Dispelling a Myth Regarding Immigration

And the reality is that anyone who knows what Trump is actually saying he only has a problem with the ones that are criminals. Liberals do not care. They just want more votes so they embrace sanctuary cities, violent criminals and the exploitation of millions of people.

 

What a heaping load of crap.Since when does presumption have anything to do with it? LOL! That is quite a stretch to avoid admitting you are wrong.

 

Due Process is not innocent until proven guilty. The presumption of innocence is a legal maxim and is not found in the US Constitution. It is not a concept within the USC.

 

No it is not. You are right about the time. Every year, from two weeks to one month, But the amount of time is not as important as the quality of time. That quality of time that was spent was, and still is, very memorable. For us, we were living in their homes, eating their food, speaking their language, and experiencing their daily lives. That is not tourism by any standard.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes it is. If it was not, then the 4th amendment would not be a part of the US constitution nor will the right for a trial by jury in criminal proceedings.

 

Really? So why are immigrants having to prove with all the financial data that they will return back to their country once the visa is granted?

- - - Updated - - -

The irony for Trump is that what he is touting politically is everything he has not done as a business man. That is why he has facilities in foreign countries. That is why he has his clothing production located in Mexico, his fragrance production located in China, etc.

 

Innocent until proven guilty is NOT in the USC. It is a legal maxim.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#innocent

This is the easiest and most basic link to provide. I guarantee you will not find a link claiming "innocent until proven guilty" is in the USC.

 

On what planet has ISIS not declared war on the US?

 

Nonsense. We have and do declare war against non-state actors. From the Barbary Coast Pirates to the AQ. The AUMF which functions as the equivalent of a declaration of war, was cited by the Obama Administration as their authority to bomb ISIS.

And now the Obama Administration knows ISIS fighters are returning to the US, and they are not being detained for the duration of hostilities? And you are bobbing your head up and down like this all makes sense?

Will your head keep bobbing up and down after one of these clowns manages to pull of VBIED in a crowd with a mass casualty event?

Think son! Think!

 

Then you are not looking hard enough. Yes, it is a legal maxim, which is the foundation of the laws we have. Just as another legal maxim, guilty until proven innocent, is in some countries. You would never find the phrase, vis a vis, in their legal documents or laws, but the point I am making is that our laws are based on the legal maxim of innocent until proven guilty. That is the basis for the 4th amendment, for due process, for pretty much everything we do as a society. To state otherwise is to show a complete ignorance of the law that is beyond reproach.

- - - Updated - - -

ISIS is not a country. It is not recognized as a country under international law.

 

The information on immigrant workers is correct because most don't pick fruit and there are numerous cases where highly educated foreigners are replacing US workers in many fields such as the tech field. Low paid immigrant workers don't replace American workers because normally this relates to employment an American wouldn't take in the first place.

 

The USC says you are entitled to Due Process and Equal Protection, it does not say you are innocent until proven guilty. It is not the foundation for the laws we have, nor is it the basis for our laws.

You claimed the phrase was in our USC, now you claim it is the basis for our laws, neither is correct.

http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Law508/InnocentGuilty.htm

 

Actually it is. Why do you think we have the phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" when trying to convict someone of a felony during court.

I never said the phrase was in our USC. I said the Constitution guarantees innocent until proven guilty. The guarantee does not mean the phrase is in the Constitution, but that the basis of our laws, the foundation of our laws, the premise of our laws is innocent until proven guilty. That is why we have due process, the 4th amendment, the judicial branch, etc.

 

Of the 11 to 12 million illegals present in the United States, about half are either children or spouses of LPR or USC. The other half are not with most of them working. Most work either in low skill, low pay construction jobs, dishwashers and cooks at restaurants, and some in the fields picking fruit.

 

The usage of innocent until proven guilty wasn't used in US jurisprudence until 1894. The USC Due Process Clauses are limits placed upon the govt, they are protections of the people. Here is what the "Due Process" of the USC is defined as

At no point does it imply you are innocent until proven guilty.

 

Actually, it was the premise for the 4th amendment, the right to not incriminate yourself, and due process clause as an extension of both those concepts. The presumption of innocence, or innocent until proven guilty, was established under English common law which a lot of our laws are based on. The court document you are referring to is simply a Constitional jurisprudence codification process.

 

Not true. The 11 million number is what the census reports. I do not believe it for a second. It is based on illegals admitting to being illegal.

The "fruit picking" myth was put out by those who want illegals here for cheap labor and future votes. A lie like that makes illegals seem like less of a threat to actual citizens. The same is true for the media hiding crimes committed by illegals. There is big money and power behind making sure illegal aliens can enter and stay in the US. Anyone who doesn't see that is just naive.

- - - Updated - - -

Correct this only applies to citizens.

 

You are only repeating a lie about "jobs Americans won't do". Fact is in many of these low skilled jobs illegals are paid less than minimum wage which is illegal. It isn't that Americans won't do the jobs as much as Americans cannot legally do the jobs.

 

At the risk of seeming naïve could you tell us where and how this "big money" and especially power there is supposed to be in making sure illegals can stay here comes from? I can see some money, but not really that much and far less than in blowing the problem out of all proportion. Power the same, but even more so, as I can see very little power coming from there but a whole Presidency being built on stopping it..

 

For example the Koch Brothers. Are you defending them?

 

I'm wondering how they are deriving money and power from the illegal immigrants being here. I realize they support amnesty, yes, but how do they make money off illegal immigrants. The Kochs support lots of liberal causes, but also lots of conservative ideas and those, IMO, are just the ones most damaging to our country.

 

Wow, so you are defending the Koch Brothers.....? One does not need to look no further than the industries they own and are in involved in to see they benefit greatly from cheap labor.

Democrats support illegal aliens for political power reasons. That is common knowledge so George Soros is most likely a big supporter of it. Also the very wealthy Carlos Slim is a huge supporter of it. He makes tons of money off illegals.

 

the 11 to 12 million is the estimated number of illegals using a method by DHS that has not changed over time. It is the most reliable estimate of the number of illegals in this country. Yes, I am aware some groups put the number in upwards of 30 million, but that is not possible given the number of foreign born persons who are here in the United States. As for the skill, most are low skilled. Some are not and are illegal based on circumstances not of their own choice. the ones that are not working are either children who came with their parents or adults who married to either USC or LPR's. What this means is that illegal immigration is something that affects more people than you realize.

Well, that is patently false. The US Constitution rarely refers to US citizen and only does it for those who are obtaining office. The term "US person" is used, especially the 14th amendment.

- - - Updated - - -

Really, when are you available to pick some cotton in the hot Texas sun for 14 hours a day at $2.79/ per hour?

 

i'm totally against illegal immigration but the problem is that those who loath the illegal immigrants are failing to understand some very basic things

1. These people come into he Country in search for the better life. All of us would do the same..
2. The US ALLOWED THEM IN. That's right, these illegal immigrants came in because US is so poor guarding the borders so don't get mad at the immigrants coming in, get mad at US for letting them in
3. U.S. businesses benefit from employing illegal immigrants by exploiting them. So why punish immigrants and not the U.S. businesses benefiting from employing them?

So we all have to understand these basic facts...

 

This refers to illegal US employers that illegal immigrants fall victim to because they cannot report the crime without fear of deportation.

As a point of fact most Americans won't do many of the jobs performed by lawful immigrants such as harvesting the apples in Washington. In the past the apple harvest was largely done by students that worked during the harvest season but today they no longer perform that work because it's hard work, paying "piecework" wages, where the person really has to expend a lot of labor for the money. Today the harvest is almost exclusively done by (legal) immigrants but there aren't enough of them for the jobs available. Roughly 1/3rd of the apple crop in Washington went unharvested during the height of the Recession because of a lack of immigrant labor and the fact that no Americans wanted the thousands of jobs available. When the work is very hard, can be dirty, and low-paying Americans typically don't want the job and won't apply for it. Why work picking apples when you can work at Walmart or McDonalds instead? There's no shortage of very low-paying jobs that Americans will work at that aren't nearly has hard but pay the same.

 

Do you even know what the 4th amendment states?

Has absolutely nothing to do with innocent until proven guilty, nor was it the premise for such.

Innocent until proven guilty wasn't even used in US jurisprudence until 1894.