Consolidated Immigration Issues Thread


#536

It’s sheriffs who want the law repealed who confirm this.

Your attempt to play them off as leftists is hilarious.


#537

They are not Leftist’s, they just don’t want to be hunted and dragged into court by your Party who is using the court system for terrorism; they have been doing their job under this law for over 3 decades before your people started making false claims about what was required of them.

Which is having the same effect as judicial terrorism always has, they fear being prosecuted for simply doing their job.


#538

For saying the law is not a sanctuary law?

That’s just stupid; they’re saying it’s a sanctuary law, because it’s a sanctuary law.

"Simply put, Oregon’s sanctuary status declaration directly contravenes federal immigration law and threatens public safety. This has put many sheriffs in the position of choosing whether to violate state or federal law. It’s an untenable position. "

– Billy J. Williams, United States Attorney for the District of Oregon

If anything, they’d be dragged into court for trying to repeal the law. You’re all mixed up RET.


#539

Are you just feigning being that dense? Your Party publicly attacked 3 deputies since 2017 for merely taking a call from ICE and answering a question, your Party attempted to say (like you are in this thread) that this 3 decade old law went much farther than the text declares and not only prohibits using State resources to enforce immigration laws but also bans all communication with the Feds; effectively saying that Oregon law enforcement officials are obligated to PROTECT criminals from the federal immigration laws.

These 3 officers were NOT convicted of this crime because what they did WAS NOT a crime and your Party KNEW THAT.

The point was to publicly accuse the officers and then sell the lie that they were only exonerated because of their ignorance. This means that ALL law enforcement in Oregon now must live with the concern that simply doing their job could make them subject to similar public accusations that while false will still require defending themselves.

So a Law that for 3 decades was not a problem has NOW become a concern to honest law officers who are just doing their job in good Faith.

THAT is why they are now trying to get the law repealed or clarified, they fear becoming victims of the judicial terrorism that your Party inflicts on the innocent CONSTANTLY when you can’t get the actual laws passed that you want.

You can pretend that this is not your strategy all you want, anyone that follows the long, bloody trail of innocent citizens who were humiliated and bankrupted defending themselves against non existent “crimes” will not be fooled for a second by your claims that laws like the Oregon law go infinitely further than their clear text.

You force the innocent to fear the law when they aren’t breaking it and you encourage the guilty to break the laws as much as possible.

I really wish that I could get decent conservatives like these officers in Oregon to STOP trying to protect themselves by fixing laws that are not broken, people like you will never stop ignoring the clear limits described in the law so this is as big a waste of time as those who want to amend the Constitution to make it say what it already says.

The answer is to STOP pretending that the judiciary has integrity and start treating them like the political entity they have bastardized themselves into; “lawyering up” does nothing but lend these jackals credibility that they have long ago exhausted.

You guys are well on your way to destroying states like Oregon but you just can’t wait to do it within the system so you try to get there through intimidating the innocent until they start acting like the laws you want are already on the books.

You aren’t fooling anyone who follows your Party closely, this is your playbook everywhere on every one of your agenda items; I wish someone besides Trump on a national level understood that so we could finally start condemning the guilty instead of the innocent.


#540

That’s my question to you; here we have the ******* DA saying it’s a sanctuary law, that it disrupts their relationship with the Feds, and still you deny it.

Yet you can’t deny it RET, you made a mistake.

Here’s what you did RET: You read the first description of the law you found, one which didn’t convey everything, and you’ve pretended with me that that’s all the law was.

You pretended to know more about their situation than you did, and you pretended the only ones calling this a sanctuary law were leftist.

In doing this you’ve only compounded your original error.

You should have been honest at the start, and admitted what’s clearly obvious; it’s a sanctuary law.

I was expecting you to downplay it for being Oregon, just one small state, who did it in 1987, not this nonsense you’re feeding me where you call Conservatives liars, and deny what words mean.


#541

The text of the law and its first 30 years in use speak for itself, you hang your hat on a nickname for the law that even your leftist media heroes always put in quotation marks.

I made no mistake, and neither did you; everything you have offered since trying to run from being exposed over your Friedman claims was misdirection and evasion.

That, as always, is entirely intentional on your part.


#542
  1. Just like they tried to do to President Trump
  2. Just like they did do for Hillary Clinton.

This pattern is repeated over and over and over, to people great and small in all walks of life. The American political struggle has condensed down to between corruption and integrity, and corruption is winning because their side is in charge of (selectively) enforcing the rules.


#543

From its official description on the day it was passed:

Prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from enforcing immigration laws. Permits law enforcement agency to [contact] exchange information with United States Immigration and Naturalization Service in order to verify immigration status of person arrested for criminal offense or request criminal investigation information about persons named in service records. Specifies that Bureau of Labor and Industries is not law enforcement agency for purposes of prohibition. "

There you have the truth RET. You made a mistake.


#544

Yep, it clearly allows for communication with the Feds.

Yep, you still know the whole fairy tale you told about Friedman was a product of your own desire to find some support for your ideas besides Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders and Cortez.


#545

Exactly, and the Left is not even trying to hide this anymore; they are proud of the innocent they butcher and have no conscience over the evil ones that they let run rampant.


#546

For people charged with a criminal offense, not people simply here illegally.

“arrested for criminal offense”

Sorry RET, but you should have done your homework.


#547

Sure, they cannot communicate if ICE calls them; only if they call the Feds. If the Feds call them they are supposed to slam the phone down and beg forgiveness for saying “hello” when it rang.

It is right there in the law if you read between the lines and ignore the entire context which deals exclusively with State resources.

It is just a coincidence that nobody noticed your sentient understanding for 30 years until Trump got elected and your Party lost all grip on sanity as they realized a crackdown on importing Welfare rats would destroy their last hope of ever gaining any appreciable power.

That is some mighty fine homework you did, good for an A+ in every Leftist indoctrination mill on American soil and probably 70 percent of our current courtrooms.


#548

You’re ignoring context; they can’t talk to the Feds about people who are just here illegally.

They have to be arrested for something else.

Prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from enforcing immigration laws.

Apparently, you don’t take what they’re saying here seriously, and it’s dumbfounding.


#549

So today I get a call from a dispatch service that is looking for 6 trucks to haul 1 load apiece into a local military base, this dispatch service has access to dozens of trucks so I asked why he was calling me?

The reason was he could only find 2 truck drivers that would be qualified to enter the military base; you must be in the United States legally to make deliveries to a military base; I laughed my ass off.

I also told him that I was too busy to bail out his criminal trucking companies who get a pass from my State on all of the draconian regulations that I have to follow at the point of a gun. This was just one small job but it is the first time I have seen the tables turned, normally it is the legal companies that are locked out of work by the illegals who can operate their dilapidated junk with impunity.

Oregon is not a sanctuary state yet, their laws provide no sanctuary from their crimes; they only protect Oregon taxpayers from having to pay for enforcement of laws that Oregons citizens decided in 1986 were not enough of a concern to bother with.

That is the truth, just as your claims about Friedman are false and just as your fairy tale about illegals coming here to work “farm jobs” is false.

The Extreme Left buy your fairy tales so I hope Trump can ship every illegal to the States that give them sanctuary; those States are a lost cause anyway although I suppose they are Utopia to you and your party.


#550

They provide sanctuary from Immigration law. Which to everyone else breathing, is what a sanctuary law means.


#551

They do no such thing, there is not one single Oregon state employee that is required to protect illegal immigrants from the Feds; that is what sanctuary means and that does not exist in Oregon.

It does exist in Sanctuary States, and is in fact the definition of offering sanctuary.

The evidence of this is pretty obvious, your judicial terrorists tried to hang 3 Oregon state deputies for not protecting illegals and all 3 were exonerated.

But I am sure that sooner or later your people will find a judge with the same lack of respect for the law that you have and “find” all of your concoctions are in the existing law.


#552

It’s in official description of the law in the House Calendar from when it was passed.

Prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from enforcing immigration laws.

You need to read these things RET, not ignore them.


#553

That’s grasping for straws RET; the Sheriff in charge of them said this was wrong (before the judge said anything), and that he personally followed up with them to ensure they knew what the law was going forward.


#554

Keep whittling down the context all you want, you guys are doing great favors for my side by sticking with your obvious fabrications no matter what; I am relieved that the days of your party hiding who they are have ended and your media has finally been widely exposed for the indoctrinated hacks they are.

2016 was a good start at cleaning out the GOP, 2020 will mark the beginning of some significant changes to your corrupt, deep state enablers.


#555

That’s what you did.

You claimed this was a reinterpretation of the law, yet here we have a description from 1987 saying it was intended to [prohibit enforcing immigration law.]

Those words I have in brackets? Are all in the description. Would you mind reading it already?