Jeff Sessions may prosecute ‘sanctuary cities’ if confirmed as attorney general

by Stephen Dinan | The Washington Times  |  published on November 21, 2016

jeff-sessions-v-sanctuary-cities

Sen. Jeff Sessions is on record saying so-called “sanctuary cities” that protect illegal immigrants should be prosecuted. He himself may get that chance next year.

Mr. Sessions is president-elect Donald Trump’s pick to be the next attorney general, and if he’s confirmed, he will mark a 180-degree turn from the Obama administration on a host of issues, but nowhere more so than on immigration, where he’s been the Senate’s leading crackdown proponent.

From his first day in office, Mr. Sessions will have the power to strip some federal funding from sanctuary cities, thanks to rulings this year by the Justice Department’s inspector general, who said federal law requires localities to cooperate with immigration agents — and who provided an initial list of a handful of the worst offenders.

“The sanctuary cities thing is huge. I think most jurisdictions are going to fold like a cheap suit,” said Rosemary Jenks, government relations manager at NumbersUSA, which lobbies for stricter immigration laws.

Some sanctuary cities have already said they’ll resist any effort to change their behavior. They are being prodded by immigrant rights advocates who are calling on Senate Democrats to deny Mr. Sessions the chance to be attorney general, saying he represents a massive step backward for the Justice Department.

  • Soniapsailer

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !hw173c:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !hw173c:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash463TopPrintGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!hw173c:….,……..

  • Jose

    Mr/President Elect Trump can simplify matters of those who want to contradict him about deporting ILLEGAL INVADERS. All he has to do is show them the current immigration laws as currently written and if anyone bucks the current immigration laws, he can make it known who that representative is and let the voters decide if that representative states on. This might not work in california or new york since ILLEGALS own the representatives/states already.

  • Helga miller

    God Bless Mr. Sessions! Please deliver us from evil….

  • notalib

    If the sanctuary cities don’t comply Mr. Sessions should come down hard on the cities. As hard as laws allow. They are a liberal joke supporting and encouraging illegal behavior.

  • justinwachin

    It will be unusual to have an attorney general who plans to uphold the law. Hopefully he will be quickly confirmed.

  • CharlieSeattle

    The so-called “sanctuary cities”are breaking the law. Jail everyone involved.

  • ArcticGrayling

    It sounds to me like Sessions wants to uphold the law. Yet Dems are supposed to think it’s a step backwards.

  • John Freese

    I hope he sends all involved and breaking the law to jail, strips them of their citizenship, then, when their time is served, throw them out of the country.

  • Tiger

    The Left is not going to stop. They dug up something 30 years old. Sessions is one of the fighters and has been all through O’s reign of terror. He knows the score, he is respected and he will kick ass and call names. And we can hardly wait.

  • gerald Hughes

    The first wek thta, Trump is in office the House and Senate should pass laws making aiding and abetting the criminal aliens a felony with severe time in jail if convicted mandatory sentences no leeway for the judge.

  • actor44

    He seems to have little respect for the Constitutional Sovereignty of the States ,or the Sovereignty of the individual although I am aware Lincoln pretty much destroyed this. Nor am I refering to the sanctuary cities debate ,illegal’s need to leave .

  • peter

    I hope that Jeff Sessions is already gathering material to prosecute Sanctuary cities.

  • solog

    There you go…that’s what I’m talking about!

  • Darold

    Sessions should not only defund these cities, but should prosecute the people responsible for ignoring the federal law!! Who do these idiots think they are?

  • NJ Lady

    Sanctuary cities ought be considered political enemies within our walls. Who the hell do they think they are, creating their own legal laws, rights, and privileges? Hey, liberal Obama is going to say “bye bye” soon (not soon enough for me) President Trump must follow our Constitution and Bill of Rights, which he will. Any dissenters, to the extreme of creating their own mini-nation, ought be dealt with promptly as enemies of the State.

  • Gale

    drag those scumbag mayors out by their hair and put them in prison.

  • Juanito Ibañez

    “Some sanctuary cities have already said they’ll resist any effort to change their behavior.”

    Simple enough: prosecute the mayors, city managers and each and every councilman/woman who voted for “Sanctuary” status for engaging in “Conspiracy to Violate Federal Immigration Laws.”

    THAT will get the attention of all city officials who might have been considering such actions as protecting the lawbreakers.

  • Gale

    has that evil ass hole lynch left yet????

  • Rick D.

    Great!! I can’t wait for justice to be served. These elitists liberals will be singing a different tune once Sen. Sessions takes charge. If you tried to pull this stunt-hiding in a “sanctuary city”- in any other country, you’d be sent back to the USA quicker than you can say B.Hussein Obama!!

    • reggie

      If you’re lucky. A lot of them will just throw you in prison an throw away the key.

  • shamu9

    Illegal Immigrants have the right to be shot on sight!

    • Juanito Ibañez

      No, they don’t!

      Being an Illegal Alien is NOT a “capital offense,” shamu!

      • Karll

        But it IS an offense that is punishable by DEPORTATION.

        • Juanito Ibañez

          Absolutely correct — and the correct and proper method of dealing with Illegal Aliens.

      • shamu9

        It is if you’re an American citizen, Illegally in Mexico! like Tamoresi?

      • shamu9

        Hola Juanito! Vete por Carajo!

  • Jose

    All those in favor of sanctuary cities are probably none other than ANCHOR BESTARDS who ILLEGAL INVADER parents are still here hiding in the shadows (except in sanctuary cities) living off US benefits, getting paid under the table, sending most of the money back home, and NEVER willing to owe any alliance to the USA.
    Eliminate these sanctuary cities, take away tax exempt from church that harbor ILLEGAL INVADERS and HEAVILY FINE those businesses that hire ILLEGAL INVADERS. This should make self-deportation easier.

    • kdms232

      Sorry, but you can not take away sanctuary from the Church. That is something that churches have had for centuries, at least in the United States anyway. Besides they can not protect the millions of illegals here, so that would not cause any religious problems.
      Cities ignoring Federal laws on the other hand should be stripped of any Federal funding, period! Then be forced to wait until the next fiscal year to be put back into the Federal budget.
      Bill3000 is just one of those loud mouthed left wingers who have no concept of who Jeff Sessions is. Most of Jeff’s life has been spent making up for those few verbal mistakes he had made in his past. He supported Rosa Parks and he prosecuted the KKK in his home state. If that makes someone a extreme Right wing, then this Bill3000 is an extreme righty as well.
      We are a country and a country has borders, if you do not want borders, leave, no one is forcing anyone who believes in no borders to stay. But understand one thing, Canada also has borders and now because of the migration, most of Europe is starting to put border fences back up, in fact I was just reading that there are more border fences now then there were during the Cold War.
      So good luck finding a country without borders.

      • Highwayman

        If you’re going to use that church thing as having Sanctuary then you’d better know the rules for guarding it there’s a difference between a church offering sanctuary then a city doing it. In a church when a person walks and ask for sanctuary that person cannot ever leave that church because if he leaves the grounds of the church he’s no longer considered under sanctuary. He has to stay permantly on that ground he does not get no extension or anything just because he asked a priest or preacher for sanctuary. But that’s not a city sanctuary and another thing when a church offered Sanctuary to someone upon request and they have to ask for it they don’t get those benefits from the government or the city and no taxpayers have to pay it. It is exactly what it is it is only sanctuary as long as it stays on the grounds where is called God’s territory or belongs to the church.. some of these people want to live their entire life and so the church building go ahead they don’t get no benefits or anything let the church members pay for that being there let them give them food let them pay for their anything they want because it damn Sho don’t come from the taxpayers because it is a church offer sanctuary so you need to understand the to the difference between them. If the man who murdered that Kathy that was on the pier in San Diego had that walked out of the church and off the grounds other Church after church and give him sanctuary any cop anyone that had a bad could arrest him there is no Sanctuary past the grounds of the church. So get your head on straight before you start talking about the two.

        • AZtejas

          not quite a true statement “to obey the law of the land”, but a very neat art of taking a statement out of context. Obey the Laws of man as long as they do not conflict with the Laws of God. Act 5:29 “Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men”.

          • Highwayman

            I am very well aware of this completely ..I’ve only read it many times ,,but I’m right in the essence of the fact that there’s no law that we are talking about in regards to what session will enforce that pertain to the rest of that verse .do you actually believe that the people involved right now that are,breaking the law and hiding illegal offering them sanctuary that this was not exactly what that verse was all about . an illegal being offered Sanctuary by a city it’s not violating any of God’s laws so no city has an obligation not to not obey the law of the land There’s no reason to mention the second part of that verse not to these people I’m not wasting a good verses in the Bible to a bunch of heathens who could not care less about the laws of God or the laws of man., and I am right about the use of the verse., are you going. To say when the law conflicts with the laws of God. that somehow illegals in this country and a sanctuary City who offers them and break the laws of the land and somehow another this laws of this country are violating the laws of God and that the sanctuary it doesn’t have to obey the laws of the land? When you talk about a sanction city offering sanctuary. Are you telling me that the city has no duty to follow the law of the land and that illegal immigrants in this country that somehow laws regarding illegal,immigration violate somehow the laws of God and thereby these cities can say we do not have to obey the law of the land . I think not.do like the verse states, obey the law of the land,
            Give unto God what belongs to God and what. Belongs to man. Well, you give it to him. Obey the laws of the land is giving to man what belongs to man.

        • kdms232

          Obviously you ar far more knowledgable on the subject of sanctuary, then i am. I was just going from memory as Churches having sanctuary for people who ask for it. We are in 100% agreement on Sanctuary. I was just saying the Federal government can not tell any church, no Sanctuary is allowed in our country, that is what I was referring to as getting into trouble with the church. That goes beyond ( I believe ) the the scope of our Federal law, at least as how I understand it.

      • BeautifulAmerica

        Yeah, but obMao PAID the catholic church to take illegals in. That’s cheating, and illegal in itself.

    • KT

      True! Sometimes drastic issues require drastic action! The laws written are going be enforced for sure & it is about time….way over due really! However, keep one thing in mind Trump is going to have to convice the House & Senate first! This time around the Senate is going to keep the President in check…. unfortunate for Him… hopefully he & Pence can open their eyes!

      • gerald Hughes

        Want to bet, liberal dem bloodsuckers all had a great time when Harry the pimp nuked the Senate, now they will pay the price for ir, the Senate will not be able to do anything.

  • Jean Langford M.

    GET EM SESSIONS…PUT THE POLITICIANS IN PRISON…DEPORT THE ILLEGALS…BANG EM BABY….

  • Walter Flatt

    IF HE DOES NOT TO THE FULLEST EXTENT, TRUMP WILL HAVE NO CHANCE OF WINNING AGIAN IN 4 YEARS, AND WE NEED HIM FOR AT LEAST 4 YEARS.

    I WOULD LIKE 6 YEAR TERM LIMIT PUT ON ALL POLITICIANS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TRUMP, HE MAY NEED 2 TERMS TO GET US STRAIGHT.

    KOREAN WAR VET 51/53 A REG. DEMOCRAT, AND MOST OF ALL A CHRISTIAN. SEND THIS TO ALL YOU KNOW.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA A CONFESSED MUSLIM ON NATIONWIDE TV. A LAW WAS PASSED IN 1952 (PUBLIC LAW 414, CHAPTER 2, SECTION 212) BANNING ALL MUSLIMS, AND WAR WAS DECLARED ON ISLAM BY PRESIDENT JEFFERSON.

    NOTHING HE HAS SIGNED, OR ORDERED IS LEGAL AND CAN BE REDONE.

    IS this is why you OBAMA,

    * didn’t go to France to show solidarity against the Muslim terrorists:

    * spoke these words at an Islamic dinner -“I am one of you.”

    * spoke of “My Muslim faith.”

    * gave $100 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to re-build foreign mosques.

    * wrote that in the event of a conflict- “I will stand with the Muslims.”

    * assured the Egyptian Foreign Minister that – “I am a Muslim.”

    * bowed in submission before the Saudi King.

    * sat for 20 years in a Liberation Theology Church condemning Christianity and professing Marxism.

    * exempted Muslims from penalties under Obamacare that the rest of us have to pay.

    * purposefully omitted – “endowed by our Creator ” – from your recitation of The Declaration Of Independence.

    * mocked the Bible and Jesus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount while repeatedly referring to the ‘HOLY’ Qur’an.

    * raveled the Islamic world denigrating the United States of America.

    * instantly threw the support of your administration behind the building of the Ground Zero Victory mosque overlooking the hallowed crater of the World Trade Center.

    * refused to attend the National Prayer Breakfast, but hastened to host an Islamic prayer breakfast at the White House.

    * ordered Georgetown Univ. and Notre Dame to shroud all vestiges of Jesus Christ BEFORE you would agree to go there to speak, but in contrast, you have NEVER requested the mosques you have visited to adjust their decor.

    * appointed anti-Christian fanatics to your Czar Corps.

    * said that NASA’s “foremost mission” was an outreach to Muslim communities.

    * as an Illinois Senator was the ONLY individual who would speak in favor of infanticide.

    * was the first President not to give a Christmas Greeting from the White House, and went so far as to hang photos of Chairman Mao on the WH tree.

    * curtailed the military tribunals of all Islamic terrorists.

    * refused to condemn the Ft. Hood killer as an Islamic terrorist.

    * has refused to speak-out concerning the horrific executions of women throughout the Muslim culture, but yet, have submitted Arizona to the UN for investigation of hypothetical human-rights abuses.

    * who when queried in India refused to acknowledge the true extent of radical global Jihadists, and instead profusely praised Islam in a country that is 82% Hindu and the victim of numerous Islamic terrorists assaults.

    * funneled $900 Million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to Hamas.

    * ordered the USPS to honor the MUSLIM holiday with a new commemorative stamp.

    * directed our UK Embassy to conduct outreach to help “empower” the British Muslim community.

    * funded mandatory Arabic language and culture studies in Grammar schools across our country.

    * follows the Muslim custom of not wearing any form of jewelry during Ramadan.

    * departs for Hawaii over the Christmas season so as to avoid past criticism for NOT participating in seasonal WH religious events.

    * was uncharacteristically quick to join the chorus of the Muslim Brotherhood to depose Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, formerly America’s strongest ally in North Africa; but, remain muted in your non-response to the Brotherhood led slaughter of Egyptian Christians.

    * appointed your chief adviser, Valerie Jarrett, an Iranian, who is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    * said this country is not a Christian nation.

    * said the Muslim call to worship is the most beautiful sound on earth.

    * GAVE 150 BILLION PLUS TO IRAN.

    * RANSOMED 4 PEOPLE FOR 400 MILLION.

    * ARE YOU, KERRY, HILLIARY & THE BIASED NEWS MEDIA TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY?

    GET BEHIND PRESIDENT ELECT DONALD TRUMP, TODAY.

    DEMCRATS, REPUBLICANS, INDEPENDENTS, GOOGLE,(THE CLINTON CHRONICLES), IF YOU LOVE AMERICA YOU WILL LISTEN TO THIS AND THE BELOW ABOUT OBAMAS BIRTH AND THEN RE-SEND TO FRIENDS, LISTEN TO THE END.

    ANGREY PATRIOT REPORTED THAT BILL CLINTONS FORMER MISTRESS SALLY MILER SAID HE SNORTED COKE OFF HER TABLE, AND THAT HILLARY ALSO SNORTED COKE AND SMOKED POT. BILL DID PARDON HIS BRO. FOR DRUG ABUSE. IS THIS TRUE?

    COULD THIS BE WHY THEY DO NOT WANT THE BORDER CLOSED.

    CLICK ON YOUTUBE LISTEN TO OBAMA SAY HE WAS NOT BORN IN THE USA.ON THIS AND LISTEN TO OBAMA SAY HE WAS NOT BORN IN THE USA. BUT WAS BORN IN KENYON WHEN GIVING A SPEECH, THIS CAN BE SEEN ON, GOOGLE (TRUMP AMEN TIME). SO WE DO NOT HAVE A LEGAL PRESIDENT. OBAMA SAID HE WAS A MUSLIM ON NATIONWIDE TV & MUSLIMS HAVE BEEN BANNED FROM THE USA FOR 200 YEARS, AND AGAIN IN 1952 BY LAW PASSED BY CONGRESS. SO. NO MUSLIM IS HERE LEGALLY.

    PASTORS A PRIVATE FAITH THAT DO NOT ACT WHEN FACED WITH CROOKS, IS NO FAITH AT ALL.

    GOOLE,(THE NEW CLINTON CHRONICLES 2015) IT IS ABOUT THE CLINTONS, TELL YOUR CHURCH MEMBERS TO GOOGLE IT ALSO.

    TRUMP SAYS HE WILL REPEAL THE LAW THAT STOPS EXAMPTION AND ALLOW CHURCHES AND OTHER ENTITIES THAT ARE BARRED TODAY TO HAVE FREE SPEECH AND NOT LOSE THEIR EXEMPTIONS.

    IS THIS WHY THE DEMOCRATS AND SOME REPUBLICANS DO NOT WANT TO CLOSE THE BORDER BECAUSE OF CUTTING OFF THEIR SUPPLY OF DOPE.

    BET YOU WILL NOT LISTEN TO ALL OF THIS. IT TELLS ABOUT MURDER, COCAINE PARTIES, UNDERAGE SEX, SEX PARTIES, MONEY LAUNDREY AND DOPE RUNNING FROM JUDGES, STATE OFFICIALS, ETC.

  • sox83cubs84

    Jeff Session will be an AG that all real Americans can be proud of. Communist Democraps, maybe not so much, but who cares what they think, anyway?

  • Edgardo L. Perez-De Leon

    Sounds extreme but obstruction of justice is a violation to the law and prosecute-able. Sanctuary cities is a designation that represents a challenge to federal law. It is the prerogative of the USAG to prosecute. Obama’s administration tolerated the violation to the law but cannot force the Trump administration to do the same.

    • AKLady2015

      Either states have the right to rule themselves, or they do not.
      Which is it?

      • Edgardo L. Perez-De Leon

        No, states have no rights on issues of national defense, security/borders, citizenship, immigration and commerce. Cities have less rights than the states.

        • AKLady2015

          Some of the 50 are “Republics”. i.e., Vermont, Texas and California..

          Then there are the First People Nations, several of which cross U.S. Borders.

          • gerald Hughes

            That has nothing to do with making federal laws that make you a criminal for aiding and abetting the criminal aliens,.
            Keep it up we will enjoy locking you liberal scum up for long periods of time.

          • AKLady2015

            Name calling, I am so not impressed.

            The First Nations are sovereign.
            You might want to learn a bit of history and law.
            .

          • gerald Hughes

            You said that, already Cretin Polly, you want a cracker?
            I will match law and history credentials with you at any point, compost heap.
            However, I don’t have to, it’s likely that 6 months from now, after we make aiding and abetting criminal aliens a federal felony, that, you will be in jail.
            There is a win win we get rid of the criminal aliens, then we make convicted felons out of the liberal scum and remove their right to vote.

          • AKLady2015

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.
            Tedious, boring, repetitive …

            Law and history credentials, you have none of either..

          • gerald Hughes

            Want some cheese on your cracker, Polly

          • mountie

            What does this have to do with the discussion. The First Nations are Aboriginal Canadians who are neither Inuit or Metis. It has nothing to do with the US.

          • AKLady2015

            Thw “First Nations” are also Aboriginal Americans.

            The term “First Nations” covers many Native American tribes, some of which cross America’s borders with Canada and Mexico. Under American law, those nations are sovereign. They hold dual citizenship, but that was not always the case.

            American Indians, the first peoples of this country, were the last to receive citizenship. The Indian Citizenship Act was signed by Coolidge in 1924.

            American women did not have full citizenship rights until 1920.

          • Edgardo L. Perez-De Leon

            I do not know why you try to teach me constitutional law when the designation of republic,commonwealth, or state makes no difference under the US Constitution. Secession is an option for republics, commonwealths and states incorporated in the US but cities are no sovereign states, and never have been, what was left clear in the proceedings of the Bankruptcy of the City of Detroit, by the way a sanctuary city. As Hispanic I feel sympathies for the immigrants, specially for those from Mexico, and for those discriminated in the land stolen to Mexico by US with the collaboration of the bandit and indecent Mexican President Santaana. Many of my friends gran gran gran parents never crossed the border.Instead they were left entramped in the stolen land –some times living like animals in caves after land records were destroyed by the invavors –just like they did in my country Puerto Rico– from Texas to Washington state, Nevada, Colorado and parts of Utah and Oklahoma. My sympathies, however, do not change the law.

          • AKLady2015

            The United States is a Republic.

            Detroit’s banruptcy was a fucnton of the auto industry and manufacturing — many plants closed, thousands of jobs were lost.

            The Trial of Tears was part of my mother’s family history. Early settlers took Native American wives. European women were in short supply.

          • Edgardo L. Perez-De Leon

            Stupidly you are making a simple issue of perogatives an issue that involved the assassination of males at the Gengis Khan style to make the Indian women sex slaves, called nicely wives.

          • AKLady2015

            Put the botle away.
            Go to bd.
            Sober up.

          • Edgardo L. Perez-De Leon

            Are you drugged, or mariguano? Igo to bed to rest from you.

      • gerald Hughes

        And Federal governmnets have the right to passs laws that make it a federal felongy to aid and abet the criminal aliens, then we start locking you scum up, until you get the message, the law applies to you garbage, also.

  • BILL3000

    Jeff Session is the kind of KKK Fascist SHIT we can expect when the Orange Monster-Elect becomes President.

    • Carl Lewis

      Bill, see you forgot taking your Zyprexa and Respiridone
      the last several days. All your demons are coming out again as you troll mericelessly here on Discuss.

    • Jose

      Hey bill: Just make you paid for and eat a loaf of bread does not make you a US citizen. Is the picture of your ILLEGAL INVADER RELATIVE and does the 3000 represent how many of your ILLEGAL INVADER RELATIVES are hiding here?

    • Gale

      suck it bill you ignorant ass hole

    • Gale

      you don’t like it?? move your sorry worthless ass to another country.

    • used_to_be_a_liberal

      Good, glad he is. That is just what we need. He will show the democrat part how the kkk should have been run when they first set it up. The democrats never have been able to do anything the right way, always messing up those people are.

    • mountie

      I normally try not to call people names but you my friend are an idiot. Sessions led the fight in Alabama to desegregate the schools. He also prosecuted the head of the KKK and got a death sentence for him. Try doing some research and stop listening to CNN and the other left wing media outlets who feed you lies.

  • ClarenceDeBarrows

    Au contraire! Jeff Sessions as Attorney General would not “represent a massive step backward for the Justice Department”. His leadership would, for the first time in at least 8 years, represent a return to proper enforcement of the rule of law in our Constitutional Republic.

    • BILL3000

      right,ClarenceDeBarrows,who Wouldn’t Know the Constitution if it were shoved up his[?] Ass!

      • gerald Hughes

        Stick it lliberal dem bloodsucking parasite.

        • AKLady2015

          Apparently, you have no respect for the Constitution.
          Trump = Fourth Reich.
          His attempt, last night, to quash the First Amendment is just the most recent example,

          • gerald Hughes

            As a matter of fact, low life lying liberal dem bloodsucking, cretin, I have oodles of respect for the Constitution.
            Ifyou walking talking compost heaps did,, the liberal media would not be ignoring it.
            Now why do you liberal scum go back to mugging aold ladies in the streets, that way at least, you would be doing something for you handouts

          • AKLady2015

            Wow, the childish name calling …
            I am so not impressed.

          • gerald Hughes

            Has the last 2 weeks left you so distraught that you had forgotten that is the only reason, that I am here is to make sure that when you liberal dem bloodsuckers start trying to pretend to be human beings that I will be here to remind you, it isn’t so.
            I’m sure that the last two weeks have left you with bald spots where you have jerked out large swatches of hair and likely have chewed off pieces of your lips, but Trump is still president and he wants the criminal aliens out of our country and he wants to lock youi aiders and abettors up.
            Going to be a lot of you in jail.

          • NM Leon

            Playing with the idiot libtard trolls is fun, too.

          • gerald Hughes

            Yeah, in her case it’s becoming boring, she is a dyslexic pos who grandchildren come in and cut and paste several hundred pcs of garbage a year.
            I have already obtained her name and address and sent it to the groups montoring the people encouraging bringing in more of the rapist killer muslims and criminal aliens

          • AKLady2015

            There went your reputation.

          • gerald Hughes

            Yep, every time I talk to one of you cretins mys stock goes sky high.

          • AKLady2015

            Playing with the ignorant, red-state dropouts i more fun.
            They get angry, sputter, cuss. and generally make fools pf themselves.

          • NM Leon

            But do they post cut and paste replies like “calling names is childish”, etc?

          • AKLady2015

            Put the bottle away.
            Go to bed.
            Sober up.

          • gerald Hughes

            Still alive, Polly?
            Suicide is the only answer for you, you are breathing air and occupying space that, a real human being could be using.

          • AKLady2015

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.

            Tedious, boring, repetitive …

          • gerald Hughes

            Why don’t you post that 150 times, cretin, then you won’t have to post again this year.

          • NM Leon

            You trolling conservative web sites to spew idiot libtard talking points is the epitome of “childish” and immature.

          • AKLady2015

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.
            Tedious, boring, repetitive …

          • NM Leon

            Yep, extremely childish and immature. By the way have you have you found a version of N American history where Cabot and Gilbert established settlements of people looking for religious freedom yet? How about a link.

          • NM Leon

            Hey troll, it’s the left that’s resorting to NAZI like violence.

          • AKLady2015

            Your knowledge of history is extremely lacking. Pay close attention, the first four have already taking place:

            First they came for the Muslims, and You did not speak out—
            Because You were not a Muslim

            Then they came for the Hispanics and You did not speak out—
            Because You were not a Hispanics..

            Then they came for the Poor and You did not speak out —
            Because You were not Poor.

            Then they came for the Disabled and You did not speak out –-
            because You were not Disabled.

            Then they came for the Jews, and You did not speak out—
            Because You were not a Jew.

            Then they came for the Elderly, and You did not speak out –-
            Because You were not Elderly.

            Then they came for You—and there was no one left to speak for You.

            ( a variation on Martin Niemoller’s famous poem).

          • NM Leon

            Speaking of history, have you found a version of N American history where Cabot and Gilbert established settlements of people looking for religious freedom? How about a link?

            First they came for the radical Muslim terrorists , and I did not speak out-Because I don’t support terrorism of any kind.

            Then they came for the illegal criminal Hispanics and I did not speak out— Because I think it’s stupid to allow illegal alien criminals to stay in our country.

            Then they came for the Poor and I did not speak out — Because I believe that the Dems trying to keep people poor and dependent on Dem crumbs is a modern form of slavery.

            Then they came for the Disabled and I did not speak out-because healthy people scamming SS disability is stealing from all of the rest of us and is fraud.

            Then they came for the Jews, and the Jews kicked their arses with my support— Because the Jews made the decision after the Holocaust…never the f uck again.

            Then they came for the Elderly, and unfortunately they did manage to trap them in a Ponzi scheme called Social Security –-

            Then they came for me—and I met them at the door with a Saiga bullpup 12 gauge auto shotgun, because I have always taken care of myself and my family, and the patriotic American Muslims, the patriotic Hispanic Americans, the (formerly) poor who now had jobs and dignity, the Jews who I supported, and the elderly who I revere all supported me.

            The fraudulent SS “disabled” scammers were in jail and irrelevant.

          • AKLady2015

            “Then they came for the Disabled and I did not speak out-because healthy people scamming SS disability is stealing from all of the rest of us and is fraud”.

            Your statement is.a prime exampl of the ignroance and bigotry I fight every day. You have no concenpt, whatsoever, as to how very hard it is for an individual to obtain SS Disability Insurance benefits.

            On average, it takes 5 years, unless the person is injured in a serious accident, or born with a serious handicap. There are multiple claim denials and appeals, right up to Federal District Court hearings. Then there are the multple, compulsory medical exams. Many are required to submit to exams every year.

            Scammers? In your dreams. You are another one of those that if they cannot see a disabilty,one does not exist.

            Alaska provides “Interim Assistance”, a whopping $280.00 a month. Could you live on that? On, and Alaska also gives one doctor visit and three prescription meds a month. No phusical therapy, etc., etc. Then, others states don;t even provide that.

            Oh, and by the way, it is INSURANCE that every worker pays for out of every paycheck. SSDI is not welfare. Only workers who have worked and paid Social Security taxes for many years are insured by the SSDI program.

            .

          • NM Leon
          • AKLady2015

            Here is some educarion for you:

            SSI is SUPPLIMENTAL SECURITY INCOME. It is federal welfare. https://ssabest.benefits.gov/ While it is administered by the SSA, it is not a Social Security benefit.

            SSDI is SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY INSURANCE.

            SSDI is INSURANCE paid for by every worker, from the first day they are employed, until the last. There are time requirements and total paid in premium requirements. https://www.ssa.gov/disability/

          • NM Leon

            Facilitating Fraud: How SSDI Gives Benefits to the Able Bodied

            https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/facilitating-fraud-how-ssdi-gives-benefits-able-bodied

            “Alzheimer’s was Minnesota man’s path to fame, then jail.”
            http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/191553521.html

            “North Carolina Man Sentenced to
            Two Years in Prison for Fraudulently Collecting Social Security Disability Benefits.” http://
            oig.ssa.gov/audits-and-investigations/investigations/north-carolina-man-sentenced-two-years-prisonfraudulently

            “Former State Lawmaker Indicted for
            Social Security Fraud.” http://oig.ssa.gov/audits-and-investigations/investigations/
            former-state-lawmaker-indicted-social-security-fraud

            A Social Security worker and a gaggle of doctors in Puerto Rico alleged to create such a large and sophisticated system for defrauding the federal government of Social Security disability benefits. From the size of the fraud, it almost seems like the entire island was in on the scam.
            “Seventy-Five Individuals Arrested and Indicted in Puerto Rico for SocialSecurity Fraud.” http://www.fbi.gov/sanjuan/press-releases/2013/seventy-five-individualsarrested-and-indicted-in-puerto-rico-for-social-security-fraud

            “Illegal Immigrant Sentenced for Benefits Fraud.” http://oig.ssa.gov/sites/default/files/audit/full/pdf/Illegal%20
            Immigrant%20Sentenced%20for%20Benefits%20Fraud.pdf

            There’s LOTS more if you care.

          • AKLady2015

            What percentage of claimants is that?
            What peecentage of the U.S. populatin?
            .
            Give it up, you are spewing unjustified bigotry and hate.

          • NM Leon

            Gee, extrapolating from FBI data, 0.0000242% of the population is ever convicted of murder. Do you seriously think we should stop investigating and prosecuting homicide?

            Give it up, you are a libtard troll, and not very well versed in either history OR data analysis. Pretty pathetic.

          • AKLady2015

            Are you serious?
            You equate minimal fraud with capitol murder?
            Why are you making up a false argument?

          • NM Leon

            So you are seriously suggesting we should not prosecute tax/insurance fraud as a crime? Why are you you trying to diminish a felony?

          • AKLady2015

            So you are seriously suggesting we should permit you to put words in other people’s mouths?

          • NM Leon

            “What percentage of claimants is that?
            What peecentage of the U.S. populatin?
            .
            Give it up, you are spewing unjustified bigotry and hate.”

            “You equate minimal fraud with capitol murder?
            Why are you making up a false argument?

            I’m sorry, was someone else posting under your account?

          • AKLady2015

            Really? And given the U.S. population, you think that minimal crime is signficant?

          • NM Leon

            Ah, so fraud is all right as long as it’s minimal. Right. Typical libtard attitude.

          • AKLady2015

            So exaggeration is all right?? Typical right-wing, so-called conservative …

          • NM Leon

            What exaggeration? I’ve given actual percentages extrapolated from FBI data.

          • NM Leon

            Go ahead, I dare you, give us the percentages of the U.S. population convicted of various crimes each year, say murder, rape, fraud, etc. Never mind, I’ll save you the trouble, its 0.000136%

            Just a little less than your .4%, lol.

          • AKLady2015

            Crime data is published on the FBI web site.
            Ou have an Internet connection, use it to educate yourself.

          • NM Leon

            No shitte, Sherlock, so does the DOJ, that’s where I got the numbers to extrapolate the percentages from. Educate yourself, troll.

          • NM Leon

            Here’s another 36,000 “disabled” and $1.29 billion. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-635

          • AKLady2015

            What does the Social Security Adminsitration’s mistakes have to do with validity of an individual’s claim? A HUGE 0.4% — THAT IS LESS THAN 1%

        • Soniapsailer

          Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !hw173c:
          On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
          !hw173c:
          ➽➽
          ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash463TopPrintGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!hw173c:….,…….

      • chw2000

        Apparently that’s where you get your information. “up your
        ass”. Now, please show where the Constitution deals with immigration. Any place. Any amendment. Please show us all how much you actually don’t know.

        • Juanito Ibañez

          chw2000 wrote:

          “Now, please show where the Constitution deals with immigration. Any place. Any amendment.”

          How about Article I, Section 8, Clause 4:

          “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…”

          Included in Naturalization is the authority to determine who gets entry — and who doesn’t.

          • AKLady2015

            Naturalization is not immigration.

            Naturalization has nothing, whatsoever, to do with refugee status.

            Them there, South of the Border people have brown skins, just like many of those Jews we refused to save from the gas chambers and ovens.

            Unlike the Jews, most people of South of the Border are Christians. Oh, that is right, dyed-in-the-wool, right-wing Protestants do not think Catholics are Christians.
            .
            Oh, and never mind the fact that it is the America appetite for illegal drugs that is the reason people are fleeing countries South of the Border. Drug lords now rule much of the land.

          • gerald Hughes

            Well them liberal dem bloodsucking creting, explain how you get to naturalize, with out immigrants, you fing idiot.

          • AKLady2015

            Not everyone who immigrates wants to be a citizen.

            They come due to war, national disaster, crime, famine, for education, for medical care …

            Some retain the hope of being able to return to their home countries.

          • gerald Hughes

            2nd part of the law that will make felons out of you aiders and abettors, will install a 10 years jail sentence for anyone caught here after being deported.
            We don’t care how they got here, or why, we just want the criminals out of our country.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            If you believe Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 does not provide constitutional authority for immigration laws, what legal basis do you ascribe for these U.S. immigration laws:

            the Steerage Act of 1819,
            the Page Act of 1875,
            the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882,
            the Immigration Act of 1882,
            the Immigration Act of 1891,
            the Immigration Act of 1903,
            the Immigration Act of 1907,
            the Immigration Act of 1917,
            the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952,
            and, subsequently,
            the Immigration Act of 1990.

          • AKLady2015

            Suggest you educate yourself by reading case law.
            Suggest you also read the 5th and 14th Amendments.

            U.S. Supreme Court cases are published on line.
            They can be searched by topic.

            Congress writes the laws,
            the Supreme Court defines how they are to be applied.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            That, dear Lady, is deflection of the worst kind.

            If you don’t know, just admit you don’t know and go on.

            Until then, STHU&GTHA!

          • AKLady2015

            Senor Ibañez your reply stands in total conflict with your claimed law enforcement background.

            The U.S. Government has three branches:
            Legistlative — maks law
            Judicial — evaluates laws
            Executive — carries out laws.

            Suggest you educate yourself by reading case law.

            Suggest you also read the 5th and 14th Amendments
            As a law enforcement officer, you would be well aware of both of those amendments.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            Just even more deflection!

            I repeat — with EMPHASIS added:

            “If YOU believe Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 does not provide constitutional authority for immigration laws, what legal basis do YOU ascribe for these U.S. immigration laws…”?

            ALL federal laws MUST have a footprint beginning in the United States Constitution; otherwise they are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

            The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

            The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

            Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it…..

            A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.

            No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

            16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

          • AKLady2015

            I repeat — with EMPHASIS added:

            CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
            ARE NOT STATUTES.

            SUGGEST YOU READ THE
            5TH AND 14TH AMENDMENTS.

            As a law enforcement officer, you would be well aware of both of those amendments.

            As a law enforcement officer, you would also be well aware of the MIRANDA WARNING, which typically follows the exampke below:

            You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions.

            Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law.

            You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future.

            If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish.

            If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present, you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney.

            Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present?

          • Juanito Ibañez

            YOU are STILL running away from “The Question,” Lady!
            So, once more I repeat — with even MORE ==>EMPHASISYOUYOU<== ascribe for these U.S. immigration laws…"?

            Do NOT reply until you are prepared to ACTUALLY answer "The Question," Lady!

          • AKLady2015

            Your question has no application, whatsoever,
            to the issue at hand.

            What is your point, well besides obfuscaion?
            Try some common sense.

            Are you willing to cough up the money to pay for what you want?

            Each and every individual arested gets a fair hearing — at your expense.

            Each and every indiviudal arrwsted get an attprney — at your expense.

            There is law, then there is enfocement.

            Canada – US border 1,538 miles
            Canada – Alaska border 3,987 miles
            Mexico – US border 1,933 miles
            US Coastline 95,471 miles
            Alaska Coastline 6,640 miles
            Total exposure 109, 569 miles

          • Juanito Ibañez

            Translation: “RUN AWAY!”

            Plonk!

          • AKLady2015

            Ignorance is bliss.
            Commin sense is a rare commidity.

          • mountie

            This is a misinterpretation of the Constitution. Not everyone is entitled to the protections granted in the Constitution. The mistake is made by almost everyone not bothering to read the preamble. The founding fathers wrote this as Citizens. It specifically states that the Constitution was established for “ourselves (citizens) and our Posterity (descendants)”. It says nothing about it applying to foreigners. If an immigrant becomes a naturalized citizen then they are afforded the protections before that no. You should note that it does not state Constitution of the United States it says Constitution FOR the United States. The United states was comprised of Citizens. Therefore it was written for citizens. We generally grant the protections to individuals who are here legally because we have allowed them entry including visitors who have no intention of staying. We have no obligation to provide any protections to individuals who are here illegally.

          • AKLady2015

            The word CITIZEN does not appear in the U.S. Constitution.

            You missed a very important part of the Preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, ESTABLISH JUSTICE…
            I suggest you take an introductory law course. I also suggest you further educate yourself by reading federal vase law.
            And to be very picky, most of what is now thw United States was not part of the country when that Preamble was written. If you remember, backin the day of Lincoln, it became illegal for people to be bought and sold. However, that is exactly what happened to every Alaskan in 1867.

          • Chris Robinette

            We the People means CITIZEN!

          • mountie

            Someone who understand English.

          • AKLady2015
          • Chris Robinette

            If you do not know the Bill of Rights then I will not tell you.

          • mountie

            First of all you should follow the advice you give to
            everyone else and actually read the Constitution. The word citizen appears in the Constitution several times. Article I – Sections 2 and 3, Article II –
            Section 1, Article III – Section 2 and Article IV – Section 2. Since there are only seven Articles the word appears in over half of them. You just happened to miss these. Or like most liberals you twist the truth to try and promote your incorrect ideas. Secondly, I have written Certiorari to the Supreme Court so I think I know something about law. Conveniently you want to ignore the fact that
            the preamble specifically says “to ourselves and our posterity”. It does not say that it establishes justice to foreign individuals. Keep trying to leave out words that are there and including words that are not there. When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution they knew what they wanted to say and
            said what they meant. This is a practice that is still followed today and recognized by the Supreme Court.

            I read case law all the time and the difficult task is
            sometimes trying to distinguish “stare decisis” (holding or precedent) from
            “obiter dictum”. This is the main reason people misquote court decisions. While something might be written in the opinion it does not mean it is part of the holding. Nothing written in the dissenting opinion is ever precedent. Do you even know the difference?

            It does not matter if most of what is now the country was added after the preamble. It existed when the state applied for statehood. The land mass known as Alaska was bought from the Russians in1867 not the people. You are really getting childish with argument.

          • AKLady2015

            Read Article III of the Treaty of Cession.
            You are not impressing anyone.

          • mountie

            So now you are equating the first nation with uncivilized natives. I am sure they like that comparison.

          • mountie

            While I do not totally agree with Juanito I would like to point out that the 5th and 14th amendments have absolutely nothing to do with immigration. I suggest that you follow your advice and try reading the Constitution and the amendments. The only sections of the constitution that deal with immigration is article I section 9 which leaves it up to the states who they allow in their borders and the 10th amendment which states that any power not specifically granted to the federal government reside with the states.

          • AKLady2015

            First, you are incorrect as to state v. national borders.
            Second, illegal immigration is a federal crime
            Third, almost 60% of federal prosecution in 2016 was immigration related.
            Fouth, the 5th and 14th Amedments have everything to do with criminal prosecution.

          • Chris Robinette

            Hillary would do away with first, second, fith, tenth and fifteenth amendments. as being inconvient for her agenda.

          • AKLady2015

            Strange, there exists no factual evidence for those claims.

          • Chris Robinette

            Correct and like Obama who thinks he is both the executive and legislative branch, Hillary will continue his unconstitutional legacy and make laws and ignore those she feel are un necessary in fitting into HER Damn agenda.

          • AKLady2015

            Your statement regarding Obama is false.
            The Constitution explicitly assigns to the president the power to sign or veto legislation, command the armed forces, ask for the written opinion of his or her Cabinet, convene or adjourn Congress, GRANT REPRIEVES AND PARDONS, and receive ambassadors.

          • chw2000

            Article 1, section 8, clause 4 provides Congress with the right to create REQUIREMENTS for immigration. It does not create a right to immigration. Nice try.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            chw2000 wrote:

            “Article 1, section 8, clause 4 provides Congress with the right to create REQUIREMENTS for immigration. It does not create a right to immigration.”

            Your opinion — not backed up by facts.

            You need to read the Constitution in the same manner as it was written; to-wit:

            Section 8:

            “The Congress shall have Power…To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…”

            There is no “requirement” to act established there: merely the “Power” to do so.

            Ergo; you are wrong.

            “Nice try.”

            Unfortunately for you, my position is backed up by experts on constitutional law.

            Try researching a subject before commenting on it.

          • chw2000

            Dear Juanito, The Constitution of the United States of America does not guarantee the right to immigrate. Your argument is not germane to my statement. Again, the Constitution grants congress the power to establish parameters for immigration but does not grant any right to immigration. You Juanito are wrong.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            “The Constitution of the United States of America does not guarantee the right to immigrate.”

            Please show where I said that it does.

            “Your argument is not germane to my statement.”

            Restate your statement so we all can be clear on what you are saying here WRT my original statement.

            “Again, the Constitution grants congress the power to establish parameters for immigration but does not grant any right to immigration.”

            Again, please show where I said that it does.

            “You Juanito are wrong.”

            Show us all how I can be wrong in stating that ALL federal laws – including immigration laws, obviously – MUST emanate from the Constitution of the United States, as THAT is EXACTLY what I have been saying here – no more, no less.

          • chw2000

            Then you agree that the Constitution does not provide any immigration guarantee? If so, then we are in agreement.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            The Constitution provides the Congress with the power and authority to make ALL the rules WRT immigration and naturalization – but there is no “guarantee” therein that a person born outside (or even inside, despite the obvious misreading and misuse of the 14th Amendment!) the United States and its territories, to parents who themselves are not citizens of the United States, that they will become U.S. citizens – UNLESS their presence here is in complete compliance with U.S. immigration laws.

          • chw2000

            Agreed. Have a great day and let us enjoy out freedom.

          • chw2000

            The Constitution does not guarantee any right to immigration. That’s the point Juanito. It provides authority for Congress to establish REQUIREMENTS.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            chw2000 wrote:

            “The Constitution does not guarantee any right to immigration.”

            Care to show where I said it did?

            My point — upheld by constitutional experts — is that all US immigration laws emanate from Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the US Constitution: nothing more.

            Remember: ALL laws of the United States MUST have a foothold established within the Constitution — or at least that’s what the Founding Fathers intended, anyway.

        • AKLady2015

          The 5th Amendment says everyone gets a fair trial.

          • gerald Hughes

            What does that have to do with immigration you fing cretin?

          • AKLady2015

            Well, there is this legal requirement in America — everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of competent jurisdiction.

            If you want to live under a dictatorship, move to one. Today would not been soon enough.

          • gerald Hughes

            Fine we’ll see how many of them self deprot when we put them in an open air jail cell in Arizona.
            They will be happy to leave after a summer and winter stay there.
            We will do the same thing that Obama did, cretin, ignore the laws we don’t like, it;s payback time scum bag.

          • AKLady2015

            YOur open-air jail cell already exists.
            Maybe you should read more news.
            Suggest you do a search on Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
            Gee, how is it you don’t know that?

          • gerald Hughes

            Cretin, if you knew that why do you keep asking how we can afford it, you fing compost heap.

          • AKLady2015

            ..
            Thank you.
            Your input is always welcome
            It says so much about you.

          • gerald Hughes

            Try Jalapeno cheese with your cracker, Polly

          • mountie

            No! It says every CITIZEN is entitled to a fair trial.

          • AKLady2015

            Where in the Constituton does it say that?

          • mountie

            You better go back and attempt to educate yourself. The 14th amendment was intended to apply to former slaves and the children of slaves born in the US. You need to read the documentation and conversations of the elected officials who drafted the 14th Amendment. It by the way totally blows a hole in the idea of anchor babies. No where in the documentation was the thought that this applied to every human being on earth ever addressed. You behave like a typical liberal, take words out of context and apply them to something that is not intended to address.

      • Rodney Steward

        I see the Dugger family is back!

    • AKLady2015

      Let’s ban those Spanish refugees just like we did
      the Jews during WW II.

      Over 8 million Jews were murdered.
      .
      How many must die before the right-wing, white supremacists are satisfied? Can’t allow those First People back on the lands we stole form them.

      • gerald Hughes

        Hey cretin forget about it, they didn’t do you any good, keep doing it we will see you and everyone like you in a cell

        • AKLady2015

          Name calling and threats.
          So not impressive, goes along with the ignorance.
          You might want to increase you knowledge.

          • gerald Hughes

            Not impressive, 3rd time now, cretin, Polly want a cracker.
            Threats not at all, can’t tellyou liberal scum how much we look forward to locking you up, that tellme the sound of that cell door slamming is terrible, get my home e-mail let me know what you thought when it slammed.
            You garbage ignored the law for 8 years, it;s payback time.

          • AKLady2015

            Name calling and threats.
            So not impressive, goes along with the ignorance.
            You might want to increase you knowledge.

          • gerald Hughes

            Want a cracker, Polly

    • AKLady2015

      Oh, and foolish one, the U.S. Constitution applies to everyone within our borders — citizen or not.
      .
      Where are you going to find thw funds to hokd all those hearings?

      Where are you going to find the funds to provide each with legal representation?

      Where are you going to find the funds to huse, feed and clothe them while they are in custody, awaiting trial?

      • gerald Hughes

        Cretin, how about Trump aslks for volunteers?
        We can build an open air jail out in the middle of the Arizona desert, Pass laws making it a federal felony with severe penalties to aid and abet the criminal aliens, then we start arresting scum like you and locking you up for long periods of time.
        Very shortl;y the ceriminal laiens will be running for the border

        • AKLady2015

          Maybe you shoild read the U.S. Constitution.
          I suggest you begin with the 5th and 14th Amendments,
          .
          The law of your imagination would be struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court as blatantly unConstitutional.
          Educate yourself. You are very poorly informed.

          • gerald Hughes

            And where did you get your law degree?
            Cretin University @ Anchorage?
            Even there you ahad to be an affirmative action admission.
            You spelled educate correctly, your grandchildren must have upgraded your cut and paste again.
            6 months from now, Ted Cruz will be the 5th conservative member of the Supreme Court and with a little luck Ginsberg will drop dead very soon to make it 6-3 conservative you liberl doutlaws have a tough 10 to 12 years coming liberal dem bloodsucker.

          • AKLady2015

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.

            Tedious, boring, repetitive …

          • gerald Hughes

            That it, Polly, that all you have?

          • AKLady2015

            Thank you.
            Your input is always welcome
            It says so much about you.

          • gerald Hughes

            Try Jalapeno Cheese with your cracker, Polly.

        • AKLady2015

          Heil Trump.

          • gerald Hughes

            Ah, another liberal dem bloodsucker, with nothing to say but, a burning need to say something.
            Found your LEFTY MANIFESTO, again, eh liberal dem bloodsucker, where was it, under the sofa with the rest of the dirt?

          • AKLady2015

            Blah, blah, blah, lie, insult …repeat ad nauseam.

          • gerald Hughes

            Want me to send you a case of Saltines, Polly.

  • parthenon1

    “May” is the wrong word Must is correct ! AND GETTING THEM OUT OF THESE CITIES EVEN IF THEY BALK IS EASY PUT A BOUNTY ON EACH CRIMINAL BASED ON THE CRIME AND SEND IN THE BOUNTY HUNTERS AND WARN LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OF POSSIBLE PROSECUTION IF THEY INTERFERE.

    • BILL3000

      Or SHOOT Them on Sight ! _But do YOU Really want to Lose your Mother that way,parthenon1?

      • parthenon1

        I didnt say kill ’em, bounty hunters generally do not kill their captives they arrest them and taked them to the proper agency this time it will be ICE after tht agency is straightened out.

      • chw2000

        Bill3000 you are really not smart. You must be illegal because you don’t know anything about the law here in the US. Those that violate the law, knowingly or unknowingly, need to be prosecuted. I’m guessing you fall into one of those categories.

      • Rodney Steward

        This also covers muslims, would you really like to see your mothers head removed because she’s an infidel, just like anyone that’s not a muslim!!

Google Analytics Alternative