Illegal alien commits hit and run on Texas cyclist

[novasteve]

her spine was exposed she got dragged so much
Cyclist trapped screaming under a truck that hit and dragged her

 

[ShootSpeeders]

He has now been charged with failure to stop and render aid and given a $100,000 bond. Avila is also being held on an immigration detainer, WISH-TV reported.

Doubtful he has insurance so who will pay for these frightful injuries? Hopefully she has insurance that pays for injuries caused by uninsured drivers. It will probably just pay medical bills though and not for suffering or inability to work.

This is the sort of thing trump should talk about. The media always buries these stories but if trump mentioned it, the press would have do so too.

 

[novasteve]

Trump won't because he's here to get Hillary elected. Watch in the debates he won't even bring up her emails. He'll never bring up individual cases of illegals doing shit like this

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Trump won't because he's here to get Hillary elected. Watch in the debates he won't even bring up her emails. He'll never bring up individual cases of illegals doing shit like this

You saying the DNC is paying trump to fight for and get the gop nomination and then make a bunch of gaffes that cause him to lose the general election? Could be. I'd like cruz except he was born in canada. All the rest are rinos so i'll continue to root for trump and hope i don't regret it.

 

[Preacher]

Heard on another forum she is a lesbian...imagine this


An illegal hits a lesbian on martin luther king blvd! ROFLMAO!

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Heard on another forum she is a lesbian...imagine this


An illegal hits a lesbian on martin luther king blvd! ROFLMAO!

Yeah, it's real funny...........

 

[Preacher]

Heard on another forum she is a lesbian...imagine this


An illegal hits a lesbian on martin luther king blvd! ROFLMAO!

Yeah, it's real funny...........

Just the "diversity" of it all amuses me...wonder whose side the cultural marxists come to. The lesbian or the illegal!?

 

[waltky]

Border Patrol drops the ball in Ohio...

Border Patrol Refused Detainer for Illegal Alien, Who Allegedly Then Attempted Rape, Shot a Woman, And Murdered a Woman
April 6, 2016 | Ohio police stopped and questioned an illegal alien in early July 2015 and when they contacted Border Patrol to issue a detainer to keep the person in custody, Border Patrol refused and the illegal alien, Juan Razo, was released. Three weeks later, Razo allegedly tried to rape a 14-year-old girl, shot a woman on a bike path, then broke into a home and allegedly murdered a 60-year-old woman.

Juan Emmanuel Razo reportedly has agreed to plead guilty to 16 charges, in a plea-bargain deal that includes a life sentence without parole, in order to avoid the death penalty. He is scheduled to be sentenced officially on April 27, 2016, according to Cleveland.com. The Painesville police first encountered Razo on July 7, 2015, and then three weeks later Razo went on his alleged crime spree, and was hunted down and arrested on July 27.

Commenting on the case in a July 31, 2015 press release, Lake County Sheriff Dan Dunlap said, “I have the utmost respect for the United States Border Patrol agents, as well as all Immigration authorities. However, I feel it is necessary that I clarify the facts concerning our initial encounter with Juan Emmanuel Razo on July 7, 2015.” On that day around 8:00 p.m., Razo was seen on foot. “When our deputy sheriffs approached him he was extremely nervous, sweating profusely, and making every attempt to avoid eye contact,” said Sheriff Dunlap. “When questioned he provided a false name, was unable to give any type of identification, and he admitted to being in the United States illegally.”

One of the police officers on the scene then called the U.S. Border Patrol, explained the situation, and then allowed the agents to speak with Razo over the phone. “As the conversations progressed Razo became less and less communicative, and he would not again admit to the Border Patrol, as he did to the deputies initially, that he was in the United States illegally,” said Sheriff Dunlap. “Subsequently the deputies requested the Border Patrol to issue a detainer/hold authorization to keep Razo in custody,” said the sheriff. “The deputies explained that the Sheriff’s Office could not further detain Razo legally without authorization from immigration authorities. Border Patrol would not issue a detainer.” “Without legal authority to further detain Razo, he was released,” said the sheriff. “Until recently detainers were routinely issued when requested.”

“Our Office provided Razo’s information to the Border Patrol, including his name and address,” the sheriff continued. “Why this information was never followed up on by Border Patrol agents is something for them to answer. It is important to note that when our Office contacted the Department of Homeland Security this week regarding Razo’s immigration status, it took two days to finally receive confirmation of Razo’s illegal status.” “The fact is current rules and regulations are making it extremely difficult for any police officer on the street to know which laws they can or cannot enforce in the area of undocumented persons,” said Sheriff Dunlap. “I want to make clear that they [Lake County police officers] did everything they legally could have done on July 7, 2015 when they encountered and interviewed Juan Emmanuel Razo,” said Dunlap.

MORE

See also:

Obama Claims Power to Make Illegal Immigrants Eligible for Social Security, Disability
April 6, 2016 | Does the president of the United States have the power to unilaterally tell millions of individuals who are violating federal law that he will not enforce that law against them now, that they may continue to violate that law in the future and that he will take action that makes them eligible for federal benefit programs for which they are not currently eligible due to their unlawful status?

Through Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, President Barack Obama is telling the Supreme Court exactly this right now. The solicitor general calls what Obama is doing "prosecutorial discretion." He argues that under this particular type of "prosecutorial discretion," the executive can make millions of people in this country illegally eligible for Social Security, disability and Medicare. On April 18, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case. Entitled United States v. Texas, it pits President Obama against not only the Lone Star State, but also a majority of the states, which have joined in the litigation against the administration.

At issue is the policy the administration calls Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, which would allow aliens in this country illegally who are parents of citizens or lawful permanent residents to stay in the United States. "The Executive Branch unilaterally created a program — known as DAPA — that contravenes Congress's complex statutory framework for determining when an alien may lawfully enter, remain in, and work in the country," the attorney general and solicitor general of Texas explained in a brief submitted to the Supreme Court on behalf of the states seeking to block the policy. "DAPA would deem over four million unlawfully present aliens as 'lawfully present' and eligible for work authorization," says the Texas brief. "And 'lawful presence' is an immigration classification established by Congress that is necessary for valuable benefits, such as Medicare and Social Security."

In the administration's brief, the solicitor general admits that the president's DAPA program does not convert people illegally in the United States into legal immigrants. He further asserts that the administration at any time can decide to go ahead and remove these aliens from the country. "Deferred action does not confer lawful immigration status or provide any defense to removal," he says. "An alien with deferred action remains removable at any time and DHS has absolute discretion to revoke deferred action unilaterally, without notice or process." Despite this, he argues, the administration can authorize aliens here illegally on "deferred action" to legally work in the United States. "Without the ability to work lawfully, individuals with deferred action would have no way to lawfully make ends meet while present here," says the administration's brief.

MORE

Related:

New Guidance Warns Landlords They Could Face Discrimination Charges For Turning Down Tenants With Criminal Records
April 6, 2016 – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development is warning landlords they could face discrimination charges for turning down prospective tenants with criminal records – if the decision has an “unjustified discriminatory effect.”

A Republican senator described new HUD guidance issued this week as yet another move by the Obama administration to support convicted criminals. The 10-page document states that “where a policy or practice that restricts access to housing on the basis of criminal history has a disparate impact on individuals of a particular race, national origin, or other protected class, such policy or practice is unlawful under the Fair Housing Act.” The Fair Housing Act applies to federally-funded and private sector housing. Landlords will have to show, if challenged, that they are not turning away tenants “based on generalizations or stereotypes,” the guidance says.

Although the guidance notes the importance of landlords protecting their safety and property, landlords are expected to provide evidence that a policy of basing decisions on criminal history “actually assists in protecting resident safety and/or property.” “Bald assertions based on generalizations or stereotypes that any individual with an arrest or conviction record poses a greater risk than any individual without such a record are not sufficient to satisfy this burden.” The new guidance states that the U.S. prison population is “by far the largest in the world,” that a disproportionate number of African Americans and Hispanics are incarcerated, and therefore have a criminal record that could limit access to housing. “Because of widespread racial and ethnic disparities in the U.S. criminal justice system, criminal history-based restrictions on access to housing are likely disproportionately to burden African Americans and Hispanics.”

In one example, the guidance says a landlord who rejects a Hispanic tenant on the basis of criminal history but admits “a non-Hispanic White applicant with a comparable criminal record,” could be violating the act. The only crime specified in the guidance as a justified reason to deny housing is conviction for drug manufacturing or distribution. An HUD official told CNSNews.com that is an exemption that is in the act itself. Apart from that, the department won’t say which past criminal activities are considered acceptable, and which are not, in turning away a prospective tenant. “We’re not specifying the types of criminal records that would or would not justify the denying of housing,” the official told CNSNews.com.

MORE