The Truth About Detainers And Related Lies
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
2017-08-01 13:25 by Karl Denninger
in Corruption , 215 references Ignore this thread
The Truth About Detainers And Related Lies
[Comments enabled]  

The latest.....

A Portland man accused of brutally attacking a 65-year-old woman has a history of arrests, at least 20 deportations and was released by local authorities in defiance of a federal immigration hold.


Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) lodged an immigration detainer against Martinez in December 2016, asking local authorities to notify them before releasing Martinez. However, he was released into the community and ICE was not notified.

So in other words ICE knew he was in custody.

But, because they are ****ing lazy, they didn't show up and camp there until he was released, which would have ended with him being arrested on the steps of the jail, he was "released into the community" and allegedly went on to******a 65 year old woman.

For this we blame..... everyone but ICE.

Note that in these cases there is never an allegation that ICE didn't know that the alleged perpetrator was in custody; in fact to issue a detainer they had to know, otherwise how would they be aware of the need or desire to issue one?

No, what's being alleged is that Portland is responsible for ICE's incompetence or unwillingness to sit a federal officer with arresting authority at wherever this guy was and pick him up when Portland is done with him.

In other words ICE IS LAZY -- instead of doing their job they're jacking off while collecting a paycheck.

There is a difference between refusal to proactively cooperate and active concealment.  One is your right, the other is a felony.  I have yet to hear of a jurisdiction that is actively concealing the fact that they have persons in custody; ICE seems to find out about them just fine, and quickly too -- quickly enough to issue their so-called "detainers."

Well, if they can issue a "detainer" they can also issue an agent to the location where said person is and immediately arrest him or her when they are released.

Put the blame where it belongs folks -- this woman was raped because our federal government intentionally, with full knowledge of the fact that this jackass had been deported 20 times while being only 31 years old, was in custody and instead of sending an agent to arrest him they sent an email.

Just like instead of investigating when the FBI was called by a flight simulator owner prior to 9/11 with the information that a bunch of towel-heads were buying time with $100 bills, had prayer mats with them and didn't want to learn how to land they jacked off in their offices and collected their salaries resulting in the death of 3,000 Americans.

Go to responses (registration required to post)
Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
A One-Sentence Bill To Force The Health-Care Issue

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 1 of 2  First12Last
User Info The Truth About Detainers And Related Lies in forum [Market-Ticker]
Posts: 7806
Incept: 2007-09-10

Scottsdale, AZ
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
They had an 8 year vacation under Obama and just like any welfare leech are having a hard time getting into work mode..............
Posts: 2594
Incept: 2008-11-14

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Karl, that about sums it up. How about those who are responsible for the release also serve the time for the crime this guy committed.

IT'S THE SPENDING STUPID The US must become less a government of men, and more a government of LAW.When people lose everything and have nothing left to lose they lose it -Gerald Celente
Posts: 2050
Incept: 2007-08-22

Southern Pines, NC
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
From a presser a couple of days ago (from the start forward a bit):

It seems a problem with the sanctuary cities releasing them without notifying?

Posts: 149426
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
So they claim.

How do they know they have them if they're issuing detainers -- by telepathy?

Look, there's a difference in both fact and law between not proactively calling ICE and telling them they're about to release someone and obstructing ICE from finding out they have someone in custody.

The latter isn't happening or ICE couldn't issue the detainers because they'd have no information on which to issue one!

So we know what's happening here -- ICE knows these people are in custody but rather than camp someone at the facility where they are they expect active effort by the state or local authorities.

There's actually a pretty good federalism argument for the states NOT comply with such a request because it has no legal force -- an outstanding WARRANT, on the other hand, does.

If you're picked up in State #1 and State #2 wants you for something they have to issue a governor's warrant before State #1 releases you. That's a formal arrest warrant. These detainers are not. Why not? Is it that ICE can't go in front of a Federal Judge and get an arrest warrant or is it that they're just too ****ing lazy to either do so or sit on the jail until the person is released then pick them up right then and there?

Winding it down.
Posts: 5387
Incept: 2009-02-28

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Hopefully the bastard is in jail with no bail. I'm not sure deportation works on this guy. But clearly he has been given an entry point.

We used to lease to a Mexican lawyer. He related to me he represented a lot of busted Mexican drug dealers. His recommendation to them was go back to Mexico. They refer to Collin County Texas as colon county, because that is where the courts stick it when convicted. Knowing that, I would not hang around in Texas and Argentina would be my destination, if that was my origin.

I would keep an eye on this Awan case. This doesn't stop at DWS, but involves Weiner, Obama and likely Hillary and the foundation. There were a lot of White House visas issued. There is a lot of criminal activity intentionally let in and out of the country and a lot of it involves drug dealing and smuggling.

If you search the donor list of Priorities USA, if you take the time, you will find several individuals and families gave them $10 million or more to back the witch in 2016. If you want something done, you lobby and donate to Congress. Not many people are worth $10 million and the list of those that can pony it up on a campaign is really short. These people were buying a lot more than legislation.

The people of Portland will do something about this when it begins to look like Chicago. Federal criminal prosecution is rigged. The acting FBI director is owned and operated by Clinton and the DNC. The last 2 might as well have been working for Al Capone 90 years ago. Awan is a massive criminal network that will expose a lot, if Federal Law enforcement does its job. They are hiding something massive. Letting criminal in and out of the country is a big part of it.

The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.---John Kenneth Galbraith
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
People have a lot of misunderstandings about "sanctuary" cities, usually those who don't live in them or near them.

I can't speak on every individual city, but Los Angeles I have some idea about, and since that's one of the poster-children for it it'll be a good example.

Cities become "sanctuary" cities at the request of law enforcement. Now, politicians can and sometimes do spin it into another direction, but the fact remains, that for the most part being a "sanctuary" city IS about law enforcement.

Because local government's have to deal with the consequences of illegal immigration, they tried deportation back in the 1960s and 70s and it failed miserably.

Then in 1979 that Los Angeles became a "sanctuary" city when the Los Angeles Police Department under Darryl Gates adopted 'special order 40.' Special order 40 says in regards to this issue: Officers shall not initiate police action with the objective of discovering the alien status of a person and Officers shall not arrest nor book persons for violation of title 8, section 1325 of the United States Immigration code (Illegal Entry).

Darryl Gates has been called a lot of things, being a liberal was never one of them. Gates did this so he could secure witnesses for crimes. This was so witnesses would not be asked or required to show their citizenship status so they would come forward and possibly appear in court. However, upon the arrest of anyone a background search is ran and all relevant authorities are notified (and they're notified of their release date). Whether that's a warrant from another state, citizenship status, etc.

What the LAPD won't do is hold someone beyond their release date for low level crime (that means the suspect has violated a city ordinance and they're not wanted for felonies elsewhere). And they won't hold someone past their release date for ICE (for low level crimes). The LAPD no longer turns over illegal immigrants on low level crimes or if their deportation would be past their release date.

Why? Just to cite a couple of recent federal court ruling:

In 2014 a federal court ruling found an Oregon county was liable for damages after holding an inmate beyond her release date so she could be transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Miranda-Olivares v. Clackamas County, and see here:

In September, a federal judge in Chicago ordered immigration enforcement authorities in Illinois and five nearby states to stop asking local law enforcement agencies to detain suspects who may be in the country illegally, stating that the practice was unconstitutional.

Eventually not inquiring into citizenship status became mandated for all city (and later county) works so illegal immigrants can seek health care. Why? So we don't have an outbreak of TB and other epidemics. Also, the city, counties and state were weary of breaking up families and then leading to a dislocation that becomes the local government's problem.

"Sanctuary" city policies have always been about the Federal Government's attempt to cost shift onto state and local government. So the city of Los Angeles is somehow suppose to find the resources to combat illegal immigration on a large scale or allow itself to be turned into a dump by not trying to prevent gang violence (LAPD not initiating based on citizenship status) or risking epidemics or having more dislocated people either flooding the social services or wandering the streets.

Only the federal government has the resources and legal authority to enforce illegal immigration and for the most part, it needs to be stopped at the boarder or else you risk massive 4th Amendment right violations under the guise of checking citizenship status. And for all of Trump's bluster, he hasn't done anything but continue to try to make immigration enforcement a local government responsibility.
Posts: 149426
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
No, it does not have to be stopped at the border. It certainly SHOULD be, but no, it doesn't have to stop there.

HOWEVER, if the local folks grab someone for a given offense, ICE is PERFECTLY within the law to show up wherever that person is and arrest them.

If a local authority DOES NOT properly check for wants/warrants/etc -- that is, they don't "run the jacket" of someone suspected (or known!) to be an illegal on purpose, THEN they would be FULLY liable, under the law, for what comes next. They'd also quite-possibly be in violation of federal anti-human trafficking laws THEMSELVES.

They're not doing that, however. It's ICE that's refusing to show up and take the person into custody.

Winding it down.

Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Yes, that's the problem exactly, ICE needs to physically show up and take custody before their release date and place them in a federal facility. With computers now, it's automatically reported to ICE because the city or county want to protect themselves from liability (and save man power in paper work). When it was the INS they never showed up either. What the federal government wanted was for local authorities to transport an illegal immigrant to a federal facility, and without reimburstment.

I would agree that it doesn't have to be stopped at the boarder, but it's never been implemented on any large scale of the Federal authorities showing up for pick up. So, I don't know if it'll ever be implemented in practice. It's too easy for the Federal government to shift the blame here onto local governments because the local government does have the person in custody. But all the real world practical problems are passed over and the federal government then simply points out who had custody.

So, I'm not disagreeing, I want to more elaborate a local position.

The Federal government plays the same game with its "request" to be notified before release, but the Federal government is informed exactly what the suspect is being held for and for how long on the initial reporting. So then the Federal government says, well, we were never informed of the suspect being released. But what the Federal government literally means is they weren't informed on the day of release. So they play this game so the federal authorities don't have to expend the resources, and Federal politicians can play the game of spinning it both ways on illegal immigration.

There's over 200 sanctuary cities in the US, so of course each city will have its own agendas for doing what it does, but being a sanctuary city gets convoluted because there's multiple reasons for becoming one, but the pro-illegal immigration groups are the ones that are given the voice by "conservative" and "liberal" news agencies when the problem is much more complicated for local governments.

What Trump, through Sessions, is demanding, is that sanctuary cities have to help find and deport illegal immigrants. So then local authorities have to become the initiating agency and as well as the holding agency (presumably beyond their release date, of course assuming the suspect is in violation of a low-level violation). Sessions might argue that immigration policies have to be enforced through traffic stops, but then we're back to the problem Chief Gates faced, or we're back in court over detainment over low-level violations.

It's the same game, and so far Trump doesn't appear like he's going to do anything of any practical consequence at the Federal level in regards to illegal immigration, but then no President or Congressional body in recent history has done much of anything.

Then the real dilemma is around the "suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant. On suspicion, then no, the LAPD will not initiate contact on that alone (this is public policy, but in practice of course the LAPD will invoke suspicion of illegal status when it suits them).

So, then, the problem is, how do they objectively establish "suspicion" of being an illegal immigrant just on that alone, without risk being sued over discrimination or 4th Amendment violation. This is one of the issues people at the local level have been arguing for is that making immigration enforcement a local issue opens up more problems than it solves because I could "suspect" anyone of not having legal status (if it's not a blanket policy then you couldn't avoid discrimination) and you invite 4th Amendment violations--which these violation of rights would be thrust upon the residents of the cities being impacted by illegal immigration (and in practice, even if it could be implemented, it once the constitutional violation is opened up, it never stays contained).

But in practice, law enforcement will run a check on anyone, they can always find a reason to do so (maybe it won't always hold up, but most of the time they can find something), but they're not going to cite detainment or initiating contact on "suspicion" of citizenship status.

It really becomes a vicious circle for local and state governments. There are many groups who support being a sanctuary city for various reasons, just one of the reasons that's not commonly cited are the groups that support being a sanctuary city as a practical response in the face of a flood of illegal immigration. However, by enacting these policies it of course attracts more illegal immigrants, so it feeds off of itself. The only way this circle can be broken is by the federal government.

In 1994, California voters passed proposition 187, 58.93% vs 41.07% with a 60% turn out. This would establish a state-run citizenship screening system and prohibit illegal aliens from using non-emergency health care, public education, and other services in the State of California. Federal district court ruled it unconstitutional. In November 1997, Judge Pfaelzer found the law to be unconstitutional on the basis that it infringed on the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration.

Later Governor Gray Davis halted state appeals. There were pros and cons of enacting it, whether a group was pro or con illegal immigration (essentially on the practicality of its implementation and consequences--for example, there was a fear of the spread of TB by some groups). Bill Clinton at the time came through campaigning against it saying it interfered with Federal immigration policies (of course that garbage NAFTA was passed ten months earlier).

The Federal government has always abandoned local governments in enforcing illegal immigration, at least with California going back to the Reagan Administration. The Reagan Administration was working on more "globalized" trade which culminated in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and then the Uruguay Round: 198694. And of course this led into NAFTA, WTO, friendly "trade" with China, etc.

Anytime California tried to do something, the federal government always came around saying how these policies would interfere with immigration policy. People in California, for the most part, aren't anti immigration, but when it comes to illegal immigration that's another story because there's issue from obeying the law, health issues, economic issues, constitutional issues, etc. It's because when the Federal government goes to sell us out on all of these foreign trade agreements, those other countries don't want illegal immigration enforced because they can export their poor to us (especially the South American and Asian countries because California is main entry point for those two regions).

Of course there's people and groups that support illegal immigration (or undocumentation, whatever you want to call it) because they're okay with it, or they don't care, or they hold sympathetic ideas (and sympathy causes more problems than it solves), or they consider themselves citizens of the world, etc. but they're not the only voice when it comes to why or how or should a city becomes a "sanctuary city. More times than not, that role was thrust upon a city. The buy local movement was something that originated in California, which is a reaction to the citizen of the world concept. It should be interesting because the buy local and citizen of the world concept are both ideals held by the left, which obviously there's a contradiction that will work itself out in some fashion.

On a local and state level, just about every policy has been tried, and it's either shot down by the courts (for good or bad), the federal government (for good or bad), or it simply doesn't work in practical implementation. For the most part, what people see in California, are the only policies left to enact.

This has always been a federal government problem dumping it in policy and in rhetoric on local and state governments.

Reason: clarification, in first paragraph
Posts: 25
Incept: 2008-11-20

New Hampshire
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
20 deportations? Good grief! Why wasn't he shot on sight after being caught following the third deportation and a box of his ashes catapulted over the border back to his native country?!? As "inhumane" as it may sound, that's the only message these clowns understand. And as for law enforcement, there is no rule of law in the US any longer so I don't see any of this stopping short of the citizens taking matters into their own hands. But I'm more likely to survive pissing on a live high voltage transformer than seeing that ever happen.
Posts: 864
Incept: 2008-12-09

Spokane WA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
>>The people of Portland will do something about this when it begins to look like Chicago. >>

What? No. I don't think they will. There aren't enough balls left in that county to fill a pint glass.

RE: ****cago, the only thing that will clean that up will be to mandate open carry for all adults... or to have NK take it off the map.
Posts: 53
Incept: 2008-10-06

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Nonsensical has some good points, but after sitting through a federal grand jury stint, I want to offer another data point: the process and paperwork to detain and deport within the federal judiciary is much longer than laypeople think. This is for those illegals who committed felonies; they were prioritized, and those caught on misdemeanors were acknowledged to be mostly let go because the system simply cannot handle the volume. Some pieces of the process were turned over to administrative judiciaries, but even that is insufficient to handle the volume. We rubber-stamped the indictments as fast as they could be read aloud by the Assistant U.S. Attorneys, and they were still behind on several days, the influx was so great. ICE is overwhelmed; they have to perform a ridiculous amount of background checking on each individual to build a deportation case, it isn't enough to simply know they illegally entered the nation before.

Either we pour an absurd amount of staffing into deportation activities in the judiciary, or we change the rules (with potentially far-reaching, undesirable ramifications). Something along the lines of gather DNA from each deportee and quickly and accurately scan DNA on all detained suspects, and use a streamlined "no due process" deportation process if the DNA match rises above some acceptable level. I don't see this situation changing for the better with the status quo, though.

Documentation checking to prevent illegal immigrant hiring at the employer level is already on the law books, and the temporary reversal of illegal immigration in the aftermath of 2008 shows that economic disincentives definitely do work. However, the E-Verify system is voluntary, and thus it is easy to game the system with fraudulent documents. There are big adverse economic impacts to mandating nationwide enforcement through E-Verify, so it is a double-edged sword going down that path, making it tough to pass legislation; there are some powerful and deep-pocketed interests lined up against that kind of enforcement. Personal opinion: requiring all employers to use E-Verify would be more effective than a physical wall, people respond to incentives.
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
People, what do you want or expect the people of Oregon to do? Realistically, that is.

States and cities have tried in the past to defend themselves and there either not the resources or legality to do it. Constitutionally the federal government does control immigration policy so it's not a states' rights issue, and it's absurd to rip up the Constitution when things don't go your way.

Conservatives outside of California scoff that California allows illegal immigrants social services, health care and education. But California tried everything else and couldn't do it.

So at some point California is stuck with 2.5 million illegal immigrants an they're not going away and there's nothing more the state and cities can do. So at that point, it's about integration and trying to prevent massive slum cities. Hopefully epidemics can be prevented as they'll seek health care. Hopefully they'll integrate and be employable if they're educated. And so on. It's the only option left for impacted states and cities.

We've been handed a bad deal, yet, many here keep saying until the people of so and so wake up, in this case Oregon, and California of course is the poster child. But it's YOU that's being conned.

Stopping illegal immigration IS a federal responsibility. The implementation and enforcement of illegal immigration begins at the negotiation table with foreign countries, at the boarders, and in federal taxes. If this was aggressively enforced, then states and cities would have the resources to handle what trickles in. But 2.5 million people?!

The key part to Karl's initial post was: "we blame everyone else...but the ICE."

Right when they began pursuing globalization and outsourcing aggressively the problems really went into overdrive. There were problems before, but they got really bad.

Manufacturing jobs, and supporting jobs (the people who ran little diners feeding those people or little mom and pop shops) and now tech jobs were all outsourced into countries where wage and environmental arbitrage could be taken advantage of and where the government of those countries spent massive amounts of money in supporting their own industry (on real free trade, without government intervention, no Chinese company is probably profitable, even for there).

Then to secure those deals with those countries, those foreign countries dumped their poor over to here. And then states and cities located at the entry points had to attempt to deal with it.

The problem is at the federal level and it's tied into these "trade" deals with foreign countries where they and their crony capitalists (since these people probably couldn't compete in a real free market capitalism) can make a fortune at the expense of everyone else (even for the most part the majority of people in those foreign countries as well).

It's the same thing with the gutting of the interior and southern states who really got hit hard by these "free trade" treaties (not the only ones of course). The problem is beyond the ability of any one state.

And because the federal government is in its rights and/or they don't enforce their own policies it's at that level where responsibility lies in.

So it's not until the people of Oregon wake up, or the people of California, or the people of Nebraska, or the people of Texas, or the people of North Carolina, and so on, it's until the people of the United States wake up and get the federal government to either do its job or enact sane policies that don't sell the citizen body out.

There's a lot of days where I wonder why we haven't burned everything down, the people of China, Vietnam, Mexico, the United States, and so on. Who other than a few cronies have benefited from these globalization policies?
Posts: 412
Incept: 2015-05-03

Vancouver WA
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
ICE "they are ****ing lazy," HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Of course they are, please let me know which law enforcement group isn't ****ing lazy....Well that does not include SCC, they like to look at porn which can lead to self ****ing. We also have TSA, they like to feel up young children and old folks, so they like to **** too and the Secret Service they like their prostitutes and well that is just ****ing for the sake of ****ing and let us not forget about the regular police who like to write tickets for all kinds of things and in the end they like to **** us all, unless you are a politician.

ICE is ****ing lazy....YEA!!!!!

There are a lot of posters on Ticker Form from the Portland area, so they may be able to give better answers then myself. I only like to cross the bridge to when I buy big ticket items, so I can save 9% by not paying taxes.

Portland, is inviting homeless people into their city, which is causing a HUGE problem, how do the city leaders plan on solving this? Raise Taxes.

Portland has allowed protestors to run wild and cause damage to personal property, they have allowed the protestors to shut down roads. My son was on I-5 going to Beaverton one night when they started to block traffic. He honked his horn, told them to get out of his way and kept going....Surprisingly they moved. He got an Atta Boy from me :)

Oregon allows illegals to get drivers licenses and not only that they will now allow people to not need to state their gender on their drivers license.

In many cases illegals have more rights than naturalized and or citizens who are born here.

Sure ICE is ****ing lazy, but isn't that part of the job description to be a cop?

Or politician
Posts: 715
Incept: 2012-12-05

Huntsville, AL
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Yeah, @ALL, I've just been cleaning and getting ready for service my AR-15 tonight. It looks like a really clear day coming to North Alabama tomorrow, and I want to fire 200 or so rounds of brass-case (not Russian steelcase) downrange tomorrow. Got the earplugs; got the Mickey-Mouse ears, so hearing won't be hurt too much.

About 30 years ago a program manager at my employer (Sperry Systems Management) "managed" to get a few "Little Plastic Russian" targets delivered to our target training range... at Fort Hood and at Fort Riley. Some of us (not me) received those targets as special favors, I guess. I received none of them, but that's okay.

(I've been reading Kazan's Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy [1991] the last couple of days. Those old Greeks were largely some pretty smart doods...)

Posts: 87
Incept: 2015-08-12

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
the problem comes from the leaders like DiBlasio, who won't allow the police to arrest naked panhandlers because they might be discovered to be illegal immigrants and then deported.

He would hurt his state's tourism to keep the illegals in-because they vote for democrats. Why do you think they got rid of ID for voting in many states? We should have fingerprint voting-nobody would vote twice or under a false ID.
Posts: 290
Incept: 2009-08-24

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
"Just like instead of investigating when the FBI was called by a flight simulator owner prior to 9/11 with the information that a bunch of towel-heads were buying time with $100 bills, had prayer mats with them and didn't want to learn how to land they jacked off in their offices and collected their salaries resulting in the death of 3,000 Americans."

And many of them received promotions.

If that's not a gigantic motherf*****g red flag, I don't know what is.

Posts: 95
Incept: 2017-06-27

New York City
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Nonsensical thank you for your excellent points and analysis. you truly understand what is involved and highlight the fact that this has been going on in its current form for a lot longer than everyone remembers. this started to hit us really hard in the NY Metro area in the 1980's where a lot of subsistence and lower wage jobs were taken and held up to the present time. as someone who needed those jobs, it was the employers not having to pay the workman's comp, unemployment insurance and do withholding for taxes. people like me were more than willing to work for the wage offered and do the work well. it also killed a lot of honest business owners who could not compete with two sets of rules. the adaptation ripped like a wildfire through many industries in key ways. every low level labor business started offering discounts to customers who paid in cash, such as no taxes charged where required, the wholesalers including large ones, jumped right in, this provided the cash to pay the workers. some businesses would keep one person on the unemployment system or workman's comp to cover themselves. what never made sense is that the state and federal taxation and regulatory agencies could easily use the same data metrics profiling software to see that a business with a certain gross or just a particular industry did not show adequate employees to function, especially restaurants as their sales converted more and more to electronic money. these metrics have been used for decades to find tax cheating by individuals and businesses, why not here.

The solution to the problem is actually very easy. Ok, we accept that the feds do not have the resources and that deporting people is pissing in the wind. we have decided to not go after businesses for whatever reason at the fed and state and local level, ok. well here is what we do at the fed level since the state cannot do this legally and the feds are the responsible ones. anything that is federally regulated or subject to receiving federal funds is fair game. banks can be required to only do business with legal residents only when those residents are of legal status, lose you green card or visa, whatever, account locked. no federal financial aid of any type can be issued unless the recipient can prove citizenship. this applies to hospitals and welfare since they rely on federal funds. banking law can even block credit card issuance. no housing assistance that states dole out to these people since it gets federal funds. social services and workers cannot help because I know that they must document their work and there is federal reporting. what you do is squeeze so tight anything that is linked to federal which is easy since the feds redistribute so much to the states. if there is a federal grant to update some DMV computer system, it cannot be used to service non-citizens, even charities that are really pretend charities that rely on federal grants can be held to this standard. the feds have slowly moved into so much state and local over the past five decades, it is time to turn this on them. Trump could start this process in a minute and there is nothing that anyone can do to stop it.

Once you do this, you will delegitimize illegals to such an extent that they will be so miserable that they will not come here. additionally it will also choke out most of the white Mexicans, eastern Europeans, who play the same games and make us lose opportunities also. you might have to address the whole place of birth **** for the illegals' kids, but this will be a great start.

i personally know Mexicans and South American guys who have played by our rules for a long time. They have seasonal jobs here with full visa status, pay the taxes and do not take from our system. They have shown me what the money does when it gets sent back home. they build houses that rival our and live like barons in many cases. Not all of course, but they also resent those who are not playing by the rules and ruining it for everyone. they get undercut too.

There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
Posts: 20
Incept: 2017-04-03

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Mangymutt has it right - cops are lazy. Cops also have that "brotherhood" thing going to keep each other in line so even if a cop wanted to really do his job he'd be gotten rid of.

I lived next door to a city cop. He worked third shift by sitting on a side street in our neighborhood and keeping an eye on his house all night. He responded to calls only enough to keep his job. He also told stories about the roid-rage SWAT guy up the street and said they were all that way. Had a friend get in the middle of a rolling ghetto gun battle and the 911 operator ask him what he was doing in that neighborhood (he was buying food from a restaurant he loved) and she refused to dispatch a cop.

Sounds like ICE on down to my local cop all sit on their butts except when they want them kissed, pass out tickets when they're told to and hide out waiting to collect their pension the minute they're eligible.

I never worked a job where I could always blame problems on someone else. I wonder what that would feel like? Somehow I just don't think I could do it.
Posts: 8564
Incept: 2007-09-10

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Not sure how I missed this, I guess it is pretty easy as a constant stream of **** hits the fan, things go by pretty fast these days.

Not only are ICE agents letting know illegal predators walk our streets, our own FBI are setting us up to get slaughtered.

You remember that Draw Mohammad Contest in Garland Texas******be upon him?

Well the FBI knew those guys were coming and did nothing to stop it. You got two know Muslim peace loving Jhihadis being watched by the FBI. And an undercover FBI agent who was following those guys was directly behind them.

The FBI agent took ****ing pictures when those guys opened fire and then fled the scene! What the ****ing ****, FBI new two Jihadist were heading to a target rich environment and did absolutely nothing!

"The man hes talking about was a special agent of the FBI, working undercover posing as an Islamic radical. The government sent attorney Dan Maynard 60 pages of declassified encrypted messages between the agent and Elton Simpson and argued Tear up Texas was not an incitement. But Simpsons response was incriminating, referring to the attack against cartoonists at the French magazine Charlie Hebdo: bro, you dont have to say that... He wrote you know what happened in Paris so that goes without saying. No need to be direct.

But it turns out the undercover agent did more than just communicate online with Elton Simpson. In an affidavit filed in another case the government disclosed that the FBI undercover agent had actually traveled to Garland, Texas, and was present at the event.

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.
George Orwell

Posts: 95
Incept: 2017-06-27

New York City
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Ginnie "I never worked a job where I could always blame problems on someone else. I wonder what that would feel like? Somehow I just don't think I could do it."

Ditto here, but at my age one begins to wonder how stupid people like us are. Watching my city worker neighbors throughout the years work as little as possible, openly state how they hang out at work doing everything but, be overpaid, great benefits and have the money for everything on our dime since they do not have to save. Federal are the same deal. Sure there are positions where people work there asses off, but they think like us.

Point about this whole issue is that it is not some conspiracy to allow illegals into the country or any of the other reasons cited. It is that most people do not realize what the federal government is. it is a giant budget with disparate interests that often compete with each other and function under some ancient rules and modern addendums to said rules. As an entity they just do not care about many issues unless there is a clear and present benefit to one of their satellite organizations. notice that i did not say danger. threat assessment is only to the extent that there would be political fallout without, war being the obvious example. Cases of the public safety must get their attention in that there is enough interest that the sub-organization(s) see enough political reason to do something. there is no taxpayer revolt by the W-2 club over businesses that cheat the system. there is no revolt that a politician can hang his hat on regarding the illegals. do not fool yourself, a lot of people like things just as they are at the shlub level and above. Neil Postman says it best how our attention has been distracted to the point of the mono second, so the only threats the public cares about are the immediate or sudden salient negative stimuli such as getting your car stolen or violent crime, the evening news. not many have the care or energy or ability to get systematically long term worked up about an issue, so the powers that be do not care. consequently the special interests groups get the govt attention as they deliver the political currency. this is why things seem like a conspiracy when the conspiracy happens AFTER the problem gets of large magnitude.

There are two ways to be rich: One is by acquiring much, and the other is by desiring little.
Posts: 21
Incept: 2017-04-29

DeKalb, Illinois
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
One of the best ways to increase both efficiency and effectiveness is adopting specialization. So, the more things you give any organization to do, particularly in government, the less likely it is that each additional task, or even the others will be done well.

Which when added to Robert Michels' Iron Law of Oligarchy explains a lot of stupidity in any large organization.
Posts: 87
Incept: 2015-08-12

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
eli, in case you forget, those terrorists were killed by the police.

anybody with a brain knew that some crazy ass Muslim terrorist would be there.
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Hello @Whitehat.

The way I see it the problems are structural and from multiple causes, so I don't think any one problem can be solved in isolation. So there will be massive dislocations and there needs to be a coordinated effort. So I'm skeptical of the solution you propose, and for a a lot of reasons (from there being state banks to even from your proposal undermining State issued identifications, which I don't see the states going for, and then corporations acting as governmental agencies and data collection--Silicon Valley is trying to replace any and all governmental functions they can, especially in foreign policy).

California understandably doesn't want to end up instantly with 2.5 million refugee-like people. That would be an unmitigated disaster. To put it into perspective, only 3 cities in the US even have a population over 2.5 million. That's just California. It's be worse elsewhere, especially the further from the boarder. This would only compel state and local governments to enact MORE social aide in trying to prevent an outright collapse.

Also, what are the illegal immigrants going to go back to? Just for this conversation we could say there's really only two groups of illegal immigrants, at least in terms of Mexicans. The older generation, those that have been here 15 or more years do tie their identity to the US, but the more recent wave, less than 5 years don't. They actually hold a hostile view of the US and the white class, and that's because they see the source of many of Mexico's problems being caused or supported by the US. And now they're here as a second class citizen trying to eek out a living. So they're caught in this world, and they see the cause of it being US foreign policy.

I'm not arguing whether it's true or false, because in any case there's a real problem.

Just looking at one piece of policy in NAFTA has been a complete disaster for the US and Mexico, except for a handful of cronies. These two economies should have never been completely opened up to each other to begin with.

But fundamentally the problem stems from the people of the United States. Everything points to as a whole it's exhausted and has run its course, at least for now. And then there's this view point that somehow the "government" is a separate entity from the citizen body. This is a debilitating view point, I think.

I know most will disagree with this, but this is the Age of Libertarianism. I know people will say it's not real libertarianism, just as the communist kept claiming that none of the other communist attempts were real communism. For the most part, the middle age billionaires, mainly from tech, are all self proclaimed Libertarians. As a matter of fact, I know few people in tech that are not libertarians.

Here's the thing with ALL ideaologies: they have weaknesses. And once it becomes the dominate beliefs, those weaknesses become exasperated and amplified. The obvious one with Libertarianism is it creates a power vacuum and it breaks down shared identity. Libertarianism made sense and was a good counter balance in the 1930-50s, but as it becomes more dominate it itself needs a counterbalance.

The Constitution recognizes the value of having antipodes, even if the people don't.

The buck starts and stops with the citizen body. We are the government ultimately, and governmental officials can be fired.

But this can all get exasperating at time to discuss.

California should conduct its own Fast and Furious, except in this case we'll lose track of entire national guard arsenal and somehow it will end up in the hands of the Mexican people so they can throw out their corrupt government and drug cartels and I don't know, somehow inspire people in the US. But then, I woke up.
Posts: 4149
Incept: 2011-04-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
As a matter of fact, I know few people in tech that are not libertarians.

I bet you're wrong here. I bet almost all of them will at some point want to extract something from someone else at the point of the government gun. Especially the ones that have kids.

For the most part, the middle age billionaires, mainly from tech, are all self proclaimed Libertarians.

Just because they proclaim it, doesn't make it so.
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 1 of 2  First12Last