Posted on 08/29/2005 2:26:24 PM PDT by VU4G10
YRABTTT.
Yes, what you say makes sense. I think you're right: "Follow the money."
That court sure can deport, they just ring up the feds in the next office and turn the illegal over. The feds come over, take him into custody, and presto, illegal alien hot footing it back to Mexico courtesy the next deport bus. Simple.
Catch and release means you throw them back in the same pond they came from, not our pond.
Want to stop illegals, fine employers by the day $1000 each. Problem resolved.
good thoughts. we'll keep searching. Your guess that he thought he was safe when he "deeded" to sister makes sense, but I just have no evidence.
But if you are driving to a bank robbery (or even away from), and you are killed by a drunk driving an 18-wheeler, your estate can probably win!
And, again, if you have a defense, you have to present it -- the court won't think it up for you.
"Nethercott may have ordered his attorney to do nothing while he deeded the property to his sister. Possibly trying to make himself judgment proof."
Isn't that fraud?
He enlists the services of the likes of Morris Dees, and the SPLC, to do it for him...
the infowarrior
For the record, I first became alarmed at the high levels of illegal immigration around the time Bush became president, although one has nothing to do with the other, it was just a change in my job. Then I heard about chain migration and other "legal" forms of immigration that ends up bringing in many people who may or may not be a threat to national security and who almost always need public assistance of some sort.
The real problem with immigration has been the courts. It is the courts that make the efforts of the Border Patrol (and any more people the Border Patrol might hire) moot. However, to hear some people tell it now (Tancredo, Buchanan) we must have had some sort of air tight seal from Tijuana to the Gulf of Mexico until just after noon on January 20, 2001.
Aren't these leftist groups cute, the MSM sticks a camera in close and we are supposed to believe they are a big deal.
Yeah. Nethercott must be mellowing.
I suppose "pretty please" is gonna stop them? No. Violent detention stops them, for a little while. Right now that "violence" is being left to the government. The government is doing a breathtakingly BAD job. Pathetic would describe a good day. This county is being lost to communist agenda racists such as La Raza and Mecha and Aztlan.
ACLU is right in the middle of encouraging the illegals and is getting paid TWICE on every lawsuit they file. Once from the true victim and once from our tax dollars. Absolute skum of the earth traitors such as Morris Dees from Southern Poverty Law are helping La Raza and Mecha and Aztlan every way they can. A rope is too good for his kind.
Guess what? We are loosing this country. It WILL be lost if the government does not start full deportation. Or if another faction in the U.S. causes deportation of the illegals.
Sounds like we are mainly on the same page. We need to keep the pressure on our politicians because a lot of them just wish this would go away, and that is not in our best interest, to say the least.
"Here's an oft-repeated scam: A pregnant woman, with no prenatal care, enters the U.S. illegally; gets free medical care for delivering her baby, who, since born in the U.S., is a U.S. citizen and elegible for welfare, which she immediately gets; then she sues the doctors, the hospital, and everything else in sight for malpractice; since she's had no prenatal care, unfavorable results are highly likely. Quite a racket, huh? And guess who pays for ALL this! Thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat's right!"
If I wasn't crying I'd be laughing! On second thought, I would still be crying.
Rule #1 for immigration reform: any child born in this country cannot have citizenship status greater than the highest citizenship staus of one or both of his/her parents.
Think of the billions to be saved in CA alone!
"Rule #1 for immigration reform: any child born in this country cannot have citizenship status greater than the highest citizenship staus of one or both of his/her parents."
That'll require altering the 14th Amendment, which I'm heartily for. Eliminating the blanket birthright citizenship provision and putting in a bottom-minimum set of requirements for citizenship would be a good first step. And considering how overwhelmed the immigration system is, all legals applying for citizenship should have their applications frozen until a super-thourough background check is done on them and loyalty-oaths are resurrected. Also, I'm not in favor of breaking up families. So if one member of an immigrant family breaks the law, the whole family gets deported together. Ending all asylum and refugee programs and repealing their associated laws would also be a good idea.
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.