Sunday tRump Roast – 02/26/2017

Here’s a nice tidbit the mainstream media isn’t broadcasting, as yet: Marla Maples’ divorce from Donald Trump was never finalized. That’s right. Marla and The Donald are still legally married. It appears that after all the papers were signed, new squabbles developed over Trump’s reluctance to pay alimony and divisions of property, so Marla never filed for a final decree.

What’s this mean? It means Trump’s marriage to Melania is not legally valid. This, in turn, means that she cannot be granted citizenship based on her marriage to The Donald. If so, she returns to green-card status, and, under Trump’s new immigration rules, subject to deportation.

Is Trump looking for wife #4?

 

Open Thread

Sunday Roast: Buh bye!

Hey kids, let’s join the Young Turks guys and take the argument to end birthright citizenship to its logical conclusion…oops.  Start packing, y’all.

This is our daily open thread — Rested and tan?  Wha…?

The Watering Hole, Saturday, November 22, 2014: This Week in Paranoia: Facts vs. Freakery on Obama’s Immigration Reforms

President Barack Obama announced earlier in the week that he would later be announcing several reforms to the immigration system, largely because Republicans have been reluctant to pass anything in the House to address the issue. So, as he has said many times before in an ultimately failed effort to spur the House to pass the bill the Senate sent them, the president said that if Congress failed to act, he would. They didn’t, so he did, and now they’re totally freaking out. They’re claiming they now have grounds for impeachment (actually, some of them said this before he made the official announcement, based on nothing more than their own imagination about what the president would actually say) because the president is trying to ignite a civil war, and that citizens must resist “by any means necessary” any attempt to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants, and that it’s all part of a plot to not only guarantee millions of future Democratic voters, but to turn the United States into a Third World country and because now there will be all kinds of voter fraud (you just know it.) None of these fears are reality-based.

The calls for impeachment really crack me up because they were coming before the president’s announcement, and many were citing the president’s proposed amnesty for illegal immigrants as the primary charge against him. Former Florida Congressman (and current “Where Are They Now File” resident) Allen West told Newsmax, “It will be the president saying, ‘You know, I want to violate the Constitution and grant amnesty to people who are here illegally.'” Family Research Council President and Anal Sex Expert Tony Perkins said, in his very roundabout way, “What the president is about to do on amnesty is essentially tell, using his authority as the chief executive, the president, to the executive branch, Homeland Security, immigration, not to enforce the law, which is a violation of his oath to uphold the law.” Eagle Forum founder and former female Phyllis Schlafly thinks that amnesty by executive action constitutes a high crime or misdemeanor.

There are at least three things obviously wrong with these allegations. First, at the time each of these people made these remarks, the president had not actually announced his plan, and when he did, it didn’t include amnesty. The right wing is really afraid of that word – “amnesty.” They talk about it all the time as if granting it to millions of people whose only crime was in the way they entered the country would bring about the end of the United States of America. They talk about it it as if it’s the worst abuse of power a president could commit (including, apparently, lying us into a costly, unnecessary war). They talk about it as if it’s the most un-American thing a president could do. So their fears about amnesty are unfounded because the president wasn’t proposing any. Second, it is actually totally within the president’s constitutional authority to grant amnesty to millions of people who entered the country illegally. The president can grant amnesty to anyone he or she desires. The president can also selectively enforce the law and decide which laws won’t be as aggressively prosecuted as others, since there isn’t enough funding to enforce all the laws anyway. It doesn’t mean a succeeding president can’t prosecute if the statute of limitations hasn’t expired, so it isn’t the same as amnesty, which would deny prosecution later. By the way, the president’s oath says he will faithfully execute the office of president, not “uphold the law.” Executing the duties of the president sometimes involves deciding when to prosecute someone and when not to. Former President George Herbert Walker Bush granted amnesty to former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger for his criminal role in the previous administration’s plan to sell arms to terrorists in exchange for hostages. (A plan which, for the record, Bush later wrote in his memoirs that he was the only one who knew everything that was going on with the arms-for-hostages deal to raise money to illegally give to rebel fighters in Central America.) And third (speaking of Reagan), former President Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Care to comment on that example of un-American activity by a president, Right Wing? If you like some facts to chew on, check out this great post at PoliticusUsa.

That’s just the crazy people talking about impeaching the president for executing a constitutional authority he actually has but didn’t actually use. Check out the link to see who thinks we’re headed for civil war, how the vote is getting rigged while simultaneously increasing voter fraud. And the good people at Think Progress (with whom I’ve had many exchanges over the years) have found other people going similarly crazy over Obama’s use of executive authority (which he is constitutionally required to do.) There’s a lot of sadly misinformed people out there, and some of them are members of the Legislative Branch in our Federal Government. I think you should be very concerned about that. You can start by looking at your own state legislatures, where many of these people got their start. To undo Republican gerrymandering, we have to take back the state legislatures by 2020, so we can control the drawing of Congressional District maps, which is the only way we’ll ever take back the House of Representatives. And we have to get rid of electronic voting, which can easily be rigged and manipulated, and very likely has in some key races in recent years. It is not secure, and it can easily change election results to anyone in power who wants to stay there. Paper ballots are the best way. They don’t take that long to count, and the results can easily be verified and re-counted as needed. Only then can we restore Democracy to America.

This is our daily open thread. Feel free to discuss crazy paranoid right wingers serving in our government, or any other topic you wish to discuss.

Oh My Aching Back

Georgia has put tough immigration laws into effect and as a result, many immigrants, both legal and illegal, are refusing to work in the fields picking crops.  It is estimated that up to 40% of Georgia’s produce will be left to rot in the fields.

The governor of Georgia created a plan to help with the labor shortage.  Probationers are encouraged to work in the fields.  Unfortunately, it is not working out so well for the growers as these new workers quit half way through the day.  Productivity is low and is not sufficient to complete the harvest.

Mendez put the probationers to the test last Wednesday, assigning them to fill one truck and a Latino crew to a second truck. The Latinos picked six truckloads of cucumbers compared to one truckload and four bins for the probationers.

“It’s not going to work,” Mendez said. “No way. If I’m going to depend on the probation people, I’m never going to get the crops up.”

Conditions in the field are bruising, and the probationers didn’t seem to know what to expect. Cucumber plants hug the ground, forcing the workers to bend over, push aside the large leaves and pull them from the vine. Unlike the Mexican and Guatemalan workers, the probationers didn’t wear gloves to protect their hands from the small but prickly thorns on the vines and sandpaper-rough leaves.

Be careful what you wish for.

Suer Friendly

From the Arizona Anti Illegal Immigrant Law:

G. A PERSON MAY BRING AN ACTION IN SUPERIOR COURT TO CHALLENGE ANY OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE THAT ADOPTS OR IMPLEMENTS A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW. IF THERE IS A JUDICIAL FINDING THAT AN ENTITY HAS VIOLATED THIS SECTION, THE COURT SHALL ORDER ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

1. THAT THE PERSON WHO BROUGHT THE ACTION RECOVER COURT COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES.

2. THAT THE ENTITY PAY A CIVIL PENALTY OF NOT LESS THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NOT MORE THAN FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR EACH DAY THAT THE POLICY HAS REMAINED IN EFFECT AFTER THE FILING OF AN ACTION PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION.

What could this lead to? Well, Steven Croley over at the Huffington Post points out

A county hospital or health clinic with a policy of treating emergency room patients without verifying their immigration status could be targeted. Local law enforcement agencies that encourage crime victims and witnesses to make reports without having to show their legal status presumably could be sued. School districts that provide educational programs for children of undocumented parents might fall within the act’s scope.

Hence every political subdivision and entity in Arizona must adopt the most draconion of policies NOW or risk having to pay $1,000 to $5,000 PER DAY for each day after a lawsuit is filed until it is settled. Oh, and by the way, you don’t have to serve a lawsuit immediately upon filing. Someone could file a lawsuit and wait, say, a month or two, before even letting the public entity know about it, racking up $30,000 + in penalties before the entity even gets a chance to respond.

Then, on top of the penalites, add attorneys fees, and you now have a state that is Suer Friendly.

Where Barack Obama stands on 10 key issues

Newsday

In accepting the Democratic Party presidential nomination Barack Obama laid out his philosophy on the role of government.

Newsday examined Obama’s positions
on 10 key issues:

On the economy: Would inject $75 billion into the economy through tax cuts and direct spending, targeting working families, seniors, homeowners and the unemployed. He contends this would prevent 1 million Americans from losing their jobs. The plan includes an immediate $250 tax cut for workers and their families and an immediate, temporary $250 bonus to seniors in their Social Security checks. 

On Iraq/Afghanistan: Pledges to withdraw most U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months, by the end of next year, four months earlier than his previous pledge. A residual force would remain to conduct targeted counterterrorism missions against al-Qaida, protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel, and support Iraq’s security forces. Opposed use of military force in Iraq, as well as the January 2007 “troop surge,” saying that while it improved security, a political accommodation in the country is the ultimate solution. 

On National Security: Would implement 9/11 Commission recommendations. Would close controversial prison at U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, which holds hundreds of suspected terrorists and other detainees. Voted to reauthorize Patriot Act in 2006, but would revise it. Pledges to secure chemical plants and ensure safe, secure disposal of nuclear waste.

Continue reading

Agonizing death…

Truthout

Heartbreaking story…this is who we are now in the United States…

He was 17 when he came to New York from Hong Kong in 1992 with his parents and younger sister, eyeing the skyline like any newcomer. Fifteen years later, Hiu Lui Ng was a New Yorker: a computer engineer with a job in the Empire State Building, a house in Queens, a wife who is a United States citizen and two American-born sons.

Clearly, this man was a danger to society. He arrived in this country legally with a tourist visa, and then stayed here and applied for political asylum. His application for political asylum was denied, but he was never required to leave.

Mr Ng attended high school, technical school, and won a contract to service computers for a firm in the Empire State Building. He married, and had two sons.

He was living the American Dream, until one day it became a nightmare of hell on earth.

In 2001, a notice ordering him to appear in immigration court was mistakenly sent to a nonexistent address, records show. When Mr. Ng did not show up at the hearing, the judge ordered him deported. By then, however, he was getting married, and on a separate track, his wife petitioned Citizenship and Immigration Services for a green card for him – a process that took more than five years. Heeding bad legal advice, the couple showed up for his green card interview on July 19, 2007, only to find enforcement agents waiting to arrest Mr. Ng on the old deportation order.

Try to do the right thing, and you will pay….

Continue reading

Veterans battle to become citizens

By Fernanda Santos, New York Times

This story infuriates me.  Has there ever been ANYTHING George W. Bush was honest about?  Ever?

Despite a 2002 promise from President Bush to put citizenship applications for immigrant members of the military on a fast track, some are finding themselves waiting months, or even years, because of bureaucratic backlogs. One, Sgt. Kendell K. Frederick of the Army, who had tried three times to file for citizenship, was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq as he returned from submitting fingerprints for his application.

About 7,200 service members or people who have been recently discharged have citizenship applications pending, but neither the Department of Defense nor Citizenship and Immigration Services keeps track of how long they have been waiting. Immigration lawyers and politicians say they have received a significant number of complaints about delays because of background checks, misplaced paperwork, confusion about deployments and other problems.

Read the whole article here.

These men and women have served this country by fighting in our wars, and were made a promise of “fast track” citizenship, and once again we have failed them.

“Fast track” means you go to the front of the line, that’s really not all that complicated.  Unless you don’t want to fulfill that promise, then it’s very simple.  Lose the paperwork, send it back for lack of fee payment (even though veterans don’t have to pay the fees), or just let it sit on the desk until they get blown up in Iraq.

What kind of background checks are required for non-citizens to join our military?  It makes sense that there would be a considerable background check.  Otherwise, it would be a simple way for al Qaeda, or other bad guys, to infiltrate our military.  I really don’t know, but I have a creepy feeling that there is very little checking going on — they can fight and die in our names, but become citizens?  Forget it.

The DOD and Immigration Services do not keep track of how long the veterans (or anyone, I suppose) are waiting for their applications to be processed.  Isn’t that convenient?  If you don’t track it, you can’t “know” it.

These men and women have served this country better than most of this administration.  It’s time we showed some gratitude and respect, and hold up our end of the bargain.