It would help if they carried signs. You can't just go harassing everyone just because they look a certain way.
I like where you're goijg with this.... give every illegal a sign at the border they have to carry. That wouldmake it really easy!
It would help if they carried signs. You can't just go harassing everyone just because they look a certain way.
^^^ THIS ^^^
Why try to round up a dozen or more illegals, when you can instead go after one employer? And, unless they are totally corrupt, they will change their ways, permanently turning off that individual employment magnet, whereas if you detain the illegal aliens, more will show up to take their place tomorrow.
Plus, the fines the employers have to pay help pay the salaries of the officers/agents.
ETA: Observing the employer load up a truckload of people at State and Washington, then driving directly to the worksite and getting to work, is strong probable cause that required I-9 and other employment processing did not occur prior to employment.
Because that would be diametrically opposed to the beneficial relationship between those who hire illegals, and those who wish to have them rounded up.
Hence Trump's war with the establishment members of the GOP.....My little cousin is a Bernie supporter and Portland, OR liberal and I told her after Trump won he was going to anger as many Republicans as Democrats....Indiucky thinks Kut may have hit the nail on the head right here....
For as "pro-active" at Arpaio was in arresting illegals, do you find it odd, that in 2014, he had his first arrest of a business owner?
For as "pro-active" at Arpaio was in arresting illegals, do you find it odd, that in 2014, he had his first arrest of a business owner?
Not really.....I had no idea he even did one much less that early...Good on him bucking the establishment two years before the election of Trump...It could explain his election loss....Thanks for sharing that tidbit Kut...
So when did your department begin arresting businessmen for hiring illegals?
Not really the local PD's jurisdiction?
So, why was it Joe's problem?
So when did your department begin arresting businessmen for hiring illegals?
Not really the local PD's jurisdiction?
So, why was it Joe's problem?
Maricopa County is heavily Republican, and easily went to Trump..
Year | Republican | Democratic | Others |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 47.7% 747,361 | 44.8% 702,907 | 7.5% 117,56 |
pretty much par for the course these days.Noce dodge Kut.
Noce dodge Kut.
pretty much par for the course these days.
pretty much par for the course these days.
Doesn't seem that heavy really....I guess compared to most urban centers Republicans up by 3% may seem "Heavily Republican"...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maricopa_County,_Arizona
Year Republican Democratic Others 2016 47.7% 747,361 44.8% 702,907 7.5% 117,56
Kut drives a Dodge?????
The county hasn't gone Democrat since the 40s.
Not really. I'm trying to figure out how you are comparing a department that's arrested more than 30K illegals, during Arpaio's tenure, sometimes using dubious means, with one that is sometimes tasked to remove illegals when they're encountered, and finding they have an active detainment/removal order.
Maybe this article will help you understand:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-of-racial-profiling/?utm_term=.23500055ebbc
...so if Trump wants to empower "now," what does that mean "before?"