No. You have missed what the trial was about entirely because Breitbart has successfully convinced you that it has something to do with immigration. It does not. This was a criminal trial, not an immigration proceeding.
Kate Steinle Verdict
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
No. You have missed what the trial was about entirely because Breitbart has successfully convinced you that it has something to do with immigration. It does not. This was a criminal trial, not an immigration proceeding.
WizardofOz
New member
What you are doing is suggesting that he receive justice, not based on what he did, but on who he is. It's a dangerous road you're walking.
And I'm not arguing against immigration restrictions.
No you didn't, you left words out and posted deceptively. Actually you and your cohorts are doing all the illustrating today.
No, you're just comparing it to Hitler, fomenting hate and fear (where did I just hear that?), he should have "received justice" years ago if it wasn't for your "compassionate solution" of protecting non-citizen illegal criminals. This wouldn't be in the news if it was an immigrant living here legally and you know it. It is political whether you like it or not.
I know, you only saw lying scumbag but you didn't see MY Final Solution on immigration which is basically saying it's my solution and I'm like Hitler. Thanks for your liberal input.
We'll just add a question to the form you fill out to receive compassionate humane treatment asking if in the future you plan on finding a gun and accidentally shooting an innocent young woman. That'll solve it.
Who do you think put it in the news?
It must have been me, of course. Keep trivializing the fact that this criminal was ONLY here because of sanctuary cities, poor immigration policies and FEDERAL LAWS BEING IGNORED BY STATES. You stated earlier that I might not like the law, but the law says he's innocent. You pick and choose which laws are OK?
You want this to be about me seeking prison time for murder and you want this case to only be about the law. It obviously wasn't murder and the prosecution was stupid for charging that. So, to you it's compassionate and humane to break the laws to display more compassion and humane treatment of people who also break the laws. That way, the laws can give the illegal criminal a fair trial by a jury of illegal criminal aliens (peers). No, you want criminal illegal aliens to be given fair trials for crimes committed while being here illegally, and a jury of legal law abiding US citizens with no knowledge that the accused is a convicted felon who broke the law to live here, thereby making it possible for him to commit the alleged crime. Gotcha :thumb:
Originally Posted by rexlunae
We'll just add a question to the form you fill out to receive compassionate humane treatment asking if in the future you plan on finding a gun and accidentally shooting an innocent young woman. That'll solve it.
Who do you think put it in the news?
It must have been me, of course. Keep trivializing the fact that this criminal was ONLY here because of sanctuary cities, poor immigration policies and FEDERAL LAWS BEING IGNORED BY STATES. You stated earlier that I might not like the law, but the law says he's innocent. You pick and choose which laws are OK?
You want this to be about me seeking prison time for murder and you want this case to only be about the law. It obviously wasn't murder and the prosecution was stupid for charging that. So, to you it's compassionate and humane to break the laws to display more compassion and humane treatment of people who also break the laws. That way, the laws can give the illegal criminal a fair trial by a jury of illegal criminal aliens (peers). No, you want criminal illegal aliens to be given fair trials for crimes committed while being here illegally, and a jury of legal law abiding US citizens with no knowledge that the accused is a convicted felon who broke the law to live here, thereby making it possible for him to commit the alleged crime. Gotcha :thumb:
All criminals still have legal rights. And immigrants who come here illegally have legal rights. That is the law. If you're going to be legalistic, you have to recognize that. No one could have known that he would go on to accidentally shoot a woman.
Thanks Mr. Obvious. If YOU'RE going to be legalistic, you have to recognize that IF THE LAW was followed, he would not have been there to pick up the magic gun to begin with.
Do you know if it's illegal to inform a jury of the defendant's prior felonies and deportations? If it is illegal, it needs to be changed. If I get a speeding ticket the judge sees my entire driving record. That's what makes no sense about this entire tragedy.
Again, there's no crystal ball for this stuff.
That would be prejudicial, and it would serve to trap people within the criminal justice system. There are rules about impeaching a witness based on prior convictions, and they vary by jurisdiction. I'll leave it for your research to dig them out.
There is significant evidence that this was an accident. How does a prior felony record bear on that?
Thanks for more liberal input. Tell me which one of those posts I'm wrong about.
[h=1]U.S. Justice Department to Cities: Focus on Crime Committed by Illegal Immigrants[/h]
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-new...ocus-on-crime-committed-by-illegal-immigrants
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. cities that refuse to step up efforts to focus on crimes committed by illegal immigrants will not be allowed to participate in a new crime reduction training program unveiled earlier this year by the Justice Department, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Thursday.
In making the announcement, Sessions singled out four local police departments that had expressed interest in the new Public Safety Partnership Program, saying they first had to answer a list of questions by Aug. 18 confirming they do not have any "sanctuary" policies to shield illegal immigrants from possible deportation by ensuring they will allow federal immigration officials access to local jails.
"Cities and states with so-called 'sanctuary' policies make all of us less safe," Sessions said.
The four police departments that must respond are Albuquerque, New Mexico; Baltimore, Maryland; and San Bernardino and Stockton, California.
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-new...ocus-on-crime-committed-by-illegal-immigrants
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. cities that refuse to step up efforts to focus on crimes committed by illegal immigrants will not be allowed to participate in a new crime reduction training program unveiled earlier this year by the Justice Department, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Thursday.
In making the announcement, Sessions singled out four local police departments that had expressed interest in the new Public Safety Partnership Program, saying they first had to answer a list of questions by Aug. 18 confirming they do not have any "sanctuary" policies to shield illegal immigrants from possible deportation by ensuring they will allow federal immigration officials access to local jails.
"Cities and states with so-called 'sanctuary' policies make all of us less safe," Sessions said.
The four police departments that must respond are Albuquerque, New Mexico; Baltimore, Maryland; and San Bernardino and Stockton, California.
WizardofOz
New member
How was my input "liberal"?
You whine about liberals and 'leftists' so much, the terms have all but lost their meaning whenever you type them.
I'm about as moderate as they come.
Newsflash - everything that doesn't align with your partisan view isn't necessarily 'liberal'.
[h=1]Godwin's law[/h]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.[9][10] Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by the American lawyer, journalist, and author Glenn Greenwald.[11]
