@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
maxdancona wrote:...3. I have stated my opinion on the inability for Federal government to force local police to enforce laws that American Citizens living in these areas don't want enforced. We went back and forth on this. We still disagree on this...
Just out of curiosity, what about the right of states to force local police to cooperate with state laws or policies? What if some town in California says that it will accept state laws or policies only when it wants to and intends to turn all illegal immigrants in custody over to ICE. You'd be okay with that?
Fair question Brandon... actually I am currently working on passing the Safe Communities Act in Massachusetts (I have developed a relationship with my State Reps and am lobbying them). The Safe Communities Act would do exactly that... prevent local law enforcement from cooperating with the ICE. We have one Sheriff here who I consider particularly problematic.
The legal answer is that the US Constitution specifically limits Federal government power over local government (particularly the 10th amendment). Even without this Constitutional protection, Congress would have to pass a law specifically requiring local governments to cooperate. You can bet that I would be among the American voices calling for the defeat/filibuster of this law.
The State Constitution does not provide this protection for local governments. Nor should it in my opinion.
@maxdancona,
Okay. It's too bad that Mexico is such a shitty place to live, but what can be done about that?
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
Okay. It's too bad that Mexico is such a shitty place to live, but what can be done about that?
Mexico is not a shitty place to live. I have good friends there, and there are quite few Americans who choose to go there to work or retire. There are Americans living illegally in Mexico.
I don't know why I am choosing this stupid comment to reply to... it doesn't represent any obligation to respond to any other stupid comment.
@maxdancona,
If Mexico is not a shitty place to live, then why the desire to come here illegally?
@Glennn,
There are Americans living illegally in Mexico (this is getting stupider each post).
@maxdancona,
Really? I guess I missed all the hoopla about Americans making their way to Mexico under cover of night. American dreamers, I presume?
@maxdancona,
Quote:The legal answer is that the US Constitution specifically limits Federal government power over local government (particularly the 10th amendment).
For the 1000th time, Max the conclusion you draw is unconstitutional. You apparently have not read, and don't even begin to understand, the 10th Amendment (or any other clause in the constitution, for that matter). The 10th Amendment does NOT allow the States to ignore Federal law, unless the Federal law is itself unconstitutional.
Of course the legal authorities for this have already been repeatedly explained to you (the "Sumpremacy Clause" of the constitution, for example).
Quote: Even without this Constitutional protection, Congress would have to pass a law specifically requiring local governments to cooperate. You can bet that I would be among the American voices calling for the defeat/filibuster of this law.
That's done been done, decades back. This is just one of MANY statutes passed by congress which impose requirements on State pertaining to immigration enforcement:
Quote:8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(a) In general: Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may NOT prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1373
Quit acting like you're some lawyer who "knows the law," Max. You have REPEATEDLY proven that you aint knowin jack-**** about it.
I just posted an article, in this very thread, showing that the Department of Justice is demanding compliance. Of course YOU know more than every federal attorney in the country, to hear you tell it, and they can't do that, eh? Nothing you see, read, or hear could ever shake that grandiose self-confidence in your own blissful ignorance.
Nice try, Max.
Quote:Quit acting like you're some lawyer who "knows the law," Max. You have REPEATEDLY proven that you aint knowin jack-**** about it.
You gotta lotta gall accusing everyone ELSE of just reciting "talking points," eh, Max?
All you have done here is parrot, like a robot, some "talking points" you were instructed to recite without understanding a single word of what you're being told to say.
And you repeat your memorized spiel
endlessly, even in the face of irrefutable evidence that the masters who told you what to say are wrong.
Another "talking point" that you have been trained to recite consists of one word: RACIST!! You don't know what that even means either, and you can't begin to spot it when you actually see it. It aint a matter of "understanding" for you. It's a simple matter of doing what you've been trained to do.
Talk about a stooge, eh? Try independent thinking sometime, why doncha, eh, Max?
@layman,
I'll haul off and take a wild-ass guess, eh?: Max is bored now, and he aint comin back.
Tail-Gunner Joe McCarthy has a bad name. And deservedly so, due to his tactics and those of his chief goon, Roy Cohn (Trump's mentor). But his questionable tactics say nothing of substance about the legitimacy of his goals. The truth is that at that time a great number of communists and communist sympathizers had indeed infiltrated every level of government. Many of these were actually natural born American citizens who were nonetheless "loyal" to the USSR, to the point of committing espionage and otherwise using every means at their disposal as government officials to advance the goals of the USSR.
How could that happen?
In the 1930's the vast majority of American were suffering from the economic catastrophe now known as the "Great Depression" which followed the 1929 stock market crash. Understandably, many American blamed "capitalists" for their plight, and the whole country was fertile ground for communist recruitment.
Many people actually joined the Communist Party. Their "model" was soviet russia and, following Russian propaganda, they viewed Russia as a virtual paradise on earth. They incessantly praised Stalin and did everything they could to minimize, and indeed even praise, the worst excesses of Stalin. He was, in their minds, an extremely wise and benevolent leader who was facing the difficult task of fighting off the lingering evil effects of capitalist thinking. Whatever he did to achieve that end was "good," no matter how extreme.
Why do I bring this up in this thread, you might ask.
I see the situation in California (and other states, especially New Mexico) as having similarities. The Senate President opposes the enforcement of immigration law because "half his family" would be targeted for deportation due to felonious acts if the law was enforced. Of course, they, being illegal, would be subject to deportation even without the felonies.
I am going to assume that all the hispanic high level government officials (of which there are many) in California are actually citizens. But does that fact, standing alone, make them "loyal" citizens? They have now passed State laws which actually prosecute loyal citizens who comply with Federal law. They have, in effect, decided to "overthrow" the U.S. government in that area so that they can maintain, and continue to increase, their ethnic influence throughout the State. Mexican nationals have infiltrated, and taken up residence in, the U.S., in California on a massive scale amounting to many millions. They now outnumber "gringos" in that State, and exert a huge effect on State government policies.
That is "just politics," but it is the politics of people with a strong bias in favor of their own "race," and, conversely, against other "races." It's predictable. But that's not my point either.
The point I am making here is actually directed toward what Lenin called the "useful idiots" who have reliably assisted them in accomplishing their illegal goals. These are non-hispanics who are American citizens, and yet, like the American Communist Party of the 1930's (and after), commit themselves to the advancement of the goals of a foreign state.
Why do they do this? What's in it for them? One of the primary things they seem get out of it is the self-satisfaction of calling everybody else a "racist" and congratulating themselves for their morally superior "open-minded tolerance."
The have been played like a violin by Mexican citizens, and hispanic U. S. citizens who are sympathetic to the goals of Mexico, all to the detriment of U.S. citizens. And they are naive and blind enough to actually take pride in it.
@layman,
This is simply a repost designed to reinforce the point I am making:
layman wrote:
A more current article:
Investor's Business Daily wrote:Immigration: Meddling dangerously in American democracy with a not-so-secret motive, the Mexican government is quietly aiding its citizens in the U.S. to become eligible to vote in our elections.
"Mexico is mounting an unprecedented effort to turn its permanent residents in the U.S. into citizens, a status that would enable them to vote -- presumably against Donald Trump," says Bloomberg Business.
But contrary to the claim in the Bloomberg piece, the goal isn't solely to keep El Donaldo from being president. It's ultimately to seed a group of Spanish-speaking people who will someday help Mexico take back the Southwest.
Don't laugh. It's not a paranoid vision. Mexico has never accepted U.S. sovereignty over what was once its land. And radical U.S. Latino rights groups -- including, most significantly, MeCha and La Raza -- have long agitated to return the Southwest to Mexico. What better way for a "reconquista" -- a reconquering -- of the Southwest than by the ballot box?
"This is the other Mexico," Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto crowed in Los Angeles in August 2014, referring to the United States. He meant it. But he's not alone. He's part of a long line of recent Mexican politicians who, emboldened by the presence of an estimated 12 million of their own citizens living in the U.S., have chosen to pick at the scab of Mexican separatism.
This goes beyond mere politicking -- and extends into undermining U.S. law. Mexico has long offered a "Guia del Migrante Mexicano," a comic-book style guide for those entering the U.S. illegally. Far from dissuading their citizens from coming here, they encourage it. Mexican officials and radical immigration groups then encourage Spanish-only ghettoization of Mexicans and Central Americans, along with a sense of grievance and victimhood for non-existent U.S. crimes.
Mexican consuls in the U.S. have repeatedly criticized U.S. law officials when they enforce U.S. law against illegal immigration. They hand out so-called "matriculas" -- a form of ID -- and lobby to have them accepted to get everything from drivers' licenses to bank accounts. Most offensively, they spend huge sums for Mexican textbooks to be used in U.S. schools with large Hispanic populations, all but guaranteeing that the kids who learn from them will remain unassimilated into the American way of life.
"After pressing us to educate Mexico's citizens, give them food stamps, deliver their babies, provide them with hospital beds and police their neighborhoods, the Mexican government also expects us to help preserve their loyalty -- to Mexico," wrote Heather Mac Donald, in a prescient article for the City Journal in 2005
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/mexicos-ballot-box-reconquista/
The Mexicans have made so many advances that, like the cheese-eaters, they now scornfully deny that there is any reconquista movement. Their current numbers are sufficient to relieve them of the need for open, public advocacy of their goals.
They have wised up and now say they're opposed to Donald Trump, that's all. The cheese-eaters all across the country fall over each trying to be the first and loudest to laud California for it's "brave" anti-Trump stance.
Played, yet again, eh, cheese-eaters.
But, for special emphasis, I want to call attention to this passage:
Quote:"After pressing us to educate Mexico's citizens, give them food stamps, deliver their babies, provide them with hospital beds and police their neighborhoods, the Mexican government also expects us to help preserve their loyalty -- to Mexico," wrote Heather Mac Donald, in a prescient article for the City Journal in 2005
Think about it, eh?
@layman,
Another big part of U.S. law that that Mexicans in California have passed legislation to violate concerns legal voting. They have now, in effect granted mexican citizens the right to (illegally) vote in federal elections. Ya talk about infiltration and subversion, eh? Another re-post:
layman wrote:
This article overlooks the fact that no illegal alien in California even needs to be a citizen to vote. No one is allowed to even ask for any kind of proof of citizenship there.
It's true that illegals are required to check a box, saying they are a citizen, in order to vote in national elections, even in California. Not to worry though. The hispanic Secretary of State and the California legislature have you covered, amigo.
They have passed a law saying that anyone who claims they are a citizen when they aint is presumed to have done so unwittingly. The presumption is that the DMV employees told them to (which they do), and hence they can't be held personally responsible.
The Mexican government, and it's citizens who are illegally ensconced in the U. S., are thrilled to see Americans obsessed with russian meddling, eh?
@layman,
[img][/img]I aint just makin up ****. California law now allows illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. When applying for a license, you are automatically registered to vote. No proof of citizenship is required. But how about federal law, you might ask:
Quote:2268. If a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote pursuant to this chapter in the absence of a violation by that person of Section 18100, that person’s registration shall be presumed to have been effected with official authorization and not the fault of that person.
2269. If a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote pursuant to this chapter and votes or attempts to vote in an election held after the effective date of the person’s registration, that person shall be presumed to have acted with official authorization and shall not be guilty of fraudulently voting or attempting to vote pursuant to Section 18560, unless that person willfully votes or attempts to vote knowing that he or she is not entitled to vote.
2270. The Secretary of State shall adopt regulations to implement this chapter.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1461
Notice that in addition to other things, this law assigns to The Secretary of State (i.e. hispanic Alex Padilla) the authority to make regulations regarding it's implementation.
I can't find those regulations right now, and don't want to spend a lot of time looking for them again. But I have read them, and they go even farther in expanding on this "not the fault of the person (illegally voting)" provision. They go on to say that any person who claims to be a citizen when he aint will be PRESUMED to have done so innocently and inadvertently, and not "knowingly."
Since you can't be charged with illegal voting unless you have "know" you are not entitled to vote, illegal voting has been made presumptively legal. The "presumption" is that the voter was "told" (or at least was confused and thought he was told) that he should check the citizenship box by a State official, and hence he did not "know" he was illegally voting when he did.
There's lot you can do to surreptitously and effectively "abolish" the constitution and protect it's violators when you have State officials passing laws to make it all "legal," eh? This is easier to accomplish when you leave the subversive provision out of the statute, but add it into obscure "regulations."
Back in 2006 I read about a couple border patrol guards who both got ten-year prison sentences for trying to stop a Mexican who was trying to bring 800 pounds of marijuana across the border in a van. This made me think that the powers that be actually wanted open borders, since the prosecution of those border patrol agents had to have sent a message to other border patrol agents.
The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security tracked Aldrete-Davila down, paid for his medical treatment for a bullet wound to his buttocks, and gave him full immunity in exchange for his testimony against the agents. He received immunity for illegally entering the country, immunity for physically attacking a Border Patrol Agent, and immunity for the two shipments of nearly 800 pounds of marijuana that Aldrete-Davila was attempting to smuggle into the United States. Adding insult to injury, Aldrete -Davila subsequently filed a $5 million lawsuit against the United States, claiming that his civil rights had been violated.
https://cole.house.gov/punishment-does-not-fit-crime
@Glennn,
Glennn, don't you support Black Lives Matter?
I may have you confused with someone else. Posting right wing stories about police being punished for breaking rules while making an arrest would be awfully inconsistent if you did.
@Glennn,
I completely agree with Congressman Cole about this:
Quote:Agents Ramos and Compean, in violation of required agency procedures, failed to file a written report disclosing the fired shots. According to Border Patrol regulations, this should have earned agents Ramos and Compean a five-day suspension. What they actually received should outrage all Americans.
The magnitude of this injustice is truly mind boggling. A violent illegal immigrant with a van full of drugs can brazenly breach our sovereign border, engage in a physical confrontation with U.S. law enforcement officials and then be given immunity in exchange for testimony against the men charged with protecting our communities. Aldrete-Davila has attempted to portray himself as a victim in this saga but nothing could be further from the truth. The victims in this story are clearly agents Ramos, Compean and the American justice system.
It's disgusting. The type of thing that only a full-blown cheese-eater would approve of.
@maxdancona,
Quote:I may have you confused with someone else.
I concur.
Quote:Posting right wing stories about police being punished for breaking rules
Right Wing story? It's just an account of something that happened. Apparently you're okay with border patrol agents being punished for breaking rules, but have nothing to say about an illegal alien drug runner being rewarded by our government for his illegal activity. Is that cheese I smell on your breath, Maxdancona?
@Glennn,
Replace "illegal immigrant" with "ghetto thug" and tell me if your opinion changes. Let let me do it for you...
Quote:Apparently you're okay with police being punished for breaking rules, but have nothing to say about an ghetto thug drug runner being rewarded by our government for his illegal activity.
Does that change your opinion? You agree that police aren't allowed to just shoot law breakers at will, right?
And, yes... that is a nice Gruyere.
@maxdancona,
He was an illegal alien who was rewarded by our government for his illegal activity. What is your point?
Quote:You agree that police aren't allowed to just shoot law breakers at will, right?
Generally speaking, a "ghetto thug" running drugs across the border should be considered a dangerous person who should be apprehended, right?
@Glennn,
He was a "ghetto thug" who was compensated because of police misconduct.
If you think monetary damages for police misconduct is a "reward" you really don't understand Black Lives Matter.
