—> ICE / Immigration Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 108K
  • Politics 
This ain’t it. The judge helped the person in question out the back door. As the legal analyst on CNN said even if you take the Trump out of it, this is without question a crime.
There is very much question whether it's a crime. Even if the charging document was accurate, she still would be convicted only upon a finding that she acted corruptly (good luck doing that after 20 years of SCOTUS smashing our anti-corruption laws) or that she "harbored or concealed" someone, which she does not appear to have done. Helping someone dodge the cops is actually not a crime.
 
There is very much question whether it's a crime. Even if the charging document was accurate, she still would be convicted only upon a finding that she acted corruptly (good luck doing that after 20 years of SCOTUS smashing our anti-corruption laws) or that she "harbored or concealed" someone, which she does not appear to have done. Helping someone dodge the cops is actually not a crime.
You'll defend anything
 
Not sure how many court rooms you've been in but Judges do not take kindly to other "law enforcement" agencies slinging dicks in and round their courtrooms. This isn't a response unique to Dugan.

Better hope they have more damning facts than what was presented in the charging document, Supers analysis is spot on.
Echoing you and super, here's a former SCOTUS clerk's walk through the complaint and relevant statutes:

 
Not in the name of it, but hindering federal law and non compliance is illegal.
Every policy that is referred to as "sanctuary city" is 100% legal under the constitution. You can shout until you're bluer in the face than you already are; it doesn't change the fact that there's a 10th Amendment to the constitution, and the 10th Amendment allows these cities to do what they are doing. I don't even much like the 10th Amendment and associated doctrine, but it's the law and it's non-fascist so I can accept it. That's the difference between you and me. You, like a child, judge everything to be right or wrong, good or bad, based on whether you like it. Whereas I act like an adult and use higher order cognitive processes.
 
Every policy that is referred to as "sanctuary city" is 100% legal under the constitution. You can shout until you're bluer in the face than you already are; it doesn't change the fact that there's a 10th Amendment to the constitution, and the 10th Amendment allows these cities to do what they are doing. I don't even much like the 10th Amendment and associated doctrine, but it's the law and it's non-fascist so I can accept it. That's the difference between you and me. You, like a child, judge everything to be right or wrong, good or bad, based on whether you like it. Whereas I act like an adult and use higher order cognitive processes.
If you're here illegally hence breaking the law and interfering with deportation efforts you're also breaking the law. You guys never talk about deportation or using the legal avenue to access this country, its strange. Always defending the law breakers. We have a process to gain access, use it. You're doubling down on a losing effort, voters want deportations, and you keep defending the indefensible. America first!!
 
Of course. If due process is provided as required by law. I haven’t seen ANYONE suggest that immigration judges should not be permitted to order the deportation of certain immigrants, as has happened for decades now under every president, including both Trump and Biden, or that immigrants who courts order to be deported should not, in fact, be deported.

I’m telling you, you’re SUPER close to getting this. Just a couple more neurons connecting and you’ll realize why you’ve been so incredibly wrong about this for so long.
Bump for Silence, who appears to have vodka-induced short term memory issues.
 
If you're here illegally hence breaking the law and interfering with deportation efforts you're also breaking the law. You guys never talk about deportation or using the legal avenue to access this country, its strange. Always defending the law breakers. We have a process to gain access, use it. You're doubling down on a losing effort, voters want deportations, and you keep defending the indefensible. America first!!
“We?”
 
If you're here illegally hence breaking the law and interfering with deportation efforts you're also breaking the law. You guys never talk about deportation or using the legal avenue to access this country, its strange. Always defending the law breakers. We have a process to gain access, use it. You're doubling down on a losing effort, voters want deportations, and you keep defending the indefensible. America first!!
What should we do about the large Meatpacking plants whose employees are likely from %25 to a majority "illegals" Should they not go to prison-the meatpacking plant management?
 
If you're here illegally hence breaking the law and interfering with deportation efforts you're also breaking the law. You guys never talk about deportation or using the legal avenue to access this country, its strange. Always defending the law breakers. We have a process to gain access, use it. You're doubling down on a losing effort, voters want deportations, and you keep defending the indefensible. America first!!
I shouldn't have to say this, but here we are: The whole point of the Bill Of Rights is to limit what the government can do even when voters want it. Voters might want the government to put gay people in concentration camps; that's not allowed because everyone has a right to liberty.

So when you say, "voters want deportations" and thus all of this OK, you're being fundamentally anti-American. Like, you couldn't be more anti-American. Literally the country was founded on the principle that there can be limitations on the government's power. That was our main contribution to world history until the 20th century, and it remains our greatest contribution to the cause of freedom.
 
I shouldn't have to say this, but here we are: The whole point of the Bill Of Rights is to limit what the government can do even when voters want it. Voters might want the government to put gay people in concentration camps; that's not allowed because everyone has a right to liberty.

So when you say, "voters want deportations" and thus all of this OK, you're being fundamentally anti-American. Like, you couldn't be more anti-American. Literally the country was founded on the principle that there can be limitations on the government's power. That was our main contribution to world history until the 20th century, and it remains our greatest contribution to the cause of freedom.
You're so far removed from reality. There's been a complete disregard of securing the border! You're arguing everything after the fact that the govt didn't enforce its original laws. Quit trying to sound clever, you're really just exposing your ignorance.
 
You're so far removed from reality. There's been a complete disregard of securing the border! You're arguing everything after the fact that the govt didn't enforce its original laws. Quit trying to sound clever, you're really just exposing your ignorance.
The real question is why Trump has stopped apprehending border crossers? His people only stopped 7,181 people in March. Why aren’t they doing nearly as good a job apprehending people as Biden did? Is MAGA trying to flood the country with Mexican gang members?
 
The real question is why Trump has stopped apprehending border crossers? His people only stopped 7,181 people in March. Why aren’t they doing nearly as good a job apprehending people as Biden did? Is MAGA trying to flood the country with Mexican gang members?
Did crossings decrease?
 
Back
Top