Will president Trump's jackbooted thugs go door to door searching for illegals?

[jillian]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

there won't be a president trump "rolleyes:

 

[Vandalshandle]

Want more examples of your constitutional rights?

This is hilarious, what a fucking moron. Like the officer stated, he (the officer) only needs to be satisfied the person questioned may be a US citizen. That is done via answering the questions or thinking they are exclaiming constitutional protections when the officer only needs to be satisfied the person may be a citizen.

From even the ACLU that states CBP has constitutional authority within 100 miles of the border and admits The Supreme Court has upheld the use of immigration checkpoints, but only insofar as the stops consist only of a brief and limited inquiry into residence status.
The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone

• In this 100-mile zone, Border Patrol agents have certain extra-Constitutional powers. For instance, Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
• Border Patrol, nevertheless, cannot pull anyone over without "reasonable suspicion" of an immigration violation or crime (reasonable suspicion is more than just a "hunch"). Similarly, Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the 100-mile zone without a warrant or "probable cause" (a reasonable belief, based on the circumstances, that an immigration violation or crime has likely occurred).

This means that permanent checkpoints aren't the same as roving check points to which from the same link states

For example, Border Patrol, according to news reports, operates approximately 170 interior checkpoints throughout the country (the actual number in operation at any given time is not publicly known). The ACLU believes that these checkpoints amount to dragnet, suspicionless stops that cannot be reconciled with Fourth Amendment protections. The Supreme Court has upheld the use of immigration checkpoints, but only insofar as the stops consist only of a brief and limited inquiry into residence status.

I really should show this to the lieutenant, to whom the commander of the Sheriff's Auxiliary reports, where I volunteer, Liquid, but I can't. Even though I am not paid to serve, I could still be fired for not being discreet, and that would bruise my ego. I won't even ask how these people got away with refusing border patrol demands, since you claim that the BP has the constitutional authority to detain them.

So, you just go on thinking that us law enforcement folks can weed out and deport illegal aliens at the rate of 6 million per year, without trials, without probable cause, and without due process. Of course, you will never really know, since Trump's chances of becoming president of the USA is pretty much the same as his chance of dying because he had been struck by lightening.

 

[Bond27]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

there won't be a president trump "rolleyes:

If you Jews rig the elections there will be a third reich.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

there won't be a president trump "rolleyes:

If you Jews rig the elections there will be a third reich.

Yep! Time for grog rations!

 

[ChrisL]

Here we go again. Another Trump supporter who thinks that the president has the authority to create a tax, regardless of the fact that the constitution says that only the House of Representatives can do that...not to mention that it would shut down trade with Mexico and cost American businesses billions of dollars.

So where did I say Trump was going to create a tax?
And mexico already costs the US billions so whats your point?

Ok, so apparently you understand that Trump is lying when he says that he is going to establish taxes on money sent to Mexico, and violate congressionally approved NAFTA treaties by putting tariffs on Mexican products (which would be paid by American consumers when they buy those products). Welcome to the world of reality.

I dont have a problem paying more for US made products if it means jobs for Americans.
How about you?

Well, then buy a Buick (It is going to be made in China) Or, buy a Kia (It is made in Georgia). Or, buy a Ford (It is made in Canada and Mexico). Me? I drive a Honda, because I am tired of the crap that GM has been selling me for 40 years. I also like fresh vegetables all year, and during the winter, 2/3rd of them come from Mexico. I shop at Walmart, over 90% of everything in the store is made outside America. Maybe you can buy one of Trump's shirts. They are made in Mexico. Personally, mine are made in Vietnam.

Our trade agreements are lopsided as hell.

I can agree with you, but I still don't think Trump is the answer.

 

[jillian]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

there won't be a president trump "rolleyes:

If you Jews rig the elections there will be a third reich.

you're kind of a psychotic loon.

 

[Liquid Reigns]

Want more examples of your constitutional rights?

This is hilarious, what a fucking moron. Like the officer stated, he (the officer) only needs to be satisfied the person questioned may be a US citizen. That is done via answering the questions or thinking they are exclaiming constitutional protections when the officer only needs to be satisfied the person may be a citizen.

From even the ACLU that states CBP has constitutional authority within 100 miles of the border and admits The Supreme Court has upheld the use of immigration checkpoints, but only insofar as the stops consist only of a brief and limited inquiry into residence status.
The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone

• In this 100-mile zone, Border Patrol agents have certain extra-Constitutional powers. For instance, Border Patrol can operate immigration checkpoints.
• Border Patrol, nevertheless, cannot pull anyone over without "reasonable suspicion" of an immigration violation or crime (reasonable suspicion is more than just a "hunch"). Similarly, Border Patrol cannot search vehicles in the 100-mile zone without a warrant or "probable cause" (a reasonable belief, based on the circumstances, that an immigration violation or crime has likely occurred).

This means that permanent checkpoints aren't the same as roving check points to which from the same link states

For example, Border Patrol, according to news reports, operates approximately 170 interior checkpoints throughout the country (the actual number in operation at any given time is not publicly known). The ACLU believes that these checkpoints amount to dragnet, suspicionless stops that cannot be reconciled with Fourth Amendment protections. The Supreme Court has upheld the use of immigration checkpoints, but only insofar as the stops consist only of a brief and limited inquiry into residence status.

I really should show this to the lieutenant, to whom the commander of the Sheriff's Auxiliary reports, where I volunteer, Liquid, but I can't. Even though I am not paid to serve, I could still be fired for not being discreet, and that would bruise my ego. I won't even ask how these people got away with refusing border patrol demands, since you claim that the BP has the constitutional authority to detain them.

So, you just go on thinking that us law enforcement folks can weed out and deport illegal aliens at the rate of 6 million per year, without trials, without probable cause, and without due process. Of course, you will never really know, since Trump's chances of becoming president of the USA is pretty much the same as his chance of dying because he had been struck by lightening.

Show it to whomever you wish, and have them explain it to you so that you can understand it. People didn't get away with refusing border patrol demands as nothing was demanded from them, CBP has the Constitutional authority to ask, as United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976) states. Now you try to put words in my comments that aren't there, at no point did I state CBP could detain them, you are confusing Law Enforcement Officers with CBP, you are either being intellectually dishonest or are just outright ignorant.

You volunteer and as a volunteer you have NO law enforcement authority, you are not in law enforcement, nor have you ever been. LMFAO

I suggest you learn immigration law, it is much different then civil/criminal law. Then I suggest you learn what an Expedited Removal is (no court hearing, no charges), in fact you can go back a page or 2 where I linked to it for you. I love how you project I am a Trump supporter based on this simple topic. watafuknmoron

The difference between you and I, is that I will vote for which ever Republican receives the nominee, simply because I don't want either Democrat in that office. My guess is you will sit out if Trump gets the nominee simply due to your own ignorance.

 

[Stephanie]

it's titles like this that is causing DIVISION and violence. and it's not coming from the Republicans. it's sickening

 

[jasonnfree]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

Here's a link for what it takes for an American to live in Mexico. That pig vincente fox knows that his country deals harshly with those who break Mexican immigration laws, but still gives the f word to Trump, and you pro undocumented people applaud fox for it. I do agree though, that what Trump proposes is unworkable, but no other country allows foreigners in their country as easily as America does, which is why we get millions of immigrants with no money, few skills, and many needs.

Newly issued Mexican immigration regulations are bad news for Americans

 

[ChrisL]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

Here's a link for what it takes for an American to live in Mexico. That pig vincente fox knows that his country deals harshly with those who break Mexican immigration laws, but still gives the f word to Trump, and you pro undocumented people applaud fox for it. I do agree though, that what Trump proposes is unworkable, but no other country allows foreigners in their country as easily as America does, which is why we get millions of immigrants with no money, few skills, and many needs.

Newly issued Mexican immigration regulations are bad news for Americans

Point is, it is completely irrational to think you can "round up" millions of people and deport them without HUGE costs to the American people. We should just let those who are already here remain, and step it up with our border control so that we aren't allowing MORE and MORE to enter the country illegally. In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should deny any kind of immigration to this country unless it is on a work visa. We have our limits and they are already being pushed. In a country of over 300,000,000 DOCUMENTED people, it's quite obvious that we do not have enough jobs or resources for anyone else.

 

[LilOlLady]

Door to door is not necessary but a joke. All that has to be done is mandatory E-Verify, fines, jail time and confiscate businesses that hire cheap illegal aliens, If they cannot work and get welfare they will self deport taking their anchor babies with them so they can get welfare in Mexico.

 

[rhodescholar]

Would not surprise me! Adolf Trump is bringing back the old days of George Wallace. Actually, Trump is more dangerous than Wallace. He's clearly the most dangerous presidential candidate in my lifetime. Sad...

While I get this is an internet forum, and juvenile, overly-emotional responses are de riguer, the moment I see people attaching Trump to hitler, calling him "racist," a "nazi", etc., I realize they are utterly devoid of facts or a real argument, and are trying to use childish emotional responses in place of having something intelligent to offer.

The fact is that Trump is not racist nor has he said anything that can be considered as such; like most Americans who actually work for a living he is fed up with the democrats importing large numbers of impoverished foreigners who will be dependent upon them in exchange for votes. This is EXACTLY what the founding fathers warned the country not to do, use the purse to buy votes from people who become addicted to receiving handouts.

A party that needs to import large numbers of foreigners because native US citizens won't vote for them has utterly failed in its mission, and by calling all those who rightfully are opposed to the country's enabling and allowance of illegals to remain in the country "racist" is childish and proof the person cannot defend the indefensible. Those defending the presence and support of illegals usually either have an agenda (la raza) or are a short-sighted democratic party supporter, who does not understand how the immense amount of money the country is wasting on illegals is destroying not only the nation's financial backbone but its underlying civic nature as well.

I say that because like many other business owners, I am reaching an end point where I will no longer pay taxes nor will I deduct them from my employees because of the vast amount of funds the federal government is spending against mine and most citizens' wishes on illegals. You might say "go ahead, you'll go to jail." Is the federal gov't going to arrest 100 million people?

There ARE going to be riots soon, and Trump came at just the right time - the pent-up anger over the illegal aliens; anchor baby nonsense, free schooling/housing/healthcare, and welfare is at a boiling point, and the democratic party and its subversive allies embracing its platform of permanent inflows of illegals such as the NY Times will be brought to task in the most ghastly ways for their crimes. Just watch if Trump is not elected, or the democrats try to stop the country from mass deporting the illegals and changing the laws to fix this problem. Watts '65 and Chicago '68 will look like picnics compared to what people like me are willing to do to stop my money and children's futures from being stolen by the national democratic party and hordes of their future voters from central/south america.

 

[rhodescholar]

And THAT costs money too!!! Good grief. So . . . your solution is just "deport them!" Well, if that was feasible, why hasn't anyone else done it? Because it is NOT feasible or affordable. That's why.

Do the folliwng and most will leave on their own:

1) no admittance of illegals to any school or college
2) no admittance of illegals to any housing/child care credits for Section 8 housing
3) no admittance of illegals to any hospital
4) $10K fine and 5 year prison sentence to any employer and all executives of any firms with illegals employed
5) no welfare of any kind for illegals
6) anchor baby mis-reading of 14th amendment repaired - BOTH parents must be citizens for baby to be a US cit
7) must be a citizen/permanent resident to open a bank account, and only they can rent or buy an apartment/house/property
8) complete border fence across entire southern border using Israel's gaza border fence as a model. Use of advanced technologies such as ground based radar to catch those digging tunnels
9) apply all of these retro-actively, so that anchor babies going back to 1950 lose their citizenship
10) tax all remittances through the wire banking system at 85%, which will be used to fund the fence's construction and re-imburse taxpayers like me who have spent huge amounts of money on illegals in our cities
11) all countries of origin of these people who refuse to accept their former residents will lose all and any aid provided. They will also lose any favorable tax treaty status and/or trade agreements in place. All visas for such countries will be reduced to a trickle and only on a VERY limited basis. Diplomatic relations will be downgraded to attache level.
12) conduct persistent and relentless workplace raids until all employers have accepted that the oversight and strength of fines makes having illegal employees no longer worth it

Once you eliminate all of the benefits for the illegals and their children, their ability to work/earn a living/find a place to live, most will self-deport, reducing the need to chase them down in the shadows and forcibly deport them. Familes where the parents came to the US and had illegal children will have the citizenship of their children revoked, and the parents will be unable to return to the US for any reason for no less than 30 years.

While seemingly draconian, these steps are actually in place in most other countries; it is just that in the US the democratic party propaganda spewed through its media allies has so brainwashed americans that many actually believe that there is nothing wrong with having lots of illegals around, that "they enrich the culture" or some other BS.

Once they are shown the hard facts, like New Yorkers who learn that NYS/NYC spends over $5 BILLION PER YEAR educating illegal children, for example, the amount of money that could finish the Second Avenue subway from Wall St to the Bronx, they begin to realize how badly they have been lied to for so long.

 

[ChrisL]

And THAT costs money too!!! Good grief. So . . . your solution is just "deport them!" Well, if that was feasible, why hasn't anyone else done it? Because it is NOT feasible or affordable. That's why.

Do the folliwng and most will leave on their own:

1) no admittance of illegals to any school or college
2) no admittance of illegals to any housing/child care credits for Section 8 housing
3) no admittance of illegals to any hospital
4) $10K fine and 5 year prison sentence to any employer and all executives of any firms with illegals employed
5) no welfare of any kind for illegals
6) anchor baby mis-reading of 14th amendment repaired - BOTH parents must be citizens for baby to be a US cit
7) must be a citizen/permanent resident to open a bank account, and only they can rent or buy an apartment/house/property
8) complete border fence across entire southern border using Israel's gaza border fence as a model. Use of advanced technologies such as ground based radar to catch those digging tunnels
9) apply all of these retro-actively, so that anchor babies going back to 1950 lose their citizenship
10) tax all remittances through the wire banking system at 85%, which will be used to fund the fence's construction and re-imburse taxpayers like me who have spent huge amounts of money on illegals in our cities
11) all countries of origin of these people who refuse to accept their former residents will lose all and any aid provided. They will also lose any favorable tax treaty status and/or trade agreements in place. All visas for such countries will be reduced to a trickle and only on a VERY limited basis. Diplomatic relations will be downgraded to attache level.
12) conduct persistent and relentless workplace raids until all employers have accepted that the oversight and strength of fines makes having illegal employees no longer worth it

Once you eliminate all of the benefits for the illegals and their children, their ability to work/earn a living/find a place to live, most will self-deport, reducing the need to chase them down in the shadows and forcibly deport them. Familes where the parents came to the US and had illegal children will have the citizenship of their children revoked, and the parents will be unable to return to the US for any reason for no less than 30 years.

While seemingly draconian, these steps are actually in place in most other countries; it is just that in the US the democratic party propaganda spewed through its media allies has so brainwashed americans that many actually believe that there is nothing wrong with having lots of illegals around, that "they enrich the culture" or some other BS.

Once they are shown the hard facts, like New Yorkers who learn that NYS/NYC spends over $5 BILLION PER YEAR educating illegal children, for example, the amount of money that could finish the Second Avenue subway from Wall St to the Bronx, they begin to realize how badly they have been lied to for so long.

Some of these ideas I can get behind, but others not so much. Would you let a toddler die because it was an "illegal" by not treating it at the hospital? Not me.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Will Trump send jackbooted thugs into every neighborhood searching for illegals and anyone else deemed anti-American?

Ignorant children on here always makes me laugh out loud


So the some on the left is accusing trump of what he might do?

When they already fuckin did it??????

 

[rhodescholar]

Some of these ideas I can get behind, but others not so much. Would you let a toddler die because it was an "illegal" by not treating it at the hospital? Not me.

Emergencies requiring immediate care can be dealt with, and the originating country (Mexico, Honduras, etc) billed for the care. Any cases not requiring immediate ambulatory care can be medi-vacced by helo to mexico or flown to their originating nation.

Keep in mind there are illegals coming across the border bringing their children in solely for the medical care of the US, and dozens of hospitals have had to close because of their non-payment. That has been a disaster for the citizens living in the neighborhoods where that has happened as they've lost local medical facilities, causing many to die because of the much longer distance they've had to travel for care - yet another cost to the country of providing support for illegals so the democraps can have additional votes.

 

[rhodescholar]

Ignorant children on here always makes me laugh out loud So the some on the left is accusing trump of what he might do? When they already fuckin did it??????

Its like the BS about banning muslims, the far left filth should go look up what Carter - the pet darling of the far left - did WRT iran.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Ignorant children on here always makes me laugh out loud So the some on the left is accusing trump of what he might do? When they already fuckin did it??????

Its like the BS about banning muslims, the far left filth should go look up what Carter - the pet darling of the far left - did WRT iran.

Yup or the Japanese americans

That's three that they did....

 

[Manonthestreet]

Door to door is not necessary but a joke. All that has to be done is mandatory E-Verify, fines, jail time and confiscate businesses that hire cheap illegal aliens, If they cannot work and get welfare they will self deport taking their anchor babies with them so they can get welfare in Mexico.

Plus you know where they are by the checks you send them Just knock on the door and say the party is over seeyabye

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

They don't have to be found guilty in a court of law, they can be given waivers. Those caught at the border can be fingerprinted, photographed, and then returned back across with no court appearance required.

Don't give up your day job to become a lawyer. Nobody can be deported unles:
1. They are convicted in a court of law of being in the country illegally, or
2. They VOLUNTARILY give up that right and agree to be deported without a trial, which means that they are not guilty of any prior offenses the next time they do it.

Love the snide insults from people that think they know what they are talking about, when the reality of it is they only know half of what they think they know. SMFH

Those caught at the border can be returned with a simple fingerprint, photograph and/or a waiver. Those charged with EWI at the border (which is what Obama is doing at the border to increase his appearance of deporting more illegals than any other President in History) can be given a court appearance (see your own link for Operation Streamline) or offered the waiver which is an admission of guilt to which if they cross the border again they can be charged with a felony instead of the misdemeanor.

Visa overstays with order of deportation against them have already had their day in court and were denied, that's why they were ordered removed.

Again, illegals are limited in their constitutional protections, they have very, very few.

Liquid, for Christ sake, you are saying exactly the same thing that I am saying except that I call it pleading "guilty" in a court of law, and you call it "offered a waiver". The fact is that it is a guilty plea, and the court has to find him guilty for him to be deported.

On the other hand, those crossing the border are often given the option of being driven back over the border with no trial, in which case, they also have no record of having done anything illegal..

I don't know what I am talking about? I live 30 miles from the Mexican border, and have attended Operation Streamline court sessions twice, personally.

Saying exactly the same thing? Then there was no need for your snide remark if all you are doing is repeating what I state. SMH

Returns are always fingerprinted and photographed and they also talk to an Immigration Officer if they choose to claim asylum. There is a record of their prior attempt if they are caught a second time, which is why they fingerprint and photograph them.

You seem to think all illegals can't be deported without first being found guilty in court, which isn't completely true, as they can sign a waiver and forgo the court all together, which, usually gets them out of custody much quicker, some go back home once deported, others turn around and try the next day to get back in.

Possibilities for Reentry to the U.S. After Removal | Nolo.com

If you do come back to the U.S. without permission after a removal order, the order could be “reinstated,” which is a process that allows an immigration officer to send you back to the country to which you were previously deported without letting you see an immigration judge first. Additionally, you could be charged with the federal crime of illegal reentry. But as discussed below, you can, if you have separate grounds upon which to request U.S. entry, apply for permission to return to the United States.

Nope. False again. Nobody in the US is guilty of a crime unless convicted in a court of law, including anyone who "signed a waiver" whatever the hell you are referring to by that. Look it up. You will find it in your 8th grade Civics text. Operation Streamline, which you argue is a procedure to deport without a criminal conviction is, in fact, a court of law, complete with a prosecutor, defence attorney, and a judge, as explained in my link, as a way to meet the constitutional requirements of a criminal conviction. Until, or unless that happens, no fingerprints, no, "Waiver", or anything else Trump can dream up, without a court conviction, can create a criminal record. These concepts are a package: Criminal charge, trial, criminal conviction, sentence, criminal record. None can be excluded. No one can become an "illegal alien" until a court determines that he broke a law. Until that moment, he is, at worst, an "undocumented alien"

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)
provides for several types of due process for aliens, depending on their circumstances of arrival and stay. The law does not require that all removals be ordered by an immigration judge.



The Supreme Court has said that, where expulsion proceedings are concerned, due process for aliens in the United States is whatever Congress chooses it to be — subject to certain constraints imposed by the Constitution, and as ultimately interpreted by the courts themselves, that is.