Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GOP Chiefs Don't Want Immigrants Charged [losing their spine - Hastert, Frist...]
Yahoo ^

Posted on 04/11/2006 4:43:58 PM PDT by Sub-Driver

GOP Chiefs Don't Want Immigrants Charged

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent 29 minutes ago

The two top Republicans in Congress, confronted with internal party divisions as well as large public demonstrations, said Tuesday they intend to pass immigration legislation that does not subject illegal aliens to prosecution as felons.

A written statement by Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, did not say whether they would seek legislation subjecting illegal immigrants to misdemeanor prosecution or possibly a civil penalty such as a fine.

"It remains our intent to produce a strong border security bill that will not make unlawful presence in the United States a felony," the two men said. An estimated 11 million men, women and children are in the United States illegally.

The Republican-controlled House passed legislation late last year that is generally limited to border security measures. It makes illegal immigrants subject to felony prosecution.

Senate efforts to write a broader bill — covering border security, a guest worker program and a path to citizenship for many of the 11 million in the country illegally — are gridlocked with lawmakers on a two-week vacation.

Frist has said he intends to bring the issue back to the Senate floor, although he stopped short of a flat commitment and the prospects for passage of an election-year immigration bill are uncertain.

The late-afternoon statement by the top GOP leaders in both houses came after days of large street demonstrations by protestors opposed to criminal penalties for illegal immigrants.

Additionally, in a Washington Post-ABC News poll published during the day, only 20 percent of those questioned said they favored declaring illegal immigrants to be felons

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; aliens; coddlingillegals; firefirst; firefrist; firehastert; folded; forcheaplabor; frist; hastert; screwedbytherinos; sellingoutamerica; soldoutcheap
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-166 next last
To: Don Joe

you can't "declare" someone a felon - they have to be charged and convicted to obtain that label.


41 posted on 04/11/2006 5:22:10 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Vlad
I hope the GOP enjoys its minority status come January.

They are planning on the usual battle plan (against "the base") -- go, "Boo!", and then say, "What are you gonna do, elect Hillary?"

They consider our votes OWNED, and plan on spooking us into once again scurrying down to the polling stations, to once again grit our teeth and "vote for the lesser of two evils."

42 posted on 04/11/2006 5:23:43 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

To: oceanview

The point I was making isn't the categorization of illegals as felons, which by itself is a good thing, to be sure - the point is that is also criminalizes those who assist them. This, combined with other statutes already on the books cuts off support provided by US citizens who, for various reasons, find it useful or profitable to aid and abet these illegals in their efforts to remain here illegally.


44 posted on 04/11/2006 5:24:41 PM PDT by surely_you_jest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
"I think this is happening on a small scale. but my understanding is that cops don't want to do this work."

I watched a House Committee hearing the other night.

On this subject, it turned out that the local jurisdictions notified the Feds about convicted felons, about to complete their sentences.

It was the Feds that (claim) to not have the resources (or the interest?) to deport them all.

It is a vicious circle. Locals blame Feds. Feds claim to lack resources.

Eventually the locals don't want to get involved, so they steer clear of immigration status issues, when possible.

45 posted on 04/11/2006 5:25:25 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The only way this is going to happen is to task city and state police officers to arrest and identify them. If someone who has committed a crime is shown to be illegal, then he/she may be prosecuted for the crime/deported. I think this is happening on a small scale. but my understanding is that cops don't want to do this work.

The reason they don't want to do it is because a) the individual officer has to be available to the ICE personnel when they come to pick up the perp. That often means the officer has to hang around the station rather than be out doing his job, or, worse, have to come in after his shift is over and b) most local officers don't view apprehending illegals as part of their job.

46 posted on 04/11/2006 5:25:45 PM PDT by sinkspur (Things are about to happen that will answer all your questions and solve all your problems.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe
Why the hell are we Americans not taking a few days off, even at the risk of loosing our job, to have an ARMED march on Washington! Not with the intent of doing violence, but as a show of outrage over this issue! Everyone knows amnesty will be the literal death of this country and we are all sitting around saying "woe is me". This sure as hell isn't the way our ancestors of even 75 years ago would have dealt with this. I keep trying to remember why the founders put the second amendment in the constitution.
47 posted on 04/11/2006 5:27:51 PM PDT by Boiling point (If God had not meant for man to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: surely_you_jest

we need to go after those who employ them. that's all we need to worry about. we don't need to start targeting charities, churches, etc. it simply gives the media an opportunity to demonize and spin this against us. there aren't going to be any SWAT teams busting into a church to round up people anyway, so why bother?


48 posted on 04/11/2006 5:30:23 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: oceanview; surely_you_jest
so what? we aren't going to forcibly deport 12 million people through the law enforcement process - get over it.

You are playing the "All or Nothing" game.

Slick, but no cigar.

It's not "12 million tomorrow, or NONE, EVER".

Can't deport all 12 million at once? Then do it the same way they CAME here -- a few thousand at a time.

Even if the cops only nab ONE OUT OF TEN, instead of giving them ALL a pass, as is done now, the OTHER NINE will be crapping their pantaloons worrying about when THEY get the brass ring in the nose.

Then, you ENFORCE the law against employers hiring them.

Finally, you offer a $1,000 reward, cash money, tax-free, to any CITIZEN who turns in an employer who hires them. Add an extra $100 to the reward for each one he's nabbed with.

I guaran-f'n-tee you the "problem" will solve ITSELF, faster than you can say "where'd they go?"

It's not a question of "how" -- the problem is NOT difficult to solve.

It is a question of WILL -- and, of AGENDA.

Our Glorious Leaders do NOT want to lose the New Plantation Workers.

49 posted on 04/11/2006 5:31:06 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
The only way this is going to happen is to task city and state police officers to arrest and identify them

The instant someone walks into the Official United States Government Ally-Ally In Come Free station with "reasonable inference of employment" as it is being termed, they will have made a sworn statement to the federal government that they have been engaged in a continuing federal crime - employment for in the requisite period.

A federal officer is malfeasant if they don't refer suspicion of the State level crimes implied by the admitted record. Translation: for the non-Federal level stuff, the feds are supposed to call the cops.

It's true that each case may have some, not all, of the crimes I mentioned. But typically they do.

So will it be a general amnesty where everyone is aware that they did it, and they just get off with a shrug?

A woman in Phoenix quoted on ABC radio ( ! ) yesterday had it right (a Mrs. Marquez, who was described as a citizen): "What about all the poor people in Mexico who are so afraid of breaking American laws that they didn't come here illegally? The people who came here missed some basic things that you learn in Kindergarten, like getting in line" - maybe not the exact quote, but close. I was amazed to hear that on ABC...

So I ask you....if the people who are here were the ones who didn't care about breaking U.S. laws, then what does that say about them? I think we have a word for such folks...

50 posted on 04/11/2006 5:31:16 PM PDT by Regulator (Starts with a capital "C")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: meagereater

The truth hurts, eh, ese?


51 posted on 04/11/2006 5:32:18 PM PDT by Clemenza (Bayonne L.A.M.F.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
I don't think they could pass a law that would suddenly turn every illegal already here into a felon.

That would be an ex-post-facto law which is expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

LOL!

They've been passing "retroactive" laws with impunity for the past several years. I guess "retroactive" doesn't mean "ex-post-facto" in our BS-driven system.

Anyway, to sooth your achin' nerves, let's say OK, fine, can't do that (even though they can). So, they pass a law that says that STAYING here ILLEGALLY is a felony.

Happy now?

52 posted on 04/11/2006 5:33:18 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

Yes, I am quite the sarcastic SOB, LOL! :)


53 posted on 04/11/2006 5:34:12 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Yes, we do need to go after those who employ them. The fact that charities, churches, etc, are also committing a criminal act which would potentially subject them to prosecution is also a good thing. It does not mean that a particular US Attorney would see fit to prosecute under a particular set of facts.

But charities, and church groups are not immune from the operation of the law. Are we, or are we not, a nation of laws? Is a religious group, or an organization with a tax exemption as a charity ipso facto immune from violating the a criminal law? I'll answer my own question - no, they are not. Nor should they be.


54 posted on 04/11/2006 5:35:02 PM PDT by surely_you_jest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
you can't "declare" someone a felon - they have to be charged and convicted to obtain that label.

Oh good Lord, what are you a lawyer, or Just Another Internet Nitpicker?

OK, let me spell it out for you -- you declare their CRIME to be a felony.

Now click on my name, and read Item # 1!

55 posted on 04/11/2006 5:36:50 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

" The Senate version makes the crime a misdemeanor,..."

This is not going to pacify the amnesty crowd. I doubt most illegals would know the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor .
The Democrats will keep hawking the " crime " angle to scare their illegal constituents -regardless of any toothless provisions the clueless Republicans add.
Asking law breakers to please learn to speak English and brush after every meal is insulting to the rest of us poor schmucks who are actually dumb enough to abide by the laws of the US.
Anything short of the red carpet is unacceptable to the Democrats and their base of illegals .


56 posted on 04/11/2006 5:38:47 PM PDT by Wild Irish Rogue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

The Katrina syndrome. The downside of federalism is that local, state and federal people don't act as part of the same team, but as "allies." and allies find it hard to work together in war.


57 posted on 04/11/2006 5:39:46 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe

once the media starts airing reports of women and children being herded from courtrooms onto buses, headed for the border (and what makes you think mexico will take them back?) - public opinion will flip on this in 24 hours, and you'll have americans supporting amnesty.

the employer stuff you mention - no one will worry about that. no one will blink at enforcement of zoning laws, where these people live 40 to a house or 20 to an apartment. fine the landlords, arrest them. we can incentivize the status quo to get many illegals to deport themselves, without a roundup, and millions of trials, appeals, etc.


58 posted on 04/11/2006 5:39:58 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Just another reason why I've decided to join the ranks of the non-voters in this country. Voting has become nothing more than a big joke. My vote doesn't mean jack. Thank you GOP.


59 posted on 04/11/2006 5:40:19 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Defend America's Freedom and Sovereignty. Pick your own lettuce and strawberries.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker
On this subject, it turned out that the local jurisdictions notified the Feds about convicted felons, about to complete their sentences.

It was the Feds that (claim) to not have the resources (or the interest?) to deport them all.

It is a vicious circle. Locals blame Feds. Feds claim to lack resources.

Eventually the locals don't want to get involved, so they steer clear of immigration status issues, when possible.

But, they WILL go after them if they are NOT Mexicans. They busted the local Chinese restaurant -- and the 50 workers the owner had "imported" and had living in ONE house. But, as I said, these were Chinese, not Mexicans.

This county is FULL of Mexicans -- and full of CRIME that they commit (the local rag's police blotter reads like a Tijuana White Pages). But, they will NOT go after them. That's because the local deep-pocket ag corps would have apoplexy if their "valued workers" were busted. So, Our Glorious Leaders give 'em a pass -- IF they're Mexican.

60 posted on 04/11/2006 5:41:39 PM PDT by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-166 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson