'This Is Not Normal': US Judge Denounces Trump's Attacks on Judiciary

[Derf]

Except that after they get here, they are less likely to commit crimes than native born American citizens!

Reference: https://www.cato.org/blog/new-resear...igration-crime

not sure what that has to do with it. That's like saying a homosexual can live a moral life while continuing in homosexuality. Or a thief is a good person while he is stealing. Or "that priest is a good man--he just likes little boys." If they are staying in America against the law, then they are constantly committing a crime.

 

[User Name]

If they are staying in America against the law, then they are constantly committing a crime.

Those strawberries aren't going to pick themselves, boy!

 

[Derf]

Except that after they get here, they are less likely to commit crimes than native born American citizens!

Reference: https://www.cato.org/blog/new-resear...igration-crime

From a reference from your link: "However, we do find a significant relationship between the activation of 287(g) agreements (enables local law enforcement agencies to enforce federal immigration laws) and assaults against police officers." So your reference shows that illegal immigrants value their ability to be in the country so much that they 1. enter illegally, and 2. assault police officers in order to stay here illegally.

That means that they DO continue to commit some crimes in disproportionate numbers.

I wonder at the purpose of these researchers when they say: "It’s wonderful to see serious academics like those above dive into investigating how illegal immigrants affect crime." and "Gunadi’s study is especially heartening to read as he started with methods adapted by Michelangelo Landgrave and myself, improved upon them, and came to a result that is similar to ours. Gunadi found a smaller difference between native-born and illegal immigrant incarceration rates, that they are one-third below natives rather than 50 percent below, but there’s no arguing with his better methods."

The numbers dropped significantly when different methods were applied, yet you feel like the research is unbiased?

 

[Derf]

Those strawberries aren't going to pick themselves, boy!

You probably realize that maintaining an illegal workforce precipitates that exact situation. They are afraid of being deported, so they are willing to work in less than ideal conditions.

 

[The Barbarian]

Then you agree with me that your statement that Trump called all minorities "rapists and drug dealers with a few good people" was hyperbole?

When you added "all" to it, you made it your statement. Cmon. You're better than that.

Are you saying that you are allowed to engage in hyperbole

You can it you want to, You own it, now.

, but Trump can't?

I don't think he can avoid it. He's a compulsive liar.

Why is that??

Upbringing, or maybe this:

According to the Toxicology Data Network at the National Institutes of Health, diethylpropion has a high risk of dependency and chronic abuse- such as taking it for years – can cause delusions, paranoia, and hyperactivity. Studies in medical journals also report it can result in sleeplessness and impulse control problems, characteristics Trump demonstrated throughout the campaign and in the weeks since his inauguration

Hope Hicks, a White House spokeswoman, acknowledged that Trump used them as diet pills for a few days in the early 1980s. However, the medical records contradict the assertion of the length of time Trump used the drugs and photographs of Trump from 1982 show him to be quite slender.
http://polipace.com/2018/03/01/trump-medical-records-show-worrisome-addiction-drug/

You get what? I didn't suggest all Anglos are completely equitable to other races.

You offered a milder version of Trump's racist claim that a "Mexican", actually a native-born American citizen couldn't be impartial.


(Cites a black president appointing an Hispanic person to the court)

Did I say she was black?

Most of Obama's appointments to judicial seats have been Anglo. So I'm wondering what that was about.

I think you missed my point. Obama did not merely consider her judicial qualifications when appointing her

What else do you think he had in mind, and what is your evidence for it? Do you think Trump did that in appointing justices?

Why is it that he could consider her race (and gender)

Why is it that Trump could consider race and gender in his appointments? And what is your evidence for that?

but Trump can't consider someone else's race when complaining about him?

It's what racists do. It doesn't matter that he's an American citizen, that he was born here. All that matters to Trump is that he's Hispanic. But it only matters in appointments, if the person isn't Anglo? Why is that?

What did you say? I think what you said was "the cow jumped over the moon." It should be ok to interpret your words that way, since those are just words on electronic paper? No, the federal judiciary is only to apply the laws it has. If the Constitution needs to say something else, Congress and the States get to change what it says.

But the Judicial Branch gets to interpret what the law means. Not the President, not the Congress.

Same with other presidents and many citizens. That's why homosexuals go to the courts to get their behavior redefined as "legal" when it wasn't legal before.

It had always been legal. It's just that the justices ruled that the Constitution now applies to them as well

 

[ok doser]

Except that after they get here, they are less likely to commit crimes than native born American citizens!

Reference: https://www.cato.org/blog/new-resear...igration-crime

well, no

most crime happens within a community

in a community of illegals who are reluctant to have any interaction with law enforcement, they are less likely to report crimes

other studies have shown that, knowing this, criminals are more likely to prey upon illegals, not less

 

[User Name]

You probably realize that maintaining an illegal workforce precipitates that exact situation. They are afraid of being deported, so they are willing to work in less than ideal conditions.

Do you realize that native-born birthrates have been declining for decades, and that without immigration (both legal and illegal), the population of the United States would be in decline, and that this trend is unsustainable given our current economic model?

Reference: https://www.thebalance.com/birth-rate-by-state-4684536

 

[Derf]

Do you realize that native-born birthrates have been declining for decades, and that without immigration (both legal and illegal), the population of the United States would be in decline, and that this trend is unsustainable given our current economic model?

Reference: https://www.thebalance.com/birth-rate-by-state-4684536

So you are in favor of employers taking advantage of illegal immigarnts that are afraid of being deported?

 

[Derf]

When you added "all" to it, you made it your statement. Cmon. You're better than that.



You can it you want to, You own it, now.



I don't think he can avoid it. He's a compulsive liar.



Upbringing, or maybe this:

According to the Toxicology Data Network at the National Institutes of Health, diethylpropion has a high risk of dependency and chronic abuse- such as taking it for years – can cause delusions, paranoia, and hyperactivity. Studies in medical journals also report it can result in sleeplessness and impulse control problems, characteristics Trump demonstrated throughout the campaign and in the weeks since his inauguration

Hope Hicks, a White House spokeswoman, acknowledged that Trump used them as diet pills for a few days in the early 1980s. However, the medical records contradict the assertion of the length of time Trump used the drugs and photographs of Trump from 1982 show him to be quite slender.
http://polipace.com/2018/03/01/trump-medical-records-show-worrisome-addiction-drug/




You offered a milder version of Trump's racist claim that a "Mexican", actually a native-born American citizen couldn't be impartial.


(Cites a black president appointing an Hispanic person to the court)



Most of Obama's appointments to judicial seats have been Anglo. So I'm wondering what that was about.



What else do you think he had in mind, and what is your evidence for it? Do you think Trump did that in appointing justices?



Why is it that Trump could consider race and gender in his appointments? And what is your evidence for that?



It's what racists do. It doesn't matter that he's an American citizen, that he was born here. All that matters to Trump is that he's Hispanic. But it only matters in appointments, if the person isn't Anglo? Why is that?



But the Judicial Branch gets to interpret what the law means. Not the President, not the Congress.



It had always been legal. It's just that the justices ruled that the Constitution now applies to them as well

You're starting to flail again, Barb. everyone can tell...

 

[User Name]

So you are in favor of employers taking advantage of illegal immigarnts that are afraid of being deported?

All that I am saying is that the immigration issue is more complicated than either of us can truly understand, let alone solve. I would say, however, that "employers taking advantage of illegal immigarnts that are afraid of being deported" is less cruel than your apparent solution, which is to label them all as criminals and either throw them in jail or deport them by the millions--a solution that is both cost prohibitive and would do far more harm than good to both them and us.

 

[The Barbarian]

You're starting to flail again, Barb. everyone can tell...

Funny how those doing it, never realize that it's them, um?

I'm thinking you've just realized the problem inherent in pointing to the appointment of Hispanic judges as at least partly racially-motivated, while not assuming the same if an Anglo judge is appointed.

 

[The Barbarian]

From a reference from your link: "However, we do find a significant relationship between the activation of 287(g) agreements (enables local law enforcement agencies to enforce federal immigration laws) and assaults against police officers." So your reference shows that illegal immigrants value their ability to be in the country so much that they 1. enter illegally, and 2. assault police officers in order to stay here illegally.

That means that they DO continue to commit some crimes in disproportionate numbers.

Illegal entry, for example. The salient fact is that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes and specifically fewer violent crimes than native-born Americans. This is why cities along the Rio Grande have lower rates of violent crime; there are a lot of illegal aliens living there. Texas is one of the few states that keeps stats on this, and yes, illegal aliens are less dangerous than the rest of us.

In fact, the more serious the crime, the greater disparity. Native born Americans, for example, commit murder in Texas at a far higher rate than do illegal immigrants.

The study found that in Texas, illegal immigrants were 47% less likely to be convicted of a crime than native-born Americans, and legal immigrants were 65 percent less likely to be convicted of a crime. Noweasteh says that holds for every type of crime, from major felonies to minor misdemeanors and even traffic offenses.

"I think it is surprising to a lot of people," Nowrasteh said. "illegal immigrants break immigration laws, so I think folks assume that they break other laws, but that's just not the case."

He says there is a simple explanation for the surprising disparity in crime rates between native American citizens and illegal immigrants.

"If they break a law they are arrested, and then they get deported," he said. "That is a much more serious punishment than for native born Americans, so they have much more of an incentive to keep their nose clean," he said.

In Texas in 2017, 399,155 native-born Americans were convicted of crimes, along with 16,275 illegal immigrants and 18,235 legal immigrants. That means 1,702 natives were convicted for every 100,000 natives, while 899 illegal immigrants were convicted for every 100,000 illegal immigrants in the state.

For sex crimes, the type of crime President Trump accused Mexican immigrants of committing, 31 out of every 100,000 illegal immigrants were convicted of crimes ranging from sexual assault to commercial sex in 2017, about 14% below the conviction rate for native born Americans living in Texas.
https://woai.iheart.com/content/2019...n-native-born/

Just for the record, the ruling party in Texas is officially hostile to illegal aliens and is highly unlikely to produce a study biased in their favor. I'm very sure they would prefer that the numbers don't sort out the way they do. There's a deep divide in the state between Trump partisans and Perry conservatives on this. Former governor Perry was deep red on almost anything, but having most of his support from Texas business and other commercial interests, he was not very concerned about illegal immigration, and didn't really do much to stop it. "Bad for bidness", you know. He even favored giving the children of illegal aliens in-state college tuition rates. "Good for bidness."

The numbers dropped significantly when different methods were applied, yet you feel like the research is unbiased?

Whoa. Illegal aliens are only one-third less likely to commit crime than native-born Americans are, not half as likely. That would explain, for example, why the murder rates in border cities much lower than elsewhere, but not half as low.

The laws need to be enforced. That's not the issue. The issue is that laws that harm us shouldn't exist. The immigration system is broken, and if it was enforced, would be an economic disaster for the United States. But until we get a president and Congress willing to do the right things, that's how it's going to be.

 

[ok doser]

... illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes and specifically fewer violent crimes than native-born Americans. ...

... illegal aliens are less dangerous than the rest of us ....

... Illegal aliens are ... less likely to commit crime than native-born Americans are ...

as it turns out, barbie is lying

most crime happens within a community, so illegals tend to commit crimes against other illegals, who are understandably reluctant to report those crimes to law enforcement

yes, fewer illegals are prosecuted and convicted

but that's only because their victims usually don't report crimes committed against them

 

[The Barbarian]

not sure what that has to do with it.

It means that when Donald Trump announced that they are rapists and drug dealers "with a few good people", he was lying as usual.

If they are staying in America against the law, then they are constantly committing a crime.

No. It is not a crime to be in America illegally. It's a civil offense. The growing number of illegal aliens who came here legally and overstayed have committed no crime at all. That's a holdover from the time of the founders, when there were open borders, and there were fewer laws and restraints on us.

 

[Derf]

All that I am saying is that the immigration issue is more complicated than either of us can truly understand, let alone solve. I would say, however, that "employers taking advantage of illegal immigarnts that are afraid of being deported" is less cruel than your apparent solution, which is to label them all as criminals and either throw them in jail or deport them by the millions--a solution that is both cost prohibitive and would do far more harm than good to both them and us.

That's not my solution, that's my description of the problem.

 

[Derf]

Funny how those doing it, never realize that it's them, um?

Yes. I was hoping you would notice.

I'm thinking you've just realized the problem inherent in pointing to the appointment of Hispanic judges as at least partly racially-motivated, while not assuming the same if an Anglo judge is appointed.

No. I pointed out that is a distinct possibility. Personally, I don't think considering race in those instances is that bad an idea, just like I told my son, when talking about the Obama candidacy, that if two equally qualified candidates, with identical political views, one black and one white, were running for the office of POTUS, I would likely lean toward the black candidate--considering the race of the candidate for the purpose of helping to establish the idea within our country that we don't need to consider race in that office. I wouldn't consider that necessary now that we have had a black president, at least on the level of country, though I might still on the level of party. Obviously it would be very difficult to find two candidates that are equivalent in qualifications and political views.

But just as a jury needing to be made up of peers of the accused should require that no black person should ever face a totally white jury, if it can at all be avoided, neither should all judges be white in a country that has fair numbers of minority citizens (and neither should he face an all black jury, if it can be avoided). My point, that I will try to explain for the third time, is that it is appropriate to consider the race of a judge in his official duties. This is no different than any judge that is involved, in a case he is hearing, in his personal life--he would need to recuse himself IF that involvement will prejudice his opinion.

For instance, if an Hispanic judge, whose parents entered the country illegally and sired the judge while on American soil, were to hear a case on anchor babies, he should probably recuse himself. He would likely be prejudicial in his ruling.

So we've talked about both positive and negative instances of considering race in judicial matters. Trump's use might be either positive or negative--I'm not sure of his motives. His execution of that consideration was poorly conceived.

 

[Derf]

It means that when Donald Trump announced that they are rapists and drug dealers "with a few good people", he was lying as usual.

"Some" isn't the same as "a few". Your statement, with quotes, is a lie. Remember saying this:

Funny how those doing it, never realize that it's them, um?

No. It is not a crime to be in America illegally. It's a civil offense. The growing number of illegal aliens who came here legally and overstayed have committed no crime at all. That's a holdover from the time of the founders, when there were open borders, and there were fewer laws and restraints on us.

From https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/crime-enter-illegally.html:
"Whether it’s by crossing the U.S. border with a "coyote" or buying a fake U.S. passport, a foreign national who enters the U.S. illegally can be both convicted of a crime and held responsible for a civil violation under the U.S. immigration laws."

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes that Derf attributed Obama's appointment of Hispanic judges as maybe due to racial factors, but not Obama's appointment of Anglo judges)

Funny how people flailing never notice that they're doing it.

Yes. I was hoping you would notice.

I think everyone noticed.

No. I pointed out that is a distinct possibility.

Just for Hispanic judges, but not for his appointment of Anglo judges.

That's puzzling, since Obama is neither Hispanic, nor Anglo.

For instance, if an Hispanic judge, whose parents entered the country illegally and sired the judge while on American soil, were to hear a case on anchor babies, he should probably recuse himself. He would likely be prejudicial in his ruling.

But of course, Trump attacked the judge in his fraud trial simply because he was Hispanic, falsely accusing him of being a "Mexican."

So we've talked about both positive and negative instances of considering race in judicial matters. Trump's use might be either positive or negative--I'm not sure of his motives.

The fact that he falsely claimed the judge was "Mexican" pretty much settles that one. Trump was obviously guilty; the attack on the judge was just an attempt to intimidate him. It didn't work and ultimately, he paid back the people he defrauded before it ever went to trial. No one really expected that he wouldn't have been found guilty. The attack on the judge is pretty much S.O.P. for him; he's done that before, such as when he was caught trying to keep black people out of his apartment houses.

His execution of that consideration was poorly conceived.

No kidding. It was intended to muddy the water, but it merely exposed him.

 

[Derf]

Barbarian observes that Derf attributed Obama's appointment of Hispanic judges as maybe due to racial factors, but not Obama's appointment of Anglo judges)

You mean "Barbarian observes something that wasn't observable, since it didn't happen."

The fact that he falsely claimed the judge was "Mexican" pretty much settles that one.

That wasn't false. Here's what the Wash. Post says: "Curiel’s parents were immigrants from Mexico." I spent a little time living in California (where the case was brought against Trump University). It was common to refer to those of Mexican descent, even if citizens of both the USA and California, as "Mexicans". Whether that's a good or bad thing, I'll let you decide.

No kidding. It was intended to muddy the water, but it merely exposed him.

Maybe. Or maybe it was intended to bring into a rather extended diatribe about something that wasn't particularly helpful for his campaign, something WAS helpful for his campaign, i.e., that "Mexicans" will like him as president. I went and listened to Trump's tirade against Judge Curiel, and that's what it sounded like to me. But I must admit that your superpower of determining other people's motives is impressive, even if inaccurate.

And the attempt by the press (I'm sure WAPO is a prime example) to make something else out of it is similar to many, many, other statements that the antagonistic side of the press has brought up numerous times. This is deception by the press. And if the press is acting willfully to deceive, it is rightfully attacked.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
It means that when Donald Trump announced that they are rapists and drug dealers "with a few good people", he was lying as usual.

"Some" isn't the same as "a few". Your statement, with quotes, is a lie. Remember saying this:

(Barbarian checks)

He added: "They're sending people that have a lot of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

"Some", not "few." Do you think that was the same sort of thing as you inserting "all" into one of my statements?

Originally posted by Derf View Post

Then you agree with me that your statement that Trump called all minorities "rapists and drug dealers with a few good people" was hyperbole?

To which I replied:
When you added "all" to it, you made it your statement. Cmon. You're better than that.

From https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/crime-enter-illegally.html:
"Whether it’s by crossing the U.S. border with a "coyote" or buying a fake U.S. passport, a foreign national who enters the U.S. illegally can be both convicted of a crime and held responsible for a civil violation under the U.S. immigration laws."

Yes, but as I showed you, it is not illegal to come into the United States by legal means and then overstay. Which is what more and more people are doing.

In 2012 that was settled in the Supreme Court case Arizona vs. United States. The majority opinion found that "as a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States."