squash laws that everyone knows the majority of CA citizens support. 

Californians in New California and Jefferson are openly siding with the feds against the rest of you from this hell hole state.

There are NO 'Californians in New California and Jefferson' because those places DO NOT EXIST anywhere but in your fantasies. 

BTFW, why would you want to name your RW dystopia after a hell hole? 

When Sessions was here speaking we were figuratively sticking up a certain finger at the rest of you.

After getting you asses handed to you by your legislature, how is giving them the finger working for you? What's interesting about your claim that your brethren are chomping at the bit to set up a RW dystopia is that you can't even manage it in what you call the 'State of Jefferson'. Hell, the Senator that represents YOU, Redding and District 1 didn't even manage to make the vote on SB 54. Maybe he was too busy appearing on Fox. Oh wait, I just checked and he was in Squaw Valley. Hilariously, he has managed to file a bill to repeal it. 

Additionally, there are many rural Districts of CA that are represented by Democratic Senators. Y'all can't even manage to get a majority vote in the hinterlands that YOU claim you control. Most of the GOP Senators in CA are from the freaking coastal suburbs of LA, SF and SD. 

You've built a little RW dystopia in your mind that doesn't exist in the real world and NEVER will. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.18  Texan1211  replied to  Explorerdog @7.3.16    4 months ago

Why do you continue to support illegal aliens and policies which help enable them to continue to break our laws over the well-being of your fellow US citizens?

 
 
Dulay
7.3.19  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.11    4 months ago
No one said ANYTHING about the Feds doing whatever they want.

Yet you begrudge CA demanding that they follow their own freaking rules. 

We are talking about the Feds doing their jobs that we pay them for without active interference from a state who puts illegal aliens above their own citizen constituents.

They SHOULD be doing their jobs, like documenting probable cause and getting warrants and subpoenas. I presume you have no problem with requiring the Federal government to FOLLOW their own procedures. Hmmm? 

Why do you continue to support illegal aliens and policies designed to aid them in illegal activities over the well-being of your own fellow American citizens?

I have no dependents [unless you count fur people] and aid no one perpetrating illegal activities. 

 
 
Vic Eldred
7.3.20  Vic Eldred  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.9    4 months ago

That CA law that involves restricting business speech & dealing with the federal government is the most blatantly unconstitutional law of those recently passed by the secessionists in CA. That really nails it for the government. I'm sure more lawsuits will follow and the Oakland mayor is in criminal jeopardy. Oh, do I want her behind bars!

 
 
Ozzwald
7.3.21  Ozzwald  replied to  Rmando @7.3.1    4 months ago
The only laws I care about are the ones that say you have to be here legally to stay and that employers deserve severe legal consequences for hiring illegals.

Sooo, homicide is okay with you?  Pedophilia, theft, rape,....?

 
 
Ozzwald
7.3.22  Ozzwald  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.4    4 months ago
I think that anytime an illegal alien sheltered in a sanctuary city commits murder that the mayor who sheltered the alien should be subject to the federal death penalty.

How about putting to death, whenever there is a murder involving an assault type weapon, a Congressman that voted against simple gun control laws?  

 
 
Ozzwald
7.3.23  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.11    4 months ago
No one said ANYTHING about the Feds doing whatever they want. We are talking about the Feds doing their jobs that we pay them for without active interference from a state who puts illegal aliens above their own citizen constituents.

Did you read the laws that are being contested?  Care to explain how any of them interfere with ICE?

 
 
GregTx
7.3.24  GregTx  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3.22    4 months ago

I'd be down for that. Can we start with the ones that have held office the longest?

 
 
96WS6
7.3.25  96WS6  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3    4 months ago

Funny how liberals always try to make the ridiculous seem just the opposite.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/in-rejecting-u-s-immigration-law-california-has-a-role-model-the-confederacy/The laws, together, make it a crime for businesses to voluntarily aid federal agents in nabbing undocumented workers; keep California law enforcement officers from telling federal agents when illegal immigrant detainees are released from jail, prison or other custody; and create special state inspections for federal immigration detention facilities.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/can-trump-win-his-fight-against-leftist-judges-and-open-border-radicals-over-immigration/

Business owners who voluntarily assist with federal immigration operations will face fines of up to $10,000, Becerra warned.

 
 
96WS6
7.3.26  96WS6  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3.23    4 months ago

I already have, you chose to ignore it.

 
 
96WS6
7.3.27  96WS6  replied to  96WS6 @7.3.25    4 months ago

New California law makes federal ICE inspections more difficult,

http://www.westernfarmpress.com/immigration/federal-ice-audits-causing-issues-wake-new-california-law

The bill by Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco) prohibits employers from allowing federal immigration agents on private business property without a judicial warrant. It also requires business owners to give their employees public notice — within 72 hours — of federal immigration inspections of employee records.

Businesses that fail to provide notice to employees face penalties of $2,000 to $5,000 for a first violation, and $5,000 to $10,000 for each subsequent violation, though some exceptions may apply.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-california-expands-workplace-1507236616-htmlstory.html

 
 
Dulay
7.3.28  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.3.20    4 months ago
That CA law that involves restricting business speech & dealing with the federal government is the most blatantly unconstitutional law of those recently passed by the secessionists in CA.

So HIPPA laws are 'blatantly unconstitutional'? How about the state labor department laws, are they ALL 'blatantly unconstitutional'? 

That really nails it for the government.

Delusional. 

I'm sure more lawsuits will follow and the Oakland mayor is in criminal jeopardy. Oh, do I want her behind bars!

Y'all almost never support your hyperbole but I'll ask none the less, please cite the statute under which she is under 'criminal jeopardy.  

 
 
Ozzwald
7.3.29  Ozzwald  replied to  96WS6 @7.3.25    4 months ago
Funny how liberals always try to make the ridiculous seem just the opposite.

Funny how the only support you have for your claims, is a EDITORIAL from a right wing news source.  You are unable to cite the actual law to support your claim.

 
 
96WS6
7.3.30  96WS6  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3.29    4 months ago

Is the Orange county register liberal enough for you?

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/03/07/trump-administration-sues-california-over-sanctuary-state-laws/

In the lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Sacramento, the Justice Dept. is challenging three California laws — the “California Values Act” (SB 54), the “Workplace Raid” law (AB 450), and the “Detention Review” law (AB 103).

The California Values Act, which took effect Jan. 1, limits cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, including sharing information about criminals in custody unless the person in question has been convicted of certain serious crimes. Passed in reaction to the Trump administration’s tough talk on immigration and his order to broaden deportations, the law essentially establishes California as the nation’s first sanctuary state.

The Dept. of Justice lawsuit seeks to allow police in California to tell federal agents when immigrants are released from custody and to share other information about those people. It also would allow law enforcement in California to transfer immigrants directly into federal custody without a warrant.

The Workplace Raid law forbids employers from cooperating with federal immigration officials and requires them to give a heads-up to their workforce before immigration agents arrive for an inspection. Business owners can be fined $2,000 to $10,000 for failing to comply.

FYI the law does not state exceptions based on the employers knowledge of criminal activity,  Or criminality in general of said immigrants.

Here is the local sheriff explaining just how daft this really is:


Law enforcement

Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, who has called for working more closely with immigration agents, believes public safety is being hindered by current state law, and the federal lawsuit could spark what she views as necessary change.

“I really think we should be able to notify ICE of individuals who have committed serious crimes and who are in our custody and let them know when they are going to be released,” Hutchens said in an interview Wednesday.

Currently, local law enforcement is not allowed to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE, when a criminal who is an unauthorized immigrant has served his or her time and is about to be released — though there are exceptions for immigrants who have committed violent crimes and other serious offenses. Previously, local law enforcement could tell ICE about the release of any immigrant from a local jail. ICE agents could then be on hand to detain them again on an immigration hold.

“This is tying my hands behind my back in areas where I think I should notify ICE,” Hutchens said of the current state law.  She said the current law forces ICE agents to search and arrest immigrants in the community, which can boost the odds of deportation for other unauthorized immigrants who have not committed any other crime.

“Local law enforcement has no desire to enforce immigration law,” Hutchens said. “However, we must have the ability to work with our federal partners to remove dangerous criminals from our community.”

All in the name of building the constituent base!  But then again,  safety and sense have not sculpted liberal policies for over a century.

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.3.31  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  96WS6 @7.3.30    4 months ago
Is the Orange county register liberal enough for you?

OC is not any kind of liberal enclave.  Four of the 7 members of Congress are republicans including the execrable Darryl Issa and Dana Rohrbacher. 

 
 
96WS6
7.3.32  96WS6  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @7.3.31    4 months ago

So to be clear what you you accept as news?  Only the democrat Underground?  Does the opinion of local law enforcement matter?

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.33  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.19    4 months ago

You may not have any dependents but you do support illegal aliens and states that put them above US citizens.

If you can live like that, more power to ya!

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.34  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.3.23    4 months ago

Do you consider the mayor announcing an ICE raid before it happened constructive and helpful to enforcement of our laws?

Would you be okay with a DA announcing that the police were going to raid someone's corporate offices to secure evidence of financial crimes before the raid happens, allowing evidence to be hidden or destroyed?

Rhetorical question--I am sure you'd be just fine with it.

SMDH

 
 
Dulay
7.3.35  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.33    4 months ago
You may not have any dependents but you do support illegal aliens and states that put them above US citizens. 

I support THE LAW.

Since the COC hasn't changed yet I'll use one of UB's favorite sayings. Not one of the swinging dicks has made a cogent argument in this seed that CA is violating Federal law and even worse, Sessions in his complaint failed to do so too. 

CA is NOT putting one person under their jurisdiction over another. 

If you can live like that, more power to ya!

Y'all want to allow the Feds to skirt the law in the name of enforcing it. 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.36  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.34    4 months ago
Do you consider the mayor announcing an ICE raid before it happened constructive and helpful to enforcement of our laws?

The first obligation of an elected official is the safety of their people. 

Would you be okay with a DA announcing that the police were going to raid someone's corporate offices to secure evidence of financial crimes before the raid happens, allowing evidence to be hidden or destroyed? Rhetorical question--I am sure you'd be just fine with it. SMDH

Interesting that you'd compare a corporate office with a whole town and documents to human beings. 

 
 
arkpdx
7.3.37  arkpdx  replied to  Dulay @7.3.36    4 months ago

The first obligation of an elected official is the safety of their people.

Interesting that you'd compare a corporate office with a whole town and documents to human beings. 




Ok so you didnt like that analogy. So you expect and endorse a mayor in Mississippi warning the local KKK chapter that the feds are going to raid them or a Idaho mayor warning a militia group that the .ATF is on their way to their compund .

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.38  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.35    4 months ago

Only idiots would warn people subject to arrest of their impending arrest.

If you chose illegal aliens over your own safety, then that isn't very bright, either.

Never have understood Americans more concerned with illegal aliens and wanting to aid them in breaking our laws versus having the federal government enforcing our immigration laws.

ICE agents are not required to obtain warrants to arrest illegal aliens.

mayors of sanctuary cities who put illegal aliens above their own constituents should be recalled or voted out as soon as possible. people who support such activities are definitely un-American.

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.39  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.36    4 months ago

More interesting that you won't answer.

that's alright--I know you would GLADLY support such stupid actions, since you already do as far as illegal aliens go.

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.40  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.35    4 months ago

If you TRULY supported the law, you would be able to see how wrong it was of the mayor to warn illegal aliens subject to arrest that ICE was coming.

What you support is not the law.

 
 
Dulay
7.3.41  Dulay  replied to  arkpdx @7.3.37    4 months ago
So you expect and endorse a mayor in Mississippi warning the local KKK chapter that the feds are going to raid them or a Idaho mayor warning a militia group that the .ATF is on their way to their compund .

Again, your analogy sucks. How about if the Feds told the Mississippi Mayor that they were going to raid the town and everyone that believed in segregation was going to be arrested. Or the Idaho Mayor was told that everyone who owned a gun was considered a suspect? 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.42  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.39    4 months ago
More interesting that you won't answer.

The interesting part wasn't a question. 

that's alright--I know you would GLADLY support such stupid actions, since you already do as far as illegal aliens go.

You haven't a clue. 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.43  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.40    4 months ago
If you TRULY supported the law, you would be able to see how wrong it was of the mayor to warn illegal aliens subject to arrest that ICE was coming.

You act as if she drove through the streets with a megaphone. Have you READ the tweet she posted? It was addressed to ALL of the citizens of her town. 

What you support is not the law.

You don't know WTF you're talking about. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.44  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.43    4 months ago

Yeah. I do.

You support illegal aliens over the safety and well-being of American citizens.

 
 
Cerenkov
7.3.45  Cerenkov  replied to  Galen Marvin Ross @7.3.13    4 months ago

"Gosh, I thought you were one of the people who is always saying that states rights should supersede federal rights. Of course I could be wrong here."

Yep. You are wrong here. Conservatives supports those state rights enumerated in the constitution. Hint: immigration is not one of them. Liberals can only see black or white apparently. 

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.46  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.38    4 months ago

Great post.  Well said and I agree completely.  

 
 
Randy
7.3.47  Randy  replied to  96WS6 @7.3.30    4 months ago
Is the Orange county register liberal enough for you?

The Orange County Register is a far right wing paper sort of along the line of a FOX news newspaper..

 
 
bugsy
7.3.48  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @7.3.36    4 months ago
Interesting that you'd compare a corporate office with a whole town and documents to human beings.

So you can't answer the question. It shows that hypocrisy is your middle name and you have no problem putting illegals before citizens, or even legal residents.

Such a sad state California is in. Why would ANYONE want to be a liberal?

 
 
Landshark
7.3.49  Landshark  replied to  Dulay @7.3.35    4 months ago

I read the laws.  CA is in direct violation of the Federal law.  The state doesn't even haven jurisdiction in these matters and you know it.

  Deleted CoC [SP]

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.50  Heartland American  replied to  Landshark @7.3.49    4 months ago

Good point.  The Trump Administration has taken the precedent he won from the Supreme Court about the federal role in immigration vs. the state and letting Ca. know that Obama won that fight.  

 
 
Heartland American
7.3.51  Heartland American  replied to  Dulay @7.3.10    4 months ago

Actually I seeded an article using federal law to advocate for the death penalty/execution of mayors of sanctuary cities where an illegal alien so sheltered commits murder.  They should have included the governor when it comes to California.  

 
 
Dulay
7.3.52  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @7.3.48    3 months ago
So you can't answer the question.

For the SECOND time, there is NO question in the interesting part. 

It shows that hypocrisy is your middle name and you have no problem putting illegals before citizens, or even legal residents.

It shows that you are hankering for an argument so desperately that you make shit up to bitch about. 

Such a sad state California is in. 

You've obviously never been there. Your loss. 

Why would ANYONE want to be a liberal?

HA insists that he and his control 'New California' and any day now they will transform it into the promised land. Then y'all can go there and put you boot on the liberals after a long day picking lettuce. 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.53  Dulay  replied to  Heartland American @7.3.51    3 months ago
Actually I seeded an article using federal law to advocate for the death penalty/execution of mayors of sanctuary cities where an illegal alien so sheltered commits murder.

Lie. The article you seeded says NO SUCH THING. 

They should have included the governor when it comes to California.

You'll never have another Arnold. 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.54  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.44    3 months ago
Yeah. I do. You support illegal aliens over the safety and well-being of American citizens

What else does your 8 ball tell you? 

 
 
Dulay
7.3.55  Dulay  replied to  Landshark @7.3.49    3 months ago
I read the laws. CA is in direct violation of the Federal law. 

Then cite the statute or Article that the state of CA is violating. You'll be the first who has. 

The state doesn't even haven jurisdiction in these matters and you know it.

The state sure as hell DOES have jurisdiction over the actions of state officials, LEOs and businesses. READ the Constitution. 

So why keep lying about it?

Unless you can prove that I have lied, you owe me an apology. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.56  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.54    3 months ago

Flippant replies don't change what you support--illegal aliens over US citizens.

 
 
Dulay
7.3.57  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.56    3 months ago
Flippant replies don't change what you support--illegal aliens over US citizens.

Flippant comments warrant flippant replies. Perhaps you could post something less obtuse? 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.58  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.57    3 months ago

Perhaps you could support the well-being of US citizens over the illegal aliens you currently support?

 
 
Dulay
7.3.59  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.58    3 months ago
Perhaps you could support the well-being of US citizens over the illegal aliens you currently support?

Prove I don't or apologize. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.60  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.59    3 months ago

I asked earlier if you thought the mayor's actions were in any way helpful in enforcing our laws, and you refused to answer, which suggests to me that perhaps you were fine and dandy with her blabbing, which to me is supporting illegal aliens. Why else would you NOT want illegal aliens prosecuted and deported?

Why would anyone in a position of authority ever blab about impending legal actions?

That is so ridiculous that I find it almost impossible that a sane person could believe it, but , by golly, you are starting to convince me!

 
 
Dulay
7.3.61  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @7.3.60    3 months ago
I asked earlier if you thought the mayor's actions were in any way helpful in enforcing our laws, and you refused to answer, which suggests to me that perhaps you were fine and dandy with her blabbing, which to me is supporting illegal aliens.

You may not have liked what I said but I DID answer. Oh and BTFW, you didn't quote my answer, you quoted my comment about your DA scenario, NOT my answer about the mayor's action.  

Why else would you NOT want illegal aliens prosecuted and deported?

PROVE that I said that. Block quote my comment. 

Why would anyone in a position of authority ever blab about impending legal actions?

The Mayor released a statement. READ it. 

That is so ridiculous that I find it almost impossible that a sane person could believe it, but , by golly, you are starting to convince me!

I couldn't care less what you believe and I'm not here to convince you of anything. I AM however still waiting for your apology. 

 
 
Texan1211
7.3.62  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @7.3.61    3 months ago

Looks like you'll have a long wait then.

 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
7.3.63  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  Cerenkov @7.3.45    3 months ago
Conservatives supports those state rights enumerated in the constitution.

OK, I get it, you support states rights as long as it's the kind of rights you think should be supported, not those Librul ones.

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
7.3.64  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Cerenkov @7.3.45    3 months ago
Conservatives supports those state rights enumerated in the constitution.

Oh, please do list the "enumerated states rights" in the Constitution (which is capitalized, by the way).  And when you're done with that, tell us what the Constitution has to say about immigration.  Take your time (you'll need it to make up shit). 

 
 
Dismayed Patriot
8  Dismayed Patriot    4 months ago

"But several studies, over many years, have concluded that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than people born in the United States. And experts say the available evidence does not support the idea that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate share of crime."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/us/trump-illegal-immigrants-crime.html

So we have 323 million documented Americans who are nearly twice as likely to commit a crime versus 12 million undocumented immigrants who commit crimes at half the rate as the average documented American. That's a prospective 1.3 million criminals among the documented Americans and 240,000 likely criminals among the undocumented immigrants. While I agree, we need to continue to work on better border enforcement and deportation of those who overstay their Visas, the argument coming from the right about the criminal element immigrants bring seems disingenuous.

 
 
Split Personality
8.1  Split Personality  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8    4 months ago
That's a prospective 1.3 million criminals among the documented Americans and 240,000 likely criminals a

yet our crowded jail population is always around 2.225 million.........

Sad.

 
 
96WS6
8.2  96WS6  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @8    4 months ago

You shouldn't have any problem with deporting criminals then.  It will barley scratch the constituent base.

 
 
lib50
8.2.1  lib50  replied to  96WS6 @8.2    4 months ago
You shouldn't have any problem with deporting criminals then.

I'm confused with your and other republicans sudden interest in people following the law and having consequences.  Trump and republicans are ACTIVELY trying to stop the investigation into illegal acts that have already led to guilty pleas and multiple indictments.  And they keep moving forward.  But nothing Trump does seems to bother any of you.  Also that welfare cowboy who takes over OUR land with guns and gets NOTHING. Remember "lock her up"?  Fucking hypocrites.  California says piss off.

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
8.2.2  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  lib50 @8.2.1    4 months ago
Remember "lock her up"?

she will be... ya have my word on that.

Cheers :)

 
 
Texan1211
8.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @8.2.1    4 months ago

Poor Cali. the rest of the world just doesn't understand you.

W-a-h, w-a-h, w-a-h.

 
 
Cerenkov
8.2.4  Cerenkov  replied to  lib50 @8.2.1    4 months ago

Too bad they don't have any legal right to influence immigration enforcement. Sad.

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.5  Heartland American  replied to  Cerenkov @8.2.4    4 months ago

True.  They have gone well beyond not supporting to outright criminal interference with the actions of our heroic American ICE law enforcement agents.  

 
 
Randy
8.2.6  Randy  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @8.2.2    4 months ago
she will be... ya have my word on that.

Yet another right wing fantasy that will never come true. Especially since she has committed no crime. So find another fantasy to...well...whatever you do when you're moaning "Lock 'er up!" late at night when you're all alone...

 
 
Randy
8.2.7  Randy  replied to  Heartland American @8.2.5    4 months ago
heroic American ICE law enforcement agents.

The way Jeff Sessions is describing them in his words and by this lawsuit they are complete cowards! That they are too scared of getting hurt if local law enforcement doesn't help them make arrests and hold onto prisoners for them that they can't get for some reason. Sure sounds like Sessions is saying that they are cowards to me. Maybe, if they are not cowards, they should march into Sessions' office and tell him to stop calling them that. To stop using them as his political pawns by making them out as scared! What are they afraid of? Doing their job? If they are that scared they need to be in a different line of work! If they are not then they need to smack Sessions upside his head and tell to stop saying they are!

Besides they sure act like cowards considering that they only go after middle aged and elderly people who have been here 20-40 years and never go after any "Bad Hombres". They never go after any gang bangers, drug dealers or criminals. It's obvious that Sessions has ordered them to just go after the low hanging fruit. The good folks who happen to be undocumented, but who have obeyed the law ever since they have been here. It obvious that Sessions has ordered them to harass just the good folks who are undocumented and to stay away from the bad ones. It's obvious that Sessions has ordered them to act like cowards to just go after the middle-aged and elderly as they pick their children or grandchildren from school or when they get ER care hospital (they actually wait outside of ER's and check for papers of anyone who is middle-aged or older and is Hispanic sort of like the ICE SS.) or who is just working at their job, not hurting anyone in any case. So not only do they act like cowards here (like I said I am sure Sessions ordered them to be) but they acting fucking lazy too. They are, out here, a waste of tax money and training. Instead of wasting our money and their time when are they actually going to do their job and go after some "Bad Hombres" for once? Because they certainly are reusing to go after anyone but good people, which means Sessions ordered them to go after only that kind of people as harassment of this State...or they really are just plain fucking cowards like Sessions says they are.

 
 
MrFrost
8.2.8  MrFrost  replied to  Heartland American @8.2.5    4 months ago

And upvoting yourself doesn't prove you right...

 
 
MrFrost
8.2.9  MrFrost  replied to  Randy @8.2.7    4 months ago

Excellent post Randy... Sessions is a POS coward and a blatant racist. Not shocking that trump appointed that worthless garbage. 

 
 
Randy
8.2.10  Randy  replied to  MrFrost @8.2.8    4 months ago
And upvoting yourself doesn't prove you right...

I always have a hard time understanding people who vote up their own posts? I mean it's the same thing as cheating at solitaire an then saying you won. Plus it's so easy to see who voted for your post that you can see when someone voted for themselves and he has a long history of praising himself like this.

 
 
Randy
8.2.11  Randy  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.3    4 months ago
Poor Cali. the rest of the world just doesn't understand you.

We don't give a shit if you guys "understand" us or not, mostly because it's unlikely that most of you even can. We'd just like you leave us alone and to stay the fuck out of ours and our State's business. Butt out!

 
 
bugsy
8.2.12  bugsy  replied to  Randy @8.2.6    4 months ago

I bet you are still sitting in your safe space, wringing your hands, and saying Christie will be locked up "any day now" for Bridgegate. It's OK, you can admit it.

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
8.2.13  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Randy @8.2.6    4 months ago
Especially since she has committed no crime.

that's funny... you should try that in a comedy act

 
 
Texan1211
8.2.14  Texan1211  replied to  Randy @8.2.11    4 months ago

Sorry, but as part of the US, California is expected to uphold all US laws.

We know you prefer illegal aliens over US citizens, but the rest of the country does not.

 
 
lib50
8.2.15  lib50  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.3    4 months ago
Poor Cali. the rest of the world just doesn't understand you.

Oh, honey, you misunderstand.  California doesn't give 2 shits what you think, we lead the world already.   As California goes, so goes the nation. 

 
 
Texan1211
8.2.16  Texan1211  replied to  lib50 @8.2.15    4 months ago

Oh, sweety, I understand that California has many citizens who wish to put illegal aliens above the safety and well-being of their own US citizens.

And at least one mayor who is more than willing to aid illegal aliens from being arrested.

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.17  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @8.2.11    4 months ago

I’m a Californian too and I support what the federal government is doing regarding our state.  I’m glad that AG Sessions came here to talk to our law enforcement people.  I can’t wait for President Trump to come here soon and he’s welcome to hold another huge rally here at our California airport   to see the support he has for no sanctuary.  

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.18  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @8.2.16    4 months ago

Not only that, they use the soon to be unconstitutional  law to coerce the non action of actual US Citizen Californians who disagree with with illegal aliens.  

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.19  Heartland American  replied to  lib50 @8.2.15    4 months ago

That hasn’t been true for like 25 years now.  

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.20  Heartland American  replied to  bugsy @8.2.12    4 months ago

laughing dudelaughing dudethumbs upPartyla de da

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.21  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @8.2.11    4 months ago

Break away and seek to become your own country if you don’t like our country’s elected government.  

 
 
Raven Wing
8.2.22  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @8.2.21    4 months ago

Like you are praying to do one day to break away from Calif into a separate state of Jefferson? Not everyone has those kinds of fantasies.

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.23  Heartland American  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @8.2.2    4 months ago

That applies to the mayor of Oakland now.  

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.24  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @8.2.22    4 months ago

We intend now to do strongly suppport Trump and Sessions, and to be as anti sanctuary as we can be once we win that law suit, and support Texas and other southern states on all the social issues and on education and job flight from the coast so strongly that you all will want to be rid of us.  Like when we supported the cap on mortgage tax deductions and on state and local taxes in the new tax bill.  It won’t affect many at all in New California but is a tax on the rich via setting a uniform national standard on each.  

 
 
Raven Wing
8.2.25  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @8.2.24    4 months ago

They will never win the lawsuit. It's simply all talk and smoke and mirrors to try and continue to fool the minions who think they now own the world and can call all the shots as they please. However, that is not how our laws work, despite how the government thinks it works. The Constitution is very clear about that. So keep dreaming your fantasy dreams. But, don't be too disappointed when it does not produce the results you wish for. 

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.26  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @8.2.25    4 months ago

We will win on the part about making it a crime for private enterprise businesses to voluntarily cooperate with the federal government/ice.  There is no place in America to make ones cooperation with the federal government a state crime.  We will also win the part against local governments and law enforcement not being allowed to spend any state or their own funds in any effort to cooperate with our own federal government/ICE.  As to the other it’s meaningless as the intent is to incarcerate those nabbed by ICE in California as far from Ca. as possible.  America will win this case against Californication. 

 
 
Raven Wing
8.2.27  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @8.2.26    4 months ago

Yeah...Yeah...Yeah....keep dreaming. You always like to use the term "We" with a very broad brush, as if you have all the people on your side, when it is only your own opinion. But, do keep the dream going, it seems to give you great pleasure to do so.

 
 
Randy
8.2.28  Randy  replied to  Raven Wing @8.2.27    4 months ago

The case doesn't stand a chance because the laws merely say that we will stay out of the Federal Officers way when they are conducing their business. The Constitution does not say that we are required to do the Federal Officers job for them or with them. They can do their own job, unless as, Jeff Sessions keeps making them out to be, they are too scared to do it without local police or State Highway Patrol Officers help. I personally doubt that Federal Law Enforcement Officers are cowards and if I were them I would so pissed off at Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III for him saying they in public and in this joke of a lawsuit that they are, I would go to his office and tell that little racist Keebler Elf to cut it out or I'm going to kick his little ass and then tear his ears off!

 
 
Raven Wing
8.2.29  Raven Wing  replied to  Randy @8.2.28    4 months ago

Exactly. The whole thing with the law suit is merely a ploy to try and bully the Calif Gov and make the people think they are doing something illegal, when in fact, they are not. I don't think for one millisecond that Gov Brown is so stupid that he did not do his homework thoroughly before making his decision, knowing that there would be those who try to contest it. He is not as ignorant as some people like to think or try to make him out to be. The law suit is totally laughable, and Sessions will be made to look the fool once again.

 
 
Heartland American
8.2.30  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @8.2.28    4 months ago

You aren’t just staying out of federal immigration matters.  You are compelling California business people to stay out as well under pain of CA. law.  You are forcing local governments and law enforcement who are sympathetic to ICE and federal enforcement not to be able to spend any of their locally raised funds on what they support or believe in.  What makes you think you can win in forcing Arizona on immigration matters and then lose on the same doctrine here?  Well, as soon as we win in court, we will be supporting ICE in California.  Our county law states that the instant a court overturns California interfering in federal immigration matters we go all in in supporting ICE.  Long live ICE.  

 
 
MrFrost
9  MrFrost    4 months ago

I have brought this up before, and the right wing fascists never seem to have an answer...

.

States...rights... 

If a blue state said that there could only be ONE gun shop in the state....run by the state and only open once a month on a Tuesday, between the hours of midnight and 2am... How would the right react? I can be pretty sure they would be outraged....beyond belief. But CA. bucks the tiger and defies the feds, and takes a stand claiming, "states rights"? And suddenly, states rights don't matter? Weird how that works. Florida just passed 3 laws.. 

1) Changed the age for buying guns from 18 to 21. (The NRA has already filed a lawsuit....I am guessing that they are mad that more kids won't be murdered).

2) 3 day waiting period...Pointless....total waste of time.....Pun intended.

3) 400 million dollars to give guns to teachers.....but they cannot seem to find a DIME to fix the schools that are literally falling apart....state wide...

.

But, "states rights".... Apparently, Florida can do as they please... But CA.? "NO!!!!!". 

What a bunch of worthless bastards  the republicans are. 

 
 
Randy
9.1  Randy  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 months ago
But, "states rights".... Apparently, Florida can do as they please... But CA.?

As far as Republicans are concerned "States Rights" only apply to Red States and not to Blue ones. They are hypocritical in the EXTREME! When it comes to Blue states and there is a Republican Administration, especially a fucked up one as bad as this one and as far right wing as this one, they consider it a mission to screw around with any Blue states as much as they can. They treat Blue states as if they are foreign nations that they hate. And they never seem to notice that when there is a Democratic Administration we never do that to them in the Red statues. Oh sure they piss and moan as if we do and fake falls and injures better the a pro-basketball or soccer or Hockey player can if they are sure the Ref is watching. But they never, ever have any evidence or proof of their supposed injury or being offended, ever!

 
 
Heartland American
9.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @9.1    4 months ago

Arizona anyone?  

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
9.2  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 months ago
and the right wing fascists never seem to have an answer..

a state can regulate its own militia... not federal immigration enforcement.

too simple huh? that is OK the supreme court will explain it better once the case is out of the 9th circus

 
 
Texan1211
9.3  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 months ago

Perhaps when Florida enacts policies statewide that favor illegal aliens over US citizens, like California, you might have  appoint. Until then, not so much.

 
 
arkpdx
9.4  arkpdx  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 months ago
But CA.? "NO!!!!!".

When you can show me in the Constitution that illegal aliens have a right to be here we can talk .Until then you dont have a leg to stand on .

 
 
Heartland American
9.4.1  Heartland American  replied to  arkpdx @9.4    4 months ago

As a Californian I can’t wait to see this.  Way to go DOJ!  

 
 
Raven Wing
9.4.2  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @9.4.1    4 months ago

Don't hold your breath. You may not like the results.

 
 
Heartland American
9.5  Heartland American  replied to  MrFrost @9    4 months ago

Coming from you that’s a badge of honor, a compliment.  We wouldn’t want those who have political opinions like yours to think anything else of us.  If you like one of our politicians, that one would not be doing his/her job.  

 
 
MrFrost
10  MrFrost    4 months ago

This admin wants to depot criminal illegal invaders? Start with the FLOTUS.

She came to the USA on a visa. It did not allow her to work, or earn an income but she did work as a model, and she was paid for those services. In other words? She violated her visa and is a criminal illegal alien invader. Look it up. So you cons want to deport these criminal illegal alien invaders? Fine. Throw the first whore out of the country. 

 
 
Texan1211
10.1  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @10    4 months ago

Sorry, but Melania Trump is a legal US citizen.

You'll have to do better than that to defend California's policies enabling and abetting illegal aliens over US citizens' needs.

 
 
MrFrost
10.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1    4 months ago

She VIOLATED her VISA. That makes her a CRIMINAL. Not that hard to figure out. She is no different than the illegal Mexican's in the country. Same thing. 

 
 
Landshark
10.1.2  Landshark  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    4 months ago

Not really.  All you lefties keep telling us we can choose which laws we want to obey. So we will.

 
 
badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη
10.1.3  badfish hαηd ⊕ƒ †hε Ωuεεη  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    4 months ago

You do know she is accused of working in a human smuggling ring?  Nasty business.

In a statement released Friday, Border Patrol said Morales-Luna was part of a transnational human smuggling network. CBP said Morales-Luna recruited drivers to transport undocumented immigrants from eastern San Diego County to a "stash house" in National City. 

These rings kidnap young women and torture them and them force them to be raped.

HOLY SPIN

 
 
Heartland American
10.1.4  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1    4 months ago

I agree.  

Fortunately, the Trump administration acted in federal court against the rogue state of California. On Tuesday night, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit which claimed that three state laws are illegal and are pre-empted by federal law. The laws prevent employers and state officials from cooperating with federal officials on cases involving illegal immigrants.

In his speech announcing the lawsuit, Attorney General Jeff Sessions called the California laws “unjust, unfair and unconstitutional.” He also condemned the actions of the Mayor of Oakland by asking “How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical open borders agenda?”

These are good first steps by the Department of Justice, but they are not enough. The Attorney General should also file charges against the Mayor of Oakland personally. It is time that these California elected officials face legal consequences for their despicable behavior and their arrogant flouting of federal law.

Fortunately, the Trump administration acted in federal court against the rogue state of California. On Tuesday night, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit which claimed that three state laws are illegal and are pre-empted by federal law. The laws prevent employers and state officials from cooperating with federal officials on cases involving illegal immigrants.

In his speech announcing the lawsuit, Attorney General Jeff Sessions called the California laws “unjust, unfair and unconstitutional.” He also condemned the actions of the Mayor of Oakland by asking “How dare you needlessly endanger the lives of our law enforcement officers to promote a radical open borders agenda?”

These are good first steps by the Department of Justice, but they are not enough. The Attorney General should also file charges against the Mayor of Oakland personally. It is time that these California elected officials face legal consequences for their despicable behavior and their arrogant flouting of federal law.   https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffcrouere/2018/03/10/california-has-become-a-disgraceful-state-n2459467

 
 
Heartland American
10.1.5  Heartland American  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    4 months ago

She’s an American citizen.  

 
 
Texan1211
10.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    4 months ago

Except that she became legal--a far cry from many illegal aliens.

 
 
sixpick
10.1.7  sixpick  replied to  Heartland American @10.1.4    4 months ago

Those radicals in the Democrat Party haven't change a bit since they revolted against the Union to keep their slaves and now they're revolting against the United States to keep their cheap labor.

 
 
Heartland American
10.1.8  Heartland American  replied to  sixpick @10.1.7    4 months ago

Exactly.  The liberal elite in coastal cities need their pool cleaners, landscapers, carpenters, maids, housekeepers, nannies, etc . to be cheap undocumented workers not here legally.  They are willing to impose MS-13 and other law breaking illegals upon us to keep their supply of cheap labor and drive the middle class out of the state.  

 
 
sixpick
10.1.9  sixpick  replied to  Heartland American @10.1.8    4 months ago

And that's where almost all the Democrat votes came from, the elite coastal cities as well.  And that is where the political power in California is located.

https://pics.onsizzle.com/california-considering-secession-so-they-cankeeptheir-slaves-never-looked-at-7477077.png

 
 
Randy
10.1.10  Randy  replied to  sixpick @10.1.7    4 months ago
revolting against the United States to keep their cheap labor.

First of all the statement that California is revolting against the United States is a fuckiing  Sessionsand you and a few other [people on this site trying to push that idea know it, so cut it the fuck out OK?

Secondly the Democratic Party of the slave era is nothing like the Democratic Party today and you and the right wing of today know that, so that is a fucking GOP lie also. Cut it the fuck out. In fact they GOP of today is the Party that most resembles the Democratic Party of the slave era and The Democratic Party of today is more like the Party of Lincoln. The two Parties have switched sides on many issues, but especially on Race from the late 1940's through the Civil Rights Era which drove the racist Southern wing out of the Democratic Party and right into the waiting arms of Richard Nixon and the GOP and here they are, happily embraced by the GOP today, endorse by the GOP majority (if not actually the GOP majority) and still voting Republican.

Lastly it has nothing to do with cheap labor because Jeff Sessions has ordered the ICE Agents to only go after the people who have been here a long time and are hard working and contributing members of the community, many of them business owners and job providers themselves, easy middle-aged and elderly targets that harass California the worst. Simply because both Trump and Sessions have a racist bug up their asses about Brown people and they know that in not that long of a time the White Race will not be the majority Race in America any longer, the people with a Hispanic heritage will be and for some reason it scares the fuck out of them and a lot of other White people, And you know what, I have no idea why they are scared? Are they really that scared of Brown people being the majority? Are they really that cowardly?

 
 
Heartland American
10.1.11  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @10.1.10    4 months ago

Out comes the race card from the secular progressive political playbook.  

 
 
Texan1211
10.1.12  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @10.1.1    3 months ago

Then why aren't you always bitching about all the other illegal aliens instead of supporting them?

 
 
MrFrost
10.1.13  MrFrost  replied to  Texan1211 @10.1.12    3 months ago
instead of supporting them?

Huh? Where did I say I supported illegals? 

 
 
Heartland American
10.2  Heartland American  replied to  MrFrost @10    4 months ago

Repugnant.   Can you imagine if a member here on the right called the prior First Lady that term?  

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.1  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @10.2    4 months ago
Can you imagine if a member here on the right called the prior First Lady that term?

Oh please. The right has called former First Lady Hillary Clinton worse than that and we never saw you take offense to that. Your hypocrisy never ceases to be endless.  

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.2  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.1    4 months ago

As does your never ending shilling for the left while claiming non partisanship.  You may not be a member of a political party but your intolerance of and strong dislike of ideologically conservative people is obvious to all.  I’m not a hypocrite and I make no effort to hide my leanings.  

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.3  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.2    4 months ago

And your own endless hypocrisy is an insult to intelligent people. Your endless denigrating of others simply because you do not agree with them belies your endless intolerance of others beliefs, opinions and POV belie your endless claims as being a true Christian. 

I have nothing against anyone in either party, but, I do have a dislike for those who feel it necessary to demean and denigrate others who do not hold the same ideology as they themselves do. And yes, YOU are a hypocrite of the first water. 

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.4  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.3    4 months ago

Please don’t project yourself upon me with your name calling coc violation.  

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.5  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.4    4 months ago

IF I called you a name then by all means flag my comment and have me spanked by the Mods. I stand by my comment.

 
 
Split Personality
10.2.6  Split Personality  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.4    4 months ago

Can you flag any comments you think violate the CoC

rather than inflame the "discussion"

That is, after all, the protocol , is it not?

 
 
Randy
10.2.7  Randy  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.5    4 months ago

I am not a Mod any longer, but if I still were I would leave your comment alone RW.

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.8  Heartland American  replied to  Randy @10.2.7    4 months ago

Of course you would because calling a conservative member personally and directly a hypocrite would never violate your coc.  But a conservative calling a liberal member directly a hypocrite and you’d be on it like a fly on crap.  The double standard is strong in this one.  

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.9  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.3    4 months ago

And yes It is you who is a hypocrite of the first water.  

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.10  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.5    4 months ago

🚩

 
 
Randy
10.2.11  Randy  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.1    4 months ago

  Can you imagine if a member here on the right called the prior First Lady that term?

And the last First Lady was called many horrible names and during protests over policy there were horrible poster in the marches showing her as an animal, as a gorilla being carried by fine upstanding Republicans and nobody in the crowds protested or object in any way and nether did any Republican on this site!

 
 
lennylynx
10.2.12  lennylynx  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.3    4 months ago

Order, Raven dear, hypocrites of the first ORDER.  

 
 
lennylynx
10.2.13  lennylynx  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.9    4 months ago

ORDER!!  O-R-D-E-R.  The first ORDER!!!  Sheesh!

 
 
Randy
10.2.14  Randy  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.8    4 months ago
Of course you would because calling a conservative member personally and directly a hypocrite would never violate your coc.

That's bullshit and you know it. I was a Mod on and off for years on this site and you saw lots of decisions from me and while I am a proud liberal if you are saying that showed any favoritism to either side then that is a damned lie and you know it is. If you want to attack me then attack me, but do not attack the work I very proudly did for this site ever since it was born, because you haven't a leg to stand on there! For me it is about freedom of speech and I would have let those comments stand no matter who made them because IMHO they didn't violate the CoC! Got it!

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.15  Raven Wing  replied to  lennylynx @10.2.12    4 months ago

LOL! Maybe first ORDER is how it goes where you come from, but, where I come from it is first WATER. Tomater...Tomato...it all means the same thing. (grin) 

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.16  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.10    4 months ago

Thank you for letting me know you flagged it.

BTW...you aren't supposed to tell about it if you flag someone. Per Perrie

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.17  Raven Wing  replied to  Randy @10.2.7    4 months ago
I am not a Mod any longer, but if I still were I would leave your comment alone RW

Thanks Randy. I am not one bit afraid of being flagged. And if it does happen that I get spanked for it, it will be well worth it. (grin)

 
 
igknorantzrulz
10.2.18  igknorantzrulz  replied to  lennylynx @10.2.13    4 months ago
The first ORDER!!!

I was a hypocrite by the time my mother broke her first WATER!!!

 
 
Dean Moriarty
10.2.19  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Randy @10.2.7    4 months ago

Nowadays it’s a flip of the coin with the skirting it could go either way. 

 
 
lennylynx
10.2.20  lennylynx  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.17    4 months ago

Can I do the spanking?  Happy  Just kidding...sort of!

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.21  Raven Wing  replied to  lennylynx @10.2.20    4 months ago

Are you a Mod? If not, no spankings by you. (grin)

 
 
Heartland American
10.2.22  Heartland American  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.17    4 months ago

Which is why coc violations happen so often.  Someone feels it worth it to get in that dig knowing that they’ll likely get skirting at worst and more often than not the insult stands.  

 
 
Raven Wing
10.2.23  Raven Wing  replied to  Heartland American @10.2.22    4 months ago

Yes, that does happen sometimes, and you are beyond a doubt the best at doing so on an on-going basis day after day after day here on this site. Then you have the audacity to complain about others. 

 
 
Randy
10.2.24  Randy  replied to  Dean Moriarty @10.2.19    4 months ago
Nowadays it’s a flip of the coin with the skirting it could go either way.

I agree Dean! The truth is that the above statement is exactly why I don't agree with the whole "Skirting the CoC' call from any Mod and never will, even when it's called against some comment against me and I wish any Mod would would never call one in any comment that is directed at me! I don't care who it is called against, right, left, liberal or conservative, it is always wrong when it is called and has no place in ANY moderating at all! PERIOD! I suppose that will keep me from ever becoming a Mod again myself, but that's OK, because if I ever became one again I would refuse to make that kind of call. EVER! A person either violates the CoC or they do not! Close only counts in Horseshoes and Hand grenades damn it! There is no such thing as a CLOSE violation of the CoC!!!

 
 
Randy
10.2.25  Randy  replied to  Raven Wing @10.2.15    4 months ago
Tomater...Tomato

I love me some tomaters! Chewing on a whole one like an apple while watching TV, with my salt and pepper shakers on end table next to my brown leather Lazy Boy chair (and me and my and my dawg are the only ones allowed to sit in it, damn it!) and I don't care what part of the country you are from, if your are from the COUNTRY, the farm country, it's tomaters! And none of us can understand why city folks can't get the pronunciation right?

 
 
MrFrost
10.2.26  MrFrost  replied to  Heartland American @10.2    3 months ago
Can you imagine if a member here on the right called the prior First Lady that term?

The right called the former first lady one racist name after another for 8 years, including her kids. But now all the sudden it's not ok? Tissue? 

 
 
Cerenkov
10.2.27  Cerenkov  replied to  Heartland American @10.2    3 months ago

It was classless, misogynistic, and hypocritical. In other words, standard liberal behavior.

 
 
sixpick
10.3  sixpick  replied to  MrFrost @10    4 months ago

Mrs. Trump did not receive her green card through marriage. Rather, in 2000, Mrs. Trump self-sponsored herself for a green card as a model of “extraordinary ability,” and on March 19, 2001, she was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. Based on this timeline, Mrs. Trump became eligible for citizenship in 2006, after five years of continuous permanent residence.

I even used Snopes for you and of course they did everything they could to discredit this, but they couldn't.  Hope it doesn't upset you that she's a real asset instead of a welfare recipient with a bunch of children living off the government.

 
 
Randy
10.3.1  Randy  replied to  sixpick @10.3    4 months ago
instead of a welfare recipient with a bunch of children living off the government.

 Unfounded right wing stereotype. Like most stereotypes, it has no connection with the truth. Still it gives people who hate Brown people something to comfort themselves to sleep with. Sort of like a racial teddy bear. Of course a White Polar Bear. Can't have a Brown or Black teddy bear.

 
 
sixpick
10.3.2  sixpick  replied to  Randy @10.3.1    4 months ago

Don't you see everyone a little dark with those glasses on?  Do you have a dog or a cat?

I am a little prejudice against young black men right now and for good reason, believe me.

 
 
lennylynx
10.3.3  lennylynx  replied to  sixpick @10.3.2    4 months ago

Well, at least you can admit that you're prejudiced against blacks, Picky, glad you are honest about it.  Sad that you think it's justifiable.

 
 
Randy
10.3.5  Randy  replied to  sixpick @10.3.2    4 months ago

Don't you see everyone a little dark with those glasses on?

I wear prescription glasses the whole time I am awake to see properly. My uncorrected vision is 20/200. However, I only wear dark glasses when I go outside or am in very bright rooms and then I have to wear red ones or grey ones. The green ones don't filter out the correct UV rays and I get terrible headaches (and I mean massive frontal ones!) if I wear them or my clear lenses. My eyes do not have all of the proper light receptacles in the back of them so I see light differently, almost like an albino does and not wearing any kind of glasses until I was 9 years old made them worse. In brightly lit rooms I still have wear my colored glasses. I am sure some people think it's strange, but fuck them, it's more comfortable.

Now as for seeing people dark, I don't really see people that way in most situations. I really don't. In the vast, vast, vast majority of situations I just see people, not any colors of skin or race at all. Why do you?

 
 
MrFrost
10.3.6  MrFrost  replied to  sixpick @10.3    3 months ago
living off the government.

1) She came to the USA in 1995.

2) She and her worthless husband ARE living off of the government. 

 
 
Texan1211
10.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  MrFrost @10.3.6    3 months ago

Like Trump doesn't have enough money to support himself.

Sheesh, the way you talk, the Trumps would be homeless had he not won the election.

How stupid that sounds!

 
 
nightwalker
11  nightwalker    4 months ago

Nah, the great trump flock are doing their favorite thing using "THE LAW" to try to force other people to their "views" or what they want them to do. I don't see a real case unless they can prove any criminals were warned.

LOL But the noble GOP will whine and cry on and on about the ones who no doubt got away. 

I don't think arresting families or family members in public or private and deporting them is really in the Nation's best interest.

 
 
Vic Eldred
11.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  nightwalker @11    4 months ago
Nah, the great trump flock are doing their favorite thing using "THE LAW" to try to force other people to their "views" or what they want them to do.

Kind of like using the law to force people to obey the Constitution in the matter of Civil Rights. I recall Eisenhower sent in the troops when the state of Arkansas thought Federal law could be ignored.

 
 
nightwalker
11.1.1  nightwalker  replied to  Vic Eldred @11.1    3 months ago

lol That's true, but I'm looking at the slippery-slope of all this, After 911, the Gov made a big new monitoring unit that spends its time ease dropping on US Now the new improved ICE (I thought it was a fine idea when they were arresting felons by the way) but they must have run out,now it's not felons they're arresting and deporting.

When enough time has passed, they'll announce they've won but by then they'll be a big agency with big cash-flow soooo they'll always have to have someone to be hunting and they don't need warrants do they? 

Maybe a law can be over-enforced.

Compared with the slim stuff people have used to make slippery-slope arguments, this is like standing on a ledge looking down and saying "all good, nothing to see here." I wonder how we ended up with this country wired up like a cold war prison lulled by the words that have been used and misused by so many down the ages: "For your own protection."

People also talk about the communist police state. What did that look like again?

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
12  The Magic Eight Ball    4 months ago
On the heels of Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warning local residents of imminent ICE raids,

I wonder if she realizes she is going to jail?

mayors warning criminals?  she will be made into a very public example of what will happen to the next fool who tries that.

 
 
Heartland American
12.1  Heartland American  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @12    4 months ago

I want her removed from office with a felony obstruction of justice conviction .  

 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
12.1.1  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Heartland American @12.1    4 months ago
I want her removed from office with a felony obstruction of justice conviction .

Have you tried stamping your feet really hard and throwing yourself on the floor and tearing your hair out? 

 
 
arkpdx
12.1.2  arkpdx  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו @12.1.1    4 months ago

He would first have to do the u thinkable and become a liberal democrat. We saw them do just that since they lost the last presidential election .They have been in the middle of a tantrum ever since. 

 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
12.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Heartland American @12.1    4 months ago
I want her removed from office with a felony obstruction of justice conviction

the magic eight ball says/ 

it will happen :)

 
 
nightwalker
12.1.4  nightwalker  replied to  arkpdx @12.1.2    3 months ago

Ahh, the "anguish of the Democrats" fantasy. Very popular. But as much fun as it is, even with all the imagined sobbing and tears and damp tissues, it's still just a wet dream.

Sorry.

 
 
PJ
13  PJ    4 months ago

I'm not able to post any articles on this site.  Apparently there is a secret to selecting pictures that are now required for articles.  

I've never experienced a site that inadvertently dissuaded members to participate because they're not able to pass a tech course.  This is very frustrating.  It really shouldn't be this hard.  

 
 
Heartland American
13.1  Heartland American  replied to  PJ @13    4 months ago

You are right.  It’s an extra hoop to jump and many pics in my library are too big. At any rate I’m back from getting my WiFi repaired and a new battery.  I’m making the rounds before JWC collapses my seeds.  He collapsed my Dana seed by accusing me of inattention to it despite having posted there 2 hours before and voting up a post seeded just before Perrie closed it for him.  There were no significant coc  issues going on on the seed either.  

 
 
Kavika
13.1.1  Kavika   replied to  Heartland American @13.1    4 months ago

Instead of whining all over the site and making accusations why don't you bring this to Perrie. Are you afraid of doing that XX. She is the one that closed the article...

It seems that it suits your end game to whine about it and play the martyr...

 
 
PJ
13.1.2  PJ  replied to  Heartland American @13.1    4 months ago
It’s an extra hoop to jump and many pics in my library are too big. At any rate I’m back from getting my WiFi repaired and a new battery.  I’m making the rounds before JWC collapses my seeds.

X - You make me laugh out loud sometimes (in a good way). 

 
 
Heartland American
13.1.3  Heartland American  replied to  PJ @13.1.2    4 months ago

It’s not really funny.  I had a seed locked today for absolutely no legitimate or objective reason what so ever two hours after I seeded it and called a liar when I said my WiFi was down today.  The bottom line is that no matter how much it is said that it wasn’t it was and I’ll stand by that forever more taking it to my grave in good conscience for judgement day that it’s the truth.  It gets real old being questioned and called a liar multiple times.  

 
 
Split Personality
13.1.4  Split Personality  replied to  Kavika @13.1.1    4 months ago

I flagged both of his complaints so that Perrie could review tomorrow and possibly offer XX some insight.......

 
 
devangelical
13.1.5  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @13.1.1    4 months ago

Perpetual victim.

 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.6  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Heartland American @13.1.3    4 months ago

I didn't call you a liar, since you are referring to me and you better take this meta to metafied or find yourself with a 2 day suspension. 

 
 
Randy
13.1.7  Randy  replied to  PJ @13.1.2    3 months ago

X - You make me laugh out loud sometimes (in a good way). 

Sometimes not...

 
 
Randy
13.2  Randy  replied to  PJ @13    3 months ago
I've never experienced a site that inadvertently dissuaded members to participate because they're not able to pass a tech course.  This is very frustrating.  It really shouldn't be this hard.

This because these polls are giving the members too much of a, irrevocable and not just suggestive, right to say what they want for the site and not for what is right and healthy for it. This is why even America is not a pure Democracy. If  you give all of the people the right to vote on every issue, they will fuck up the overall picture and (IMHO) that is happening here. The new olitness rules are making it harder to breath. Yes they are only small steps. However when added to the small steps that have been added over the years and the ones that are no doubt you will have coming in future polls, the girdle will almost certainly tighten  ayou will face rather uncomfortable choice of not breathing or cutting it off.

 
 
Trump Won, Liberals Lost Their Shit, I Love It
13.2.1  Trump Won, Liberals Lost Their Shit, I Love It  replied to  Randy @13.2    3 months ago

Comment deleted for CoC violations SP

 
 
Tessylo
13.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Trump Won, Liberals Lost Their Shit, I Love It @13.2.1    3 months ago

(deleted)

Sounds like everything you say.  

Don't inflame the situation, just flag it please. SP

 
 
Trump Won, Liberals Lost Their Shit, I Love It
13.2.3  Trump Won, Liberals Lost Their Shit, I Love It  replied to  Tessylo @13.2.2    3 months ago

10-4

 
 
A. Macarthur
14  A. Macarthur    3 months ago


ICE spokesperson quits rather than continue spreading lies for Trump officials


James Schwab, San Francisco spokesperson for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has resigned from his post, “saying he couldn’t continue to do his job” after Donald Trump, Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, and acting ICE director Thomas Homan “made false public statements” regarding a recent raid targeting Northern California last month. Following Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warning her immigrant residents that a raid was imminent, Sessions and Homan alleged that 800 immigrants had evaded arrest due to her actions. Trump alleged “close to 1,000.” Schwab believed both were exaggerated and “wanted the agency to correct the number.” He was rebuffed:

“I quit because I didn’t want to perpetuate misleading facts,” said Schwab, 38, who was hired in 2015 and resigned last week. “I asked them to change the information. I told them that the information was wrong, they asked me to deflect, and I didn’t agree with that. Then I took some time and I quit.”

“I didn’t feel like fabricating the truth to defend ourselves against (Schaaf’s) actions was the way to go about it,” he said. “We were never going to pick up that many people. To say that 100 percent are dangerous criminals on the street, or that those people weren’t picked up because of the misguided actions of the mayor, is just wrong.”

"I just couldn't bear the burden,” he later told CNN, “continuing on as a representative of the agency and charged with upholding integrity, knowing that information was false.“ Schwab “also said he is a registered Democrat, but has been a loyal federal servant, regardless of which party is in power.” Mayor Schaaf, who has been hounded by Trump officials and right-wing media for her action, applauded the former spokesman: “I commend Mr. Schwab for speaking the truth while under intense pressure to lie. Our democracy depends on public servants who act with integrity and hold transparency in the highest regard.”

“This Administration has a deeply troubling track record of half-truths, false statements and outright lies aimed at demonizing and scapegoating immigrant families,” Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) commented. “I commend this individual for refusing to perpetuate misleading information.”



https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/3/13/1748669/-ICE-spokesperson-quits-rather-than-continue-spreading-lies-for-Trump-officials?detail=emaildkre

 
 
Texan1211
14.1  Texan1211  replied to  A. Macarthur @14    3 months ago

This is HORRIBLE reporting.

Why no mention of the numbers this man believes to be correct?

Isn't that rather important to the article if he is going to accuse the Trump Admin. of something wrong?

 
 
A. Macarthur
14.1.1  A. Macarthur  replied to  Texan1211 @14.1    3 months ago

Why no mention of the numbers this man believes to be correct?

Isn't that rather important to the article if he is going to accuse the Trump Admin. of something wrong?

"Trump alleged “close to 1,000.” Schwab believed both were exaggerated and “wanted the agency to correct the number.” He was rebuffed:"

In America, when an allegation like that of Trump's is made, the one making the allegation (in this case, Trump), has the responsibility of satisfying the "burden of proof" … (so, you have it backwards).

 
 
Texan1211
14.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  A. Macarthur @14.1.1    3 months ago

No, I don't.

The man said the numbers were incorrect. Why no mention of the "real" numbers then?

Very poor reporting on this.

If the government says the inflation rate is 6%, and some economist says "No, it isn't", don't you think the economist would at LEAST say what he thinks the "real" number is????

And that competent reporters would INCLUDE that number instead of just saying the numbers are wrong?

 
 
Texan1211
14.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  A. Macarthur @14.1.1    3 months ago

Uh, the FBI guy is the one asserting that the numbers were wrong, but he failed to provide ANY numbers.

 
 
Heartland American
15  Heartland American    3 months ago

“Instead, ICE can take other actions without involvement of the courts while leaving the politicians to appear foolish and absorb the blame for the consequences. There are three immediate actions that would be effective and, quite frankly, fun to watch as they unfold.”   https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/03/punishing_the_mayor_of_oakland.html

 
 
Texan1211
15.1  Texan1211  replied to  Heartland American @15    3 months ago

Excellent alternatives for ICE to employ.

I would add one more option:

Make Oakland the West Coast HQ for ICE and conduct raids every single day for months on end, at businesses and in known illegal alien neighborhoods.

Arrest EVERY illegal alien they can find.

 
 
Heartland American
15.1.1  Heartland American  replied to  Texan1211 @15.1    3 months ago

Great idea.  Now local cities and counties are turning on their state government for its heavy handedness on the issue regarding business and local government and are siding with the federal government.  Good news!  

 
 
Heartland American
16  Heartland American    3 months ago

Maybe in anti sanctuary areas law enforcement could notify a different federal law enforcement agency about illegals in jail and other logistics and then the FBI or other agency could pass the info on to ICE. 

 
 

Share This

Flagging unavailable
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


bugsy
Raven Wing
Heartland American
Vic Eldred
1ofmany
Ed-NavDoc
MUVA
GaJenn78
BeastOfTheEast
epistte


Old School Marine
Sunshine


40 visitors