Posted on 02/23/2005 5:15:25 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez
Please keep those sweet nothings to the parties you attend, not on a FR thread where a serious issue is being discussed.
Then find the convictions - refute that assertion with the facts if you can find them.
I don't think you will. U.S. Attorneys prefer to win cases - losses look bad on their record.
Many of us pay property taxes. All of us have seen our medical bills and insurance go up, so save your 'cut and pastes' for someone else.
I wasn't the one that tried to pass of bad info. :) You defend YOUR assertions.
Btw, "BOT Plantation"? Rofl!
Too late for what? You all to come up with another smear?
If you all are that desperate, I'll give you all a tip, call nancy pelosi's office, I'm sure they will have hundreds on file, considering their daily talking points.
That has nothing to do with immigrant laborers. It's more likely that if all illegal immigrant laborers were deported, the economy would be thrown into a depression and you wouldn't even have a job, much less medical insurance.
sw
Generally, the only people who want to watch film of people really getting their legs blown off as regularly scheduled "entertainment" are those folks who get their rocks off from watching that stuff.
What would likely happen if your proposal went through: the American public would demand that the land mines be removed.
You want to solve the problem? You're going to have to work within three constraints:
1. The Constitution. This rules out measures that require throwing out the requirement for "probable cause" before a cop demands ID. Speaking Spanish is not probable cause.
2. The budget. Beyond a certain point, Americans are not willing to pay for border security--that point being where it either raises taxes or cuts into other services that they want government to provide.
3. The moral sense of the general public. Proposals involving mining the border, turning the border into a free-fire zone, etc. are thus non-starters.
Look, I know Poohbah. He's not kidding about it - and has laid out this case in multiple threads.
Short version, I trust him. You, on the other hand...
Several open-and-shut cases were brought. In one case, the driver's license and social security cards were printed on fax paper. The defense merely stated that he had been duped and deceived by the forged documents.
That case led to an acquittal in 15 minutes. My friend in the US Attorney's office went absolutely ballistic.
Everyone said in the post-mortem that it would've been far more profitable to go after illegal aliens engaged in welfare fraud--except that doing so would annoy the American Federation of Government Employees, who are the second biggest union in the Democrats' corner (the first being the National Educators' Association).
You can't, because they don't.
And I suspect that admitting the truth - that the only thing infringing on our liberties are the President's own proposals (the National ID card being front and center) - would put you in a rather uncomfortable position.
That national ID card was Sensenbrenner's idea - and he threatened to scuttle last year's intelligence bill if he didn't get it voted on this year.
Oops, is that an inconvenient fact?
As for the National Guard, do you want soldiers carrying out law enforcement duties? I don't.
I have no objection to cutting off welfare benefits, but I also want citizens cut off them, too.
Posse Comitatus Act violation right there, because if the federal government's giving the orders, the National Guard is same as the US Army.
If I'm not mistaken, these U.S. Attorneys are judged on conviction percentages.
In other words, a lot of acquittals mean no bonuses, no promotions, and no real good chances at good private-sector jobs down the line.
I am convinced that a few of the FReepers who screech the loudest about illegal aliens getting welfare are angry that they're being expected to share the loot.
Yeah, they are rabble rousers. But they do quite a bit of good. They played an important role in the Grey Davis Recall and they almost got David Dreier thrown out of office with their FireDreier Campaign. Dreier is sure singing a different tune about immigration these days. His Bonner Plan to modernize social security cards and require that they be verified against a database when people are hired might actually do some good if it ever becomes law. It will make it a lot easier to prosecute the employers because it will take away the "the ID looked real to me" excuse.
As for Ken and John's interview, it always comes down to a few questions they refuse to answer about the President's Shamnesty plan:
Once employers are forced to pay taxes and minimum wages on guest workers what will keep them from just hiring a new batch of illegals from the next waive of desperate people?
Why will we suddenly be able to enforce our borders after his plan is in effect if we can't enforce them now?
Why will we be able to enforce the laws against employers after his plan is in effect when we can't enforce them now?
How will you make the guests go home after 3 or 5 years when their visas expire? Or is the REAL plan to let them all stay?
How will it solve the myriad of problems accompanying this massive influx of generally illiterate people who don't speak our language including: failing schools, closing emergency rooms, depressed wages for our own poor and higher taxes for the middle class?
In other words, a lot of acquittals mean no bonuses, no promotions, and no real good chances at good private-sector jobs down the line.
You are absolutely correct. Now, we could start giving bonuses in return for sheer numbers of cases brought against employers--but that is the same as encouraging government employees to do nothing, and we already have plenty of that.
"Of more than 167,000 convictions secured by the federal government in the past decade for immigration and naturalization violations, only 364 were against employers who hired undocumented workers, statistics from the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services show"
This is also included,
"The most visible immigration case mounted against a major employer in recent years ended badly for the federal government. In March, Tyson Foods and several managers of its poultry processing plants were acquitted of charges that they conspired to recruit and smuggle undocumented workers.<'I>"
"Some Florida growers deliberately cede the hiring and management of all farmworkers to contractors. By putting an additional layer of bureaucracy between themselves and an immigration review, these employers can claim they had no knowledge of whether their workers were properly documented."
"Remember how the law works," said Rob Williams, a lawyer who directs the Migrant Farmworkers Justice Project in Florida. "The ID only has to pass the laugh test."
"Congress overhauled the nation's approach to illegal immigration with the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986, calling for sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. But the same law spelled out types of identification (easily obtainable through fraudulent means) that must be accepted by employers and prohibited employers from discriminating against employees based on appearance."
http://are.berkeley.edu/APMP/pubs/i9news/jobsprice060703.html
Note, Tyson got acquitted.
Open-and-shut case, yet the company and managers walked out of court free men (or women). What does that tell you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.