The Facts Behind Anti-Immigration Rhetoric

Business simply wants cheap labor, they don't care as long as they make profit. The tax payer is stuck footing the social costs. Your CBO report states illegals cost local govts and tax payers, Economists admit they decrease US GDP by 1%. Even the Progressive Paul Krugman admits they are a net cost.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990DEFDC1430F934A15750C0A9609C8B63

Guess what, your CBO report states they exact same thing.

 

Unable to deal in facts, the Secure the border guys feel it necessary to challenge established facts on a point by point basis, wanting to force me into furthering proving what was already discussed. I'm sorry, but I refuse to read Liquid Reigns posts. Any person that will follow me around like a dog in heat and try to brow beat me has more problems than anybody on this board.

I trust that each and every person here can access the links I leave and come to your own conclusions. Liquid Reigns does not trust anyone else to do likewise... and he thinks he has a monopoly on understanding. But I digress.

The Secure the border lobby exists for one reason and one reason only - they have a hidden agenda to destroy America. They dominate boards like this, not allowing for ANY criticism or scrutiny of their religious ideology about hating so - called "illegals." The fact that they would use such a term (absent a presumption of innocence and due process) is indicative of what kinds of people we're dealing with.

Donald Trump was born a Democrat. He hates the concepts of freedom and Liberty. His main issue is immigration. Now, we've clearly established that being in the United States without papers is not a crime. Still the Secure the border guys can't deal with it. WHY?

This issue is about Liberty. If convincing the foreigners to go home - or not come here at all, we could have a productive discussion. That, however, is not the goal of he Secure the border people. It's not about the taxes nor what one would expect a reasonable argument to be about (i.e. the impact of foreigners on our culture.) No, this is an issue about people that hate and despise Liberty. So, in order for their narrative to work, that fine point of whether or not we are discussing a civil violation or a crime must remain their primary focus. But, they cannot overcome the fact that every immigration official has declared that we're dealing with civil NOT criminal law.

America was founded on Christian principles, not as a theocracy, but upon solid Christian principles. When our forefathers signed their names onto the Declaration of Independence, there were no citizens. Yet that document states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-"

Liberty is an unalienable Right. Liberty is not a by-product of your citizenship. According to the Declaration of Independence Liberty is bestowed upon all men by a Creator... not a government mind you, but a Creator.

One only need read the early state constitutions of this country. ALL of them made a belief in God (and in some cases the Bible or being a Protestant) a prerequisite to holding public office. Bearing that in mind, the Bible has this to say:

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." II Corinthians 3: 17

Certainly, you can find that sentiment in the writings of our founding fathers. John Adams, the second President of the United States wrote:

"[You have Rights] antecedent to all earthly governments: Rights, that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; Rights, derived from the Great Legislator of the universe."

For one to buy into the Secure the border ideology, you have to reject the concept of Liberty. Their religion is an assault on the foundational principles upon which this country was founded.

 

Laws do not stop illegal activity but provide a remedy for the illegal activity. In the case of illegal immigrants, that remedy is deportation. Not allowing them to break the law in the first place is mitigation and that is what the Secure the border guys are all about. We are talking about criminal activity with illegal entry.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/20...crime-improper-entry-v-unlawful-presence.html

 

Talk about being unable to deal in facts. The only things being challenged are your inept claims that the facts don't met out. You seem to deal in distortion and all out lies, like claiming the CBO clams illegals pay more in taxes then they receive in benefits when it has been shown directly from your CBO report that they do not. When you are presented with facts you go on your little tirade like the above paragraph. The issue is you still can't respond with answers without looking foolish.

Digressing won't help you. Answer the very simple questions I posed. I have accessed your links, I then quoted your very links, links that you claim say one thing when in reality they say something quite different. The Chris Christie example, you fail to recognize what he had to correct when on the very same link it tells you exactly what I said he said. He was talking about people entering on a visa.

OMFG A hidden agenda to destroy America? Dominate boards like this not allowing for any criticism or scrutiny? That sounds more like you, you are being criticized and I am scrutinizing your claims, you don't seem to be able to respond with any sort of intelligent answers, and when confronted you whine like a child. Illegal immigrants get due process once they are detained and charged, then they are suppose to get deported, or in rare cases EWI's may be allowed PRUCOL status on a one on one basis. With your vast immigration experience and law degree (that you claim to have ) you should already know this. Your attempts to demonize those that don't believe as you do is

Its not a crime for those that entered on a visa, for all others they can be charged with the crime and found guilty, thus it is a crime, the federal govt says its a federal misdemeanor. You haven't established anything, what you have claimed has been defined and shown to be for specific classes and not all classes. It has been dealt with, it has been shown, why is it you can't accept the reality of your broadbrushing being intellectually dishonest?

Administrative violation regarding visa overstays are not criminal as they entered legally, otherwise 8USC1325 (EWI) is a criminal violation of US Code (Immigration Law INA275). Administrative Law is like Criminal Law as it is the Govt as the Prosecutor. You don't have a law degree, nor do you have any experience in immigration law. This is basic year 1 & 2 law stuff.

The hyperbole is too much.

 

In dealing with this issue, I'd like to take a moment and summarize where we've been so far:

1) The Secure the border guys keep telling you we are dealing with a criminal issue when the people who make the final decision have stated and ruled repeatedly that this is civil law

2) We've answered the myths that the undocumented foreigners don't pay taxes; we've addressed the fact that they pay as much in taxes as they receive in benefits (for the most part)

3) We have given an accounting of the fruits of the labors of the Secure the border position (i.e. the so - called "Patriot Act," National ID / REAL ID Act, etc.)

4) We have discussed the Secure the border guy's war against private property and unalienable Rights

5) We've witnessed on this thread the hatred that the Secure the border activists have for Liberty. So now, we continue to another aspect of their rhetoric.

The Secure the border people tell us that this is a criminal issue. Let's work with that for a moment. The Secure the border people wanted a wall around the U.S. and they wanted to feel "safe." The United States, at the behest of the Secure the border lobby created the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity at a cost of over 98 BILLION DOLLARS to start it up. With 216,000 employees it now costs and additional $55 + BILLION DOLLARS per year for funding. Then there was the cost to pass the so called "Patriot Act." The Border Security part of that bill requiring that a fence be built ended up with an estimated 4 MILLION DOLLARS per mile average to build the wall... mind you, this only to build the wall - not man it or pay for the surveillance equipment, weaponry, technology, etc.

Now, bear in mind, the Secure the border guys are claiming this is a criminal issue. So, a policy was developed in order to enforce this nutty wall idea. As a matter of policy, Constitution Free Zones were created under the pretext of enforcing immigration laws.

With a Constitution Free Zone, you do not retain any constitutional guarantees within a hundred miles of a border. It's as if the Constitution doesn't exist. The pretext? Enforcing the immigration laws. So, we're dealing with criminal law, correct? Now, WHO does this Constitution Free Zone affect? Citizens, right?

The Fourteenth Amendment provides:

"No State shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...."

So, if we can have Constitution Free Zones with the pretext of pursuing "criminals," what keeps this from growing? Why can't the LEO community ignore private property lines altogether under the guise of chasing criminals? If you leave the Secure the border guys in charge, that is exactly what would happen.

Again, this entire effort by the Secure the border advocates began when Ranch Rescue caved in on the private property issue. PRIOR to 2003 the citizens militias were busy fighting things like Eminent Domain abuses.

Back in the 1990s and early 2000s, when companies like Wal Mart used to have private property condemned in order to build superstores, the militia was up to the challenge. That fight died the moment the Secure the border lobby co-opted the militias to help the NEW WORLD ORDER / ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT proponents in building up the world's largest POLICE STATE. Yes, there IS a reason that the Secure the Border guys hate the notion of private property. Their rhetoric cannot hide their insidious agenda. They must create criminals out of Guest Workers and deny to employers the ability to give their jobs to whomever they want.

Don't worry. We won't get those jobs. If Donald Trump were to prevail, most businesses would move to Mexico and most of you would have to kiss the Mexican's backside just to have any kind of job.

 

The next point to challenge the Secure the border rhetoric is simply this (I keep posing it and it goes unanswered BTW):

Let us suppose that the Secure the border guys are successful. They elect Donald Trump, build a wall, and deport every brown individual they can find. Along with the undocumented foreigners will go their families.

In a few years, the children born in the U.S. to undocumented foreigners begin migrating back to the U.S. With them they bring their SSN, birth certificate and National ID Card. The Secure the border lobbyists start that silly ranting like they do on this thread, but the courts aren't buying.

Finally, the case ends up in the United States Supreme Court wherein they find that those children are, in fact, American citizens. But wait, these people have no job skills; they lack an education; they have no family support system (you deported them.)

The Secure the border guys cannot mount any kind of resistance. THEY built the ultimate POLICE STATE, financed the armed drones and machine gun toting federal mercenaries. The Secure the border guys locked down the border and none of us can leave. Since we're under constant surveillance and everything we buy, sell or create is observed by Uncle Scam, any thoughts of rebelling against the powers that be are exercises in futility.

Remember this: In spite of all the badgering and B.S. they sling, NONE of them has ever argued their positions in court... not even once. The people that used to represent their efforts have lost every single court battle they have been in. The laws the Secure the border people backed have been used against American citizens more times than the so - called "illegal alien."

The leadership of the Secure the border advocates includes nothing except Democrats and ex - nazis. Donald Trump is a left wing Democrat pretending to be a Republican. The entire leadership of the self proclaimed Minutemen was National Socialist to a man with most of them becoming murderers or ending up in prison - or sometimes dead. These aren't baseless charges; they are a proven fact.

They came here to challenge me on this thread and they failed. They lie to you. Again, quoting Thomas Paine on this point:

"An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and
to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates his duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

The "Wow" factor for the Secure the border advocates has failed miserably on this thread. They misapply the laws and misinterpret them, but the proof is in the pudding. Instead of asking who is what and who has done what, let the Secure the border guys tell you how many times they have used their interpretations in court or even in administrative tribunals and actually won a case.

They can't. Instead they came here to argue about what judges can and cannot do. Judges do whatever they want and if you don't like it, you're free to appeal. In 1803 the United States Supreme Court set itself up as the final arbiters of what the law is. You can forget that high school crap about three equal branches of government... the courts have become the superior branch, where judges legislate from the bench. Once something begins making its way through the appeals court, the other two branches throw in the towel and don't do anything.

In thirteen years (when this modern effort got front pages headlines) the Secure the border people have not won a single court case and all the legislation they've passed has cost us Liberties while not affecting any of these so - called "illegal aliens." They want you to believe they have all the answers and a monopoly on understanding yet they cannot cite you a single success that wasn't more costly to the citizenry than the people they hate, loathe and despise who are not American citizens.

 

What they have stated they've had to clarify and walk back. Each clarified that it is visa entries that overstay their departure dates, that is not a crime.

You made a claim that the CBO said they pay as much in taxes as the resources they use. The CBO calls you a liar, as do I. Directly from the CBO

https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/110th-congress-2007-2008/reports/12-6-immigration.pdf

In reality you have done no such thing.

Again, in reality you haven't.

Hatred? This is a discussion board, you don't want discussion, you want your way, doesn't work like that. You've made claims, as asinine as they are, that have been shown to be utterly inept.

EWI is a criminal act, and thus they can be charged with a criminal federal misdemeanor.

Constitution Free Zones have been around since 1953. Directly from the ACLU

https://www.aclu.org/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

You don't know squat about what you are claiming.

You don't seem to adept with knowledge to know that the BP can not simply stop you for no reason within the CFZ.

Again from the ACLU link.

The sky is falling, Chicken Little.

BS

Guest Workers enter the county legally for a set amount of time. Illegal immigrants enter via stealth and choose to take what rightfully doesn't belong to them, while society gets stuck paying for their theft.

The hyperbole and scare tactics are bountiful in this piece.

 

Some will some won't as has been demonstrated by prior deportations.

All assumption. What if they find those children not to be citizens, but Nationals only? Then what? A US birth Certificate is not proof of US Citizenship, it is mere evidence of a birth to a certain mother and father and begins nothing more then a child's identity.

Such a Rosie picture. We get it, your a loon extremest that doesn't like the govt.

That's right folks don't condemn the persons committing the crime, condemn the groups they claimed to be involved in.

Your (*)(*)(*)(*)ing hilarious, every point you have exclaimed has been shown to be either a half truth or all out BS.

Ho-hum

Not won a single court case? Parts of those cases were allowed to continue, while other parts were struck down. Don't claim things that are factually incorrect, I told you you would be called out on it.

 

Here is a response I came across regarding all this BS exclaimed by the OP.

C'mon Hannibal.

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=357760

 

I find Liquid Reigns responses to be amusing. I did read his last one because the basic points I have been making are factual and true.

Coming into the United States without papers is not a crime, regardless of how Liquid Reigns tries to spin it. He comes here with information and no citing sources, expecting me to either defend it or repudiate it. I owe him nothing not covered within this thread.

As most people know, the law is always fluid. There was a time when constitutionalists held sway and we did not allow the state government to enforce federal laws. Then the government allowed states and counties to begin enforcing immigration laws; Bush gave the BATFE the power to enforce any law on the books - regardless of whether the BATFE had prior jurisdiction.

In both instances, the Secure the border lobbyists backed the move. The real deal is simple: government sometimes has the power to do something, but they don't always have the authority. The honest truth is, Liquid Reigns knows full well which times I personally believe that the government lacks the authority, but has the power. Rest assured, no branch of the government has the authority to criminalize Liberty.

When a person is accused of a Title 8 violation they are put into detention. Compared to jails and prisons, the detention facilities are quite lavish. From there, the accused is taken before an EXECUTIVE branch official for processing. As the law has been ruled upon, the process is, at all times, a civil process NOT a criminal one.

Liquid Reigns can blow smoke all day long, but it does not matter whether you came in via the southern border or not. The real fact is, Improper Entry (contrary to Liquid Reigns protests) does not generally affect those who over-stay a visa since those with a visa entered properly.

Reigns and his ilk have brow beat anyone that challenges them. But, in criticizing me and bringing dirty laundry into this thread, Reigns has exposed the weakness and the ugly truth about not only WHO he is, but WHAT he is. He could not allow this thread to proceed and stand on its own merits. He cannot afford to allow you to look at the facts. He MUST accuse me of something; MUST question me on a personal level; MUST lie to you.

I'm sure that all of you who have read this far into the debate realize that if the highest ranking immigration official declares the process of deportation to be a civil process, it must be civil rather than criminal. Mukasey did not say that applied only if a person over-stayed a visa... he said the entire process was civil not criminal.

We can argue about it all day long. Liquid Reigns has never won a single court battle. He's probably never even been in court unless it was divorce court. Attacking me will not change what the law is. I don't agree with every point; I've even stated there are addressable issues regarding immigration AND Guest Workers with no proper path to follow once they've been offered an opportunity to make money. This isn't good enough for the Secure the border lobby. In the past they were able to censor those who disagree with them; able to brow beat and intimidate all that did not bow down to them. This was the first time, the facts were brought out and we got to the meat of the issue. Now the final fact:

For thirteen years I have offered to debate the top echelons of the leadership of the Secure the border lobby. When I went into their playgrounds, the moment they started losing the debate, they censored me and shut me out of the debate... then had the audacity to proclaim themselves the winner. But, they would never meet me on a level playing field. So, in closing, the only point they think they've won here is whether or not this is civil law or criminal law.

The biggest reason that immigration violations are civil is due to two things:

1) The highest ranking immigration official in the U.S. declared them to be so and

2) Title 8 USC 1325 makes the assumption that Title 18 would make ENTRY a crime. Title 18 does NOT make entry without papers a crime AND efforts to change the law failed. If Title 18 contained such a statute, somebody from the Secure the border side would have included it on this thread. They didn't. Case closed.

 

Don't lie, you have read everyone of my posts. Your points are half truths and all out lies, as has been shown, such as your claim that illegals pay $12B per year to SS, when in reality they do not, your claim that illegals pay more in taxes then they receive stating the CBO states that, another lie and shown via the CBO that you are quite incorrect; You claim 8USC1325 is not criminal, yet the Federal Govt says it is a Federal Felony......

Entry Without Inspection is a crime, the perpetrator can be charged and found guilty and receive up to 2 years in jail. I have cited and linked everyone of my sources, hell I even used your own sources and links, too. The rest is juvenile and

The states enforced immigration laws since their inception, many have it written into their very own constitutions. BATFE doesn't enforce any law on the books, they are limited to within their jurisdiction, scope and confines of law. Your perpetual ignorant claims are amusing though.

It is not a civil process, Immigration Court is only civil in nature. That means the defendant doesn't have the right to a trial by a jury of his peers, he is being charged with a violation of the law and is a defendant. Immigration Court also doesn't afford the defendant with a lawyer, yet they can have a pro bono lawyer or pay for their own. The charges they face in Immigration Court are criminal violations. These violations result in penalties, i.e. deportation, fines, jail time, barred from return from 3 years to life. It is the Federal Govt prosecuting the immigrant who is the defendant, and it is the Federal Govt that must prove their case.

The only one around here blowing smoke is you. Nobody ever stated that EWI affects those who over stay their visas. In fact, a visa overstay is simply out-of-status and can apply to adjust their status with no penalty, however if they have an order of deportation against them issued they may not be able to adjust and once deported will have a bar from re-entry for 3 years to life dependent upon how long they remained past their order of deportation.

Nobody has "brow beaten" you, you made statements, claimed them as fact, you were then shown that your statements are either half true or an all out ignorant lie and that was mostly done by using your own sources, then I provided my sources that made you look even more ignorant. I can't afford people to look at the facts? Hell I provided links for them to do just that. I am accusing you of being an all out liar.

Look at you trying to play as though you are in a court room and are pleading in front of a jury.

Mukasey never stated such, you claimed it was Napolitano that did such. So you can't even keep your claims straight now? The process of deportation is only civil in nature, meaning the defendant (the alien in the hearing) is being charged with a Federal violation by the US Govt (the prosecution in the case). Civil law is tort law (private disputes between persons or organizations), criminal law prosecutes someone for a violation (accused of a crime like an illegal charged with EWI or having an order of deportation against them). This is basic law which TheResister claims to both have a law degree and to be more experienced than anybody else by having worked in the immigration field for 6 years.

Your hilarious. Your interpretation of the law is, for lack of a better word, inept. There are already guest worker visas, the H2A has no annual cap. Guest workers are non-immigrants, many visas are non-immigrant visas, there are a couple of those visas that do allow for change of status such as the H1B. With your vast immigration law knowledge you should already know this.

Nobody is censoring you, you are on a discussion board, you don't want to discuss anything, you claim you are the top of the heap and therefor we should take what you have to say as indisputable fact. Sorry, but in reality you're nothing more than a key board commando.

And yet you can't even hold your own against me? All you do is whine if you are shown to be incorrect, you then show your intellectual dishonesty by changing the wording of the argument, or providing half truths and phrases out of context, to include making claims that show you don't comprehend your own source.

There is no assumption, 8USC1325 (Improper entry - EWI) is a federal misdemeanor, period. http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/f...seminar/2012/4_Table_Federal_Misdemeanors.pdf

Visa overstays (an infraction of immigration law equivalent to a traffic ticket) are not considered illegal immigrants until they have an order of deportation issued against them, and even then they can still apply to adjust their status, where as an EWI can not have their status adjusted unless granted on a one on one basis by the AG grants PRUCOL status or the IJ determines they qualify for asylum.

 

Overstaying a visa is NOT an improper entry.

 

So they contributed $13B in payroll taxes(your original claim was they paid $12B solely to SS)

which include more than just SS (which half of all contributions are by the employer) minus the $1B in benefits paid out, which you also claimed illegals can not receive SS benefits when obviously they can, which then leaves a total of payroll taxes, which are SS @ 6.2% and medicare @ 1.45% with the employer matching those numbers. So, as I previously showed once you deduct the employers part, that number is cut in half, and once you remove the 25% + of other non-match payees that number drops even further to what I previously showed.

So you claim the entire payroll tax and fail to accept reality when it is broken down and it is not $12B to SS. SMFH
Such intellectual dishonesty mets you a liar.

No it hasn't, if 8USC1325 was rejected why does the Federal Govt state it is a Federal Misdemeanor? http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/fi...sdemeanors.pdf

Title 18 is the Crimes and Criminal Procedures section https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18

So instead of your broadbrushed initial claim in your OP you now limit your argument to visa overstays.

Unfortunately, 8USC1325 is a federal misdemeanor for EWI, which as I originally stated makes your OP void. Now if you are whining about only visa overstays, then as I already stated, they are simply out-of-status and are not illegal until they have an order of deportation issued against them. So to digress, your opening paragraphs aren't very definitive and are rather broadbrushed, showing ignorance of the issue.

And then you go on about Improper Entry not being a crime yet again. SMFH Congress has authority over immigrants

http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/fi...sdemeanors.pdf Take it up with the Federal Govt as they state 8USC1325 is a Federal Misdemeanor. http://www.justice.gov/usao-mdpa/pr/honduran-citizen-apprehended-york-county-charged-improper-entry

In PA no less
How about the information directly from a Law Office

So it looks like PA and their Honduran National that was caught beyond the border in the interior of the country can be charged with EWI and can be found guilty of said CRIME. This is what reality looks like and what the facts met out.

Big man on the interwebs.

Mukasey never ruled 8USC1325 to be civil law. His exact quote from your many other forums is

https://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=365344&page=20
That means exactly what I stated earlier, Administrative court is a criminal court with no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel under the Due Process Clause or any other provision, and what you showed in your OP

Civil in nature, i.e. they do not get a jury of their peers and they are not afforded a tax payer paid attorney. It does not make it civil law as you continuously and ignorantly claim. Administrative law is criminal law, the US Govt is the prosecutor and the immigrant the defendant. This is basic law 101.

H2A most certainly applies, we could bring in all the AG pickers we need legally.

Lack the cahones? WOW, so I have responded to each of your comments, asked numerous questions to which you never responded, and I lack the cahones.

I have all the faith in the world about my position, links have been provided. Is this not an open forum? Is this not in the public's eye? Am I not here pointing out your fallacies and mistakes? Look at you running away :whining: we're done here":whining: LOL LMFAO WAFM SMFH

You forgot self righteous and master debater. LOL

And here is Christie saying you are wrong

http://www.nj.com/morristown/index.ssf/2008/04/christie_clarifies_illegal_imm.html

Look at that he says Title 8 is a criminal code, too. LOL

There are no rulings stating it is civil law.

Do you really not know the difference between civil law and criminal law? And you claim to have a law degree? LMFAO WAFM SMFH

Nobody has ever claimed that overstaying a visa is improper entry.

 

You have - in damn near every post that I've read on this thread. When you don't outright say it, you imply it.

 

In post #31 I asked a question of the Secure the border lobby. If anybody wants to proffer a response, I'd like to see it. Here it is again:

Let us suppose that the Secure the border guys are successful. They elect Donald Trump, build a wall, and deport every brown individual they can find. Along with the undocumented foreigners will go their families.

In a few years, the children born in the U.S. to undocumented foreigners begin migrating back to the U.S. With them they bring their SSN, birth certificate and National ID Card. The Secure the border lobbyists start that silly ranting like they do on this thread, but the courts aren't buying.

Finally, the case ends up in the United States Supreme Court wherein they find that those children are, in fact, American citizens. But wait, these people have no job skills; they lack an education; they have no family support system (you deported them.) They come here by the MILLIONS. They will be welfarites. What is the response of the Secure the border lobby?

They've militarized the border, taken away your Liberties, assaulted your private property Rights and prevented you from leaving. Those who rebel will cause Uncle Scam to declare Martial Law and you won't be able to "legally" resist NOR will it be practical to. The Secure the border guys will have lobbied for the armed drones, the high tech surveillance, machine gun toting federal mercenaries and severe restrictions on both your Right to keep and bear Arms along with your freedom of movement.

It is naive and outright stupid to think that the United States Supreme Court will rule in favor of the Secure the border lobby. Who are their allies in the Supreme Court? Kagan the communist? Sotomayor, the liberal Mexican? Maybe sell out John Roberts? Of the nine Justices, the Secure the border lobby wouldn't get three votes.

Again, they will have to resort to millions of words of type, challenging every statement I make (as if you're too stupid to check it out on your own.) Don't let the snake oil salesmen fool you. The Secure the border lobby gave you:

The so - called "Patriot Act"

National ID / REAL ID Act

Constitution Free Zones

Womb to the tomb surveillance

The creation of the Dept. of Homeland (IN) Security

Warrantless searches

Endless background checks

SSN based ID after the patriot community was winning in the war to prevent the SSN from being used as ID

The end of innocent until proven guilty

The continued theft of your money via the illegally ratified 16th Amendment

Assaults on your private property Rights

That is the "fruits of their labors." You feeling safe yet???

 

He, Christie, would then be quite correct. Link: http://www.cairco.org/legal/civil-federal-immigration-crime

My addition in red (visa overstay)

You have no law degree, nor have you any experience in immigration law, whatsoever.

Bull. At no time wahtsoever have I stated a visa overstay falls under 8USC1325, I have stated numerous times that a visa overstay is merely out-of-status and does not become illegally here until they have an issued order of deportation against them. The only penalty for a visa overstay is deportation and a bar from 3 years to life from returning. A visa overstay is a violation of the law, however it is not a crime, it is equivalent to a speeding ticket, a mere infraction.

Visa overstays fall under INA 222(g) http://www.lawandsoftware.com/ina/INA-222-sec1202.html
which is also 8USC1202 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1202

Here it is explained http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo...quences-of-overstaying-on-temporary-visa.html

Unlawful presence is only for visa overstays, it does not include those that entered via improper entry, i.e. EWI.

 

See this link: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=427124&page=4&p=1065428694#post1065428694

 

Here is the US Code for visa overstays.
8USC1253 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1253

 

Where, in that link, do you presume the worst to happen? You don't have a back up plan, son. For THIRTEEN YEARS (since this modern anti - Hispanic effort started) your side has (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ed, moaned and groaned and you've LOST got that LOST every time you've been in court.

IF you had been successful, you could point to the numbers and claim how the idiotic legislation your side endorsed has worked. You're afraid of me because I can tell you about the innocent Americans who have been jailed and murdered at the hands of legislation YOU endorsed. You can dodge, duck and sling skeet, but you cannot escape the truth. NOTHING your side has done has changed the bottom line regarding people you call "illegal aliens."

You can give me cites all day long from people that publish commentary and or their opinions. But, when we ask the people that enforce immigration law, NONE OF THEM, NOT ONE AGREE WITH YOU.

 

Liquid Reigns presumes that since I don't respond to his personal attacks, that is some kind of "proof" he is right about this. Let's work with that:

Liquid Reigns is not publishing his credentials to show you he has any experience. No, he relies on immigration organizations for his information. And, if he really thought I didn't know what I was talking about, he would publish what he feels is the truth and move along. He cannot afford to do that. He doesn't trust any of you to look at the facts, presented once, and then decide for yourself. He believes you are an idiot.

I've basically been in a state of semi-retirement for several years now, but I'm not a hard man to find. If any of you want to know what I REALLY know about the law and immigration in general, why not meet with me personally and then decide? That would work better than all this back and forth B.S.

What we have with the Secure the border advocates is insecure people that think they have a monopoly on the truth and the interpretations of the law. At the end of the day, I like the way Rudy Giuliani summed this up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDo-ZVK4dc0

Ladies and gentlemen, listen to Rudy. Congress TRIED to make improper entry a crime and the effort failed. Liquid Reigns is never going to change that.

Title 8 references Title 18 for criminal prosecution. The problem was two - fold: Title 8 is not a criminal statute (which is why it keeps referencing Title 1 AND Title 18 never included a provision for a crime regarding improper entry OR people the Secure the border guys keep calling "illegal aliens."

It is not a crime - NOR SHOULD IT BE. It would be unconstitutional to criminalize Liberty.

 

Why would I presume the worst would happen? I asked you specific questions in that link based on your doomsday assumptions.

I'm not your son, your not my father, Your age verse my age isn't that far apart. I don't need a back up plan and neither does the US govt who is responsible for enforcing the laws on the books, law that they made.

What has "my side" lost? What court cases are you referring to? This ine case will make your ignorance once again shine, Obama's Immigration Orders Remain On Hold After Appeals Court Ruling http://progressillinois.com/news/co...orders-remain-hold-after-appeals-court-ruling Looks like we are winning that one.

Look at you trying to intimidate me. I'm afraid of you? The rest of this is your simple ignorance.

So you publish commentary from the people that enforce immigration law and I show how you mis-interpt their words and how they themselves had to clarify their words, and then how you change their very words to then fit into your ramblings.

 

And what credentials have you published other than you claiming to be something that you are not and claiming you have something that you don't have? the only thing you have done to this point is claim to have been summoned to court over a child you had in your possession without documentation or being the child's relative.

Publish what I feel is the truth? Did I not do that when I should your intellectual dishonesty in your claims? And yet I presented numerous links that show your claims to be fallacious.

Semi-retirement? You mean since you were fired from Lucent? Meet you personally and then decide? how many people do you think live in Georgia near you that read this? Your own militia members bailed on you.

Monopoly on the truth, based on your conspiracy theories?

Congress didn't try to make improper entry a crime (it is and was already), what congress tried to do was make visa overstay a crime which failed in the senate. Try reading the bill itself.

No, 8USC1325 references title 18 for the penalties, fines and/or jail time based on the severity of the crime, which is a federal misdemeanor for the first offense and a federal felony for the second offense.

Title 8 is the criminal statute, title 18 is the penalties designation for the crime. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3559

And because 8USC1325 stipulates up to 6 months for the first offense it becomes a Class B Misdemeanor 18USC3559(a)(7)
Since the second offense is up to 2 years 18USC3559 stipulates it to be a Class E Felony 18USC3559(a)(5)

It is a crime otherwise they wouldn't be charged with it.

 

One has to give Liquid Reigns credit. In keeping with the strategies of the Secure the border lobby, he repeats a lie enough so that you will begin to accept it as truth. I only read his last sentence because he wants a debate about whether or not immigration under Title 8 is a crime.

Rudy Giuliani stated:

“It a crime,” Giuliani said Friday. “I know that’s very hard for people to understand, but it’s not a federal crime.”
Guiliani's comments came in an interview with CNN Headline News and radio talk-show host Glenn Beck.
“I was U.S. attorney in the Southern district of New York,” he said. “So believe me, I know this. In fact, when you throw an immigrant out of the country, it’s not a criminal proceeding. It’s a civil proceeding.”

https://sayanythingblog.com/entry/rudy_giuliani_illegal_immigration_isnt_a_crime/

Even this has not been good enough for Reigns, so today I will spank him yet again with the truth. Let’s look at the law and explain it to the intellectually challenged Liquid Reigns:

a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both - See more at:
b) http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VIII/1325#sthash.xiS6ptaN.dpuf

So, what an accused be tried for under Title 8? NOTHING. That is why Title 8 (Immigration and Nationality Law) references Title 18. All one has to do is examine the law closely. Eluding authorities, entering by making false or misleading representations, and the willful concealment of a material fact are all crimes in Title 18 (the Criminal Code), but improper entry is NOT a crime under Title 18. Any idiot ought to be able to read the law and see that Title 8 simply does not prescribe criminal penalties. The criminal penalties are imposed through Title 18 (which is the Criminal Code.)

Imagine, if you will, an old set of encyclopedias in printed form (Reigns probably never saw one.) That is pretty much what the United States Code Annotated looks like if you visit a law library. The law is divided into many different sections, but one book in particular deals with criminal law. It is Title 18. On the other hand, Title 8 is Immigration and Nationality.

IF you listen to Giuliani’s interview cited earlier, he goes on to tell the audience that not only is improper entry NOT a crime, but Congress tried to change the law, but failed. Reigns knows this. It was one his lap dog politicians that introduced the bill.

WHY Reigns is opposed to little brown people from south of the border seems to hinge on this one issue, so we will play his game until such time as we can move forward. This is important because outside of this narrow issue, Reigns has NO issue. And, he has become the spokesboy for the misguided Secure the border lobby

 

I didn't presume the worst you did, I questioned you on it. Do you really have such a hard time following comments? What court cases would those be, you keep exclaiming, yet you fail to say which cases. Modern anti-Hispanic effort? So now you are claiming its racist.

I'm afraid of you? You seem to be a big man on the keyboard, there commando, afraid of you, hardly. I'm not the one dodging or ducking anything, nor am I slinging skeet. My side? what is my side? All I have done is pointed out your fallacious claims and lies, you don't seem to take criticism or scrutiny very well, sorry, but you are not authority on the issue.

They certainly don't agree with you since you have to go change their words, hoping nobody will go back and check the actual context and discussion. You've been shown to be a liar so much in this thread by the claims you have made and then they turn out to be either completely broadbrushed or all out fallacious.

 

Like I said you have no law degree nor do you have 6 years experience in immigration law.

What credential have you published? What? Not a single one? Really, just your blow hole claim that this is what you are and what you have done. OK

I'll fly right out there from CA. What a joke.

Rudy's whole argument is we couldn't prosecute 12M people, that 12 M includes visa overstays, Ol' Rudy is doing the very same thing as any politician, they broadbrush the groups together and make claims regarding visa overstays as if that covers all illegals including EWI.

I don't need to change that, its already law, all one need do is read the proposed bill and realize it tried to make visa overstays a crime.

No, 1325 references title 18 for fines and punishment.

This is basic comprehensive English.

http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/training/primers/Primer_Immigration.pdf

According to the United States Sentencing Commission (see above link), it most certainly is.