Tag Archives: illegal immigrants

SF Sheriff: more complicit in Kate Steinle’s murder

Posted on by

Pier 14 San FranciscoJust when you thought things couldn’t get more Leftist, they get more Leftist.  But it’s San Francisco after all.

From SFGate.com, a bay area news site:

Pier 14 killing: S.F. sheriff asked feds to send immigrant here

by Jaxon Van Derbeken

San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi has deflected blame in the release of a Mexican national now facing murder charges in the Pier 14 slaying by demanding to know why federal authorities returned him to San Francisco to face a 20-year-old marijuana charge in the first place.

An excellent question.  Why?  Finally, a journalist with an inquisitive mind.

The answer, it turns out, is that the Sheriff’s Department asked federal officials to do so.

Mirkarimi’s agency requested custody of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez as he was completing a 46-month stint in federal prison in March in San Bernardino County, according to a Sheriff’s Department letter obtained by The Chronicle. Lopez-Sanchez had been deported five times to Mexico, and had been imprisoned for illegally re-entering the U.S.

Curiouser and curiouser.

The federal Bureau of Prisons alerted the Sheriff’s Department in March that Lopez-Sanchez was going to be released. Mirkarimi’s agency, realizing that Lopez-Sanchez was wanted on a $5,000 bench warrant related to a 1995 marijuana possession for sale case, asked prison officials March 23 to hold onto him and to notify San Francisco authorities “when the subject is ready for our pick-up.”

“Also, please notify us if the hold cannot be placed or the named subject is released to another jurisdiction prior to our receipt,” said the letter, signed by Vic Gaerlan of the sheriff’s warrant bureau.

Lopez-Sanchez arrived in San Francisco on March 26, and the marijuana case against him was discharged the following day. He was returned to jail, however.

For the next three weeks, sources with knowledge of the matter told The Chronicle, sheriff’s deputies sought clarification from the department’s legal division on whether to hold onto Lopez-Sanchez so Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials could pick him up for possible deportation. ICE had requested that the city detain Lopez-Sanchez.

About now, you’re asking yourself a question, aren’t you?

Let’s let Breitbart.com pick up the story.

Lopez-Sanchez was scheduled for release from federal prison in southern California in March. Given that information, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) began processing a reinstatement of removal order for the five-time deportee, Breitbart News previously reported.

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Department was also alerted to Lopez-Sanchez’s impending release from federal Bureau of Prisons custody in March, according to a Sheriff’s department letter obtained by the San Francisco Chronicle. Noting Lopez-Sanchez had a 20-year-old bench warrant on possession-for-sale of marijuana, on March 23 the Sheriff’s department requested notification when Lopez-Sanchez was “ready for our pickup.”

“Ready for pickup” on a $5,000 dope charge about which the SF District Attorney couldn’t care less.

Lopez-Sanchez was transferred from the federal Bureau of Prisons in Victorville, California to San Francisco Sheriffs’ department custody on March 26.

A court dismissed Lopez-Sanchez’s charges the day after he arrived in San Francisco, March 27.

It was not until after Lopez-Sanchez was delivered to San Francisco County custody that ICE was notified of the transfer. ICE then issued a detention request for Lopez-Sanchez. That request simply asked for notification prior to Lopez-Sanchez’s release, not that he be detained for an extended period of time.

San Francisco sanctuary city and Sheriff’s department policies specifically deny all such detainer requests unless backed by a court order or warrant.

In other words, as a “sanctuary city,” San Francisco chooses not to comply with the law.

So why request his return?

Please allow me to state what, in my opinion, may be the answer to: why did they request Sanchez?

I believe it’s because they are a “sanctuary city” and that, by acquiring physical custody of Sanchez, they could assure his release prior to being detained by the feds for deportation back to Mexico.

In other words: they were protecting him.

It’s what they do.

BZ

Sanctuary Cities Cartoon

 Share

San Francisco helped kill Kate Steinle

Posted on by

Kate SteinleSan Francisco quite proudly declared itself a sanctuary city 26 years ago.  It is proud of that fact.  A “sanctuary city” means that Illegals of all shapes and sizes will, according to the mindset of Leftists, not be “ratted out” to various authorities for deportation just because they are “undocumented” — LeftSpeak for illegal.

San Francisco is proud of that label.

San Francisco is proud, even after a 32-year-old Pleasanton woman, Kate Steinle, was shot and killed in front of her father at Pier 14 on the Embarcadero in San Francisco, on Wednesday, July 1st, at about 6:30 PM.

Her last words were: “Dad, help me, help me.”

Her father was powerless, considering Kate Steinle had been shot directly in the chest three times by an illegal immigrant who purposely sought out San Francisco because he knew it was a sanctuary city.

Here’s where the pride of San Francisco comes in:

Had San Francisco authorities not refused a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer request, Lopez-Sanchez may not have been in the United States and Steinle might still be alive.

Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) addresses the core issue: laws were not enforced.

Laws were not enforced.  We’ll get back to that.

Sheriff Ross MirkarimiThe San Francisco Sheriff’s Department is in charge of illegal immigrant notifications, not the SFPD.  The SF Sheriff himself, Ross Mirkarimi, is doubling down on his having done the proper thing:

S.F. Sheriff Defends Releasing Killer, Calls Trump ‘Opportunist’

by Michelle Moons

San Francisco’s Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi is defending the intentional April release of five-times-deported Mexican national Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who has since confessed to the Wednesday shooting death of a young woman at Pier 14.

Sheriff Mirkarimi appeared agitated as he spoke to San Francisco-based KRON 4 News, casting blame on U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for not filing a formal court application to detain Lopez-Sanchez. In a separate CNN interview, Mirkarimi defended his refusal of ICE detainers. He called ICE policy the “imperfect deportation and transferring of people.”

It is San Francisco Sheriff’s department policy to deny all ICE detainer requests. He indicated that he only honors court orders.

Mirkarimi also told CNN’s Jake Tapper that sanctuary city policies “make us safer.”

Safer, yes, of course.  Why didn’t I think of that?

Further, the San Francisco mayor, Edwin Lee, said in part:

As I said in 2013, we must protect both civil liberties and uphold public safety. Which is why, at the time, I promised to veto any legislation that completely eliminated the Sheriff’s ability to make a case-by-case determination about honoring U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers. Our sanctuary policies should not create a safe harbor for convicted, violent felons.

Translated: Mayor Lee just threw Mirkarimi under the bus.  But of course Lee takes the golden opportunity to turn a death into a political wiffle ball.  It’s the fault of the Republicans:

Even after repeated attempts by President Obama and Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi to reform our immigration laws, Republicans in Congress have blocked those efforts, unfortunately, leaving cities and local municipalities to act upon immigration issues that affect its residents. I will continue to work with the Obama Administration on Comprehensive Immigration Reform to ensure cities aren’t forced to make and enforce immigration law.

That said, what actually happened with Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez?  He shouldn’t have even been in the United States.  With seven felony convictions — not arrests, but convictions — Sanchez had been deported to Mexico five times.  And came back each time.

Even CNN wrote about the circumstances surrounding the multiple releases of the murder suspect:

In March, Lopez-Sanchez was turned over to San Francisco authorities and ultimately released after completing a federal prison sentence.

U.S. Immigrations and Custom Enforcement said San Francisco wanted Lopez-Sanchez on a drug warrant, so the agency handed him over with a request to let it know if he was to be released.

Despite that request, San Francisco authorities let him go in April after the drug charges were dropped.

Freya Horne, chief legal counsel to the San Francisco County Sheriff, said city officials believe such requests violate Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Question, Freya: if a federal detainer violated federal law, then how has the federal government been getting away with its various USC sections over the numerous years regarding deportations of illegals?  When I worked Booking in the Sacramento County Main Jail as a deputy in the 80s, I would pick up the phone and call the USBP when we suspected a LE agency had arrested an illegal.  The USBP did the rest.  Simple.

Sanchez confessed to the murder but his Public Defender subsequently insisted he was not guilty.

Breitbart.com adds:

It is San Francisco Sheriff’s department policy to deny all ICE detainer requests. He indicated that he only honors court orders.

ICE had begun processing the reinstatement of Lopez-Sanchez’s removal order before the prisoner was transferred on March 26 from a Bureau of Prisons facility in Victorville to San Francisco Sheriff’s custody pursuant to an old drug warrant.

ICE was informed of the transfer afterwards and alternatively issued a detainer request for the prisoner.

A San Francisco court dismissed Lopez-Sanchez’s drug charge on March 27.

On April 15, 2015, authorities dismissing the ICE request for detention released the seven-time convicted felon Lopez-Sanchez onto the streets.

Finally, I submit to Leftist sheriff Ross Mirkarimi (he is, you should know, a co-founder of the Green Party of California) that you, sir, are damned near equally responsible for the death of Kate Steinle.  You go explain your philosophy and mindset to the parents, siblings, friends and relatives of Kate Steinle.  Personally.


ABC US News | World News

But you won’t.  Because you are a coward and your belief system is “Leftist Mindset Uber Alles.”  It’s funny, however, how you call Trump an “opportunist” when he dared to speak the truth about Mexico.  Mexico is out for Mexico — but of course on your planet of purple skies you hadn’t remotely thought of that.  Mexico does not give us our best and brightest.  Its children have brought disease to this nation.  It sends us more MS13 gangbangers.  Its illegals commit crimes in this nation and commit murders.  Yet your purple skies, Mirkarimi, “Trump all.”

You are absolutely disgusting in your willingness to forsake your law enforcement oath for murdering Leftist values.  You sicken me.  You are unfit to wear your badge.  I say this, sir, as a recently retired (two weeks ago) Sergeant with a California department much larger than yours, after 41 years of service: you sicken me.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me finally write: wake up.  Some of your police and sheriff departments are killing you in the fashion of the SFSO.  They are killing you either by fear, cowardice, ignorance or by dint of wishing to be politically correct.  But they are doing it nevertheless.

They are killing you because they are not obeying the law.  Their not obeying the law is because they have chosen to do so for expedience — AND — because the federal government does not obey its own laws.  More on that in a subsequent post.

I submit: the American taxpayers are not too terribly far away from picking and choosing which laws they will or will not obey.

Because the federal government and some agencies in law enforcement have already led the way on the issue.

And a terrible lead it is.

BZ

P.S.

Two additional points:

1. The handgun used by Sanchez to murder Kate Steinle was stolen in a burglary from a local federal agent.  Sanchez said he “found” the handgun nearby wrapped in a T-shirt.  Of course he did.  Read this to see the lengthy criminal history of Sanchez as per a federal database.

2. Here is the City of San Francisco’s sanctuary ordinance from its own website.  The complete text of the ordinance is here.  Mayor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order 07-01: Sanctuary City Policy (PDF) is delineated.

UPDATE:

Gavin Newsom has had the link to his Executive Order 07-01 Sanctuary City Policy REMOVED.  The link, when clicked, now indicates: For Your Information – Page Not Found

Isn’t that just terribly convenient, as Stick points out, since it would appear that Newsom will likely be running for governor?

Sanchez Pleads Not Guilty

 

 Share

In the US: end “birthright citizenship”

Posted on by

Because, after all, if it’s good enough for Harry Reid, it’s good enough for me.

It’s also apparently good enough for Louisiana Senator David Vitter:

Vitter happened to quote from another figure who advocated for the end of birthright citizenship: Harry Reid.

In 1993, Reid introduced S.1351, called the Immigrant Stabilization Act.  As you can see when you click the link, this bill was proposed solely by Reid himself, fully credited.

Reid said then, in a 1993 speech:

If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guarantee full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that is a lot of services.

Reid is entirely correct.  Vitter agrees.  And so do I, wholeheartedly.  Reid continued:

Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”

No wonder at all.  True then and true now.  Want proof of Reid’s words?  Here it is:

Reid later verbally regretted the move in 1999.  That was because he realized he was moving closer and closer to more true power in DC and his seniority in the Demorat Party helped immensely.  Demorats counseled him to walk back his earlier remarks.  Also, Nevada became flooded with illegal Mexicans, a firm expanding base of Demorat voters who filled the mandatory two-pronged ideal: 1) ignorant and 2) needy, not independent.

And nothing smells better to a Demorat than another ignorant, needy, Mexican voter.

Demography is prophecy.  As such, we are well on our way to turning the Left Coast into what Victor Davis Hanson calls “Mexifornia.”  That is to say: purposely “importing” the same ignorant mindset that has turned Mexico into the southern country from which people have, for decades, wanted to escape.  DC is purposely importing unskilled, uneducated and disease-ridden illegals into the United States.  For one reason only: votes.

When illegal children began flooding our southern border in huge waves roughly two years ago, is it any surprise whatsoever that diseases the US hadn’t seen in any kind of significant numbers shot skywards?  TB?  Pertussis?  Swine flu?  Dengue?  Measles? All over the US?  DC purposely took those children and hid them in communities all around the states, refusing to tell anyone what they had done and where they had stashed those children, in order to hide them.  Then it lied about the statistics.

Like Vitter, like the younger Harry Reid, I too support the end of “anchor babies” and birthright citizenship.

The 14th Amendment says:

Amendment XIV

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

But: does the 14th absolutely guarantee birthright citizenship?

No European country does this, and much of Europe is either based upon actual, perceived or wished Socialism.

Some people think the 14th Amendment actually allows Congress to end “birthright citizenship” once and for all.

The 14th Amendment only commands citizenship to persons born on US soil to parents who are not citizens of a foreign country.  It does not command “anchor babies” or “birthright citizenship.”

Jeremy Buck writes cogently:

RUMOR: The 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to children born to parents illegally in the U.S.

FACT: The current law that grants automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens is Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1401, which uses language similar to the 14th Amendment, regarding persons born in the United States and “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Critics argue that automatic birthright citizenship could be changed by revoking the statute.  Others say it would require a constitutional amendment because they believe the 14th Amendment requires birthright citizenship. However, nobody can say what the 14th Amendment means until the Supreme Court interprets it.  The court has not done that (The 19th century case – United States v. Wong Kim Ark – that some outlets are reporting concerned a legal Chinese immigrant).

The Birthright Citizenship Act would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act – not the constitution – to consider a person born in the United States “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States for citizenship at birth purposes if the person is born in the United States of parents, one of whom is: (1) a U.S. citizen or national; (2) a lawful permanent resident alien whose residence is in the United States; or (3) an alien performing active service in the U.S. Armed Forces.

And there you go.  Just a modicum of logic used.

I say: end automatic “anchor babies” and birthright citizenship.”

Leftists will squeal like stuck pigs.

Because: there goes their ignorant and needy voting base.

BZ

 

 Share

Illegal immigrants just want to work hard: not

Posted on by

Illegals don’t want to partake of various entitlements.

Their motives are simpler and easier to understand: to work hard, earn a decent wage, send some money home, try to better themselves through honest labor and ethics.

Except: not.

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Report: 42 percent of new Medicaid signups are immigrants, their children

by Susan Ferrechio

Immigrants and their U.S.-born children make up more than 40 percent of new Medicaid recipients at a cost of $4.6 billion, according to an analysis of government data.

The Center for Immigration Studies, a low-immigration advocacy group, released a report early Thursday that found both legal and illegal immigrants and their minor children made up 42 percent of Medicaid growth from 2011 to last year.

Part of the increased enrollment came as a result of the new healthcare law’s expansion of Medicaid to impoverished and low-income adults.

“The high rate and significant growth in Medicaid associated with immigrants is mainly the result of a legal immigration system that admits large numbers of immigrants with relatively low-levels of education, many of whom end up poor and uninsured,” the report says. “This fact, coupled with the extensive supports we provide to low-income residents, unavoidably creates very significant costs for taxpayers.”

God bless ObakaKare and Barack Hussein Obaka, His Imperial Majesty, in all His Glory.

As for you, you racist taxpayer, harder work and more of it.  There are, literally, millions of illegal immigrants that will soon demand more free shit next week.  Stop reading this and get back to work.

BZ

 

 Share

One man who speaks the truth about Fornicalia: Tom McClintock and the drought

Posted on by

Top Five Gubernatorial Candidates Debate In SacramentoFrom Breitbart.com:

McClintock on CA Drought: ‘We Are Being Governed by People Who Are Out of Their Minds’

by Joel B. Pollak

WASHINGTON, DC — Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) warns that California’s water crisis will continue until there are major changes in state government, and until Republicans win the U.S. Senate. 

“We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” McClintock said, referring to the inability of state and federal authorities to manage California’s water supply.

“Droughts are inevitable–they are nature’s fault. Water shortages are our fault,” he said. 

And I couldn’t agree more with Representative McClintock.

In fact, it was Governor Jerry Brown’s problem first in the 70s, which he purposely chose to ignore.  Via schadenfreude, it is now his issue to handle in his doting hypocrisy.

Speaking to Breitbart News in his Capitol Hill office, McClintock outlined what he believes would be necessary to prevent future shortages: resuming construction on existing dam projects, some of which were abandoned during Gov. Jerry Brown’s first administration in the 1970s.

The Auburn Dam project, for example, would create a reservoir two-and-a-half times the size of the ailing Folsom Lake, he said. In addition, McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.

Precisely the issue I raised in the post prior to this.  Jerry Brown had his chance to solve the issue before it became the massive problem it is now.  And he roundly refused.

McClintock also criticized Brown’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta tunnel project, which will cost billions but would offer no water storage capacity and no hydroelectric power. He noted that state water projects in the mid-twentieth century spent comparable amounts in current dollars, yet also included storage and generated electricity, and paid for themselves over time.

“It’s only in the last several decades that the state has issued general bonds for these projects, which leave taxpayers on the hook. It’s insane,” McClintock said. 

I can only concur, Congressman.  It is in fact insane.  All that cash to be spent with no electrical generation included.  At least Brown and Leftists are nothing but consistent.

Environmentalists have opposed the construction of new dams, partly because of habitat and scenery destroyed by reservoirs, and because of the physical obstacle dams often pose to annual fish migrations.

There you go.  The veritable Crux of the Biscuit.  Lefitsts and Enviros clearly value fish and scenery over humanity.

Yet McClintock sees dams as a critical part of addressing California’s chronic water shortages. He and his Republican colleagues have also passed several measures aimed at changing the distribution of water to favor struggling Central Valley farmers, and he intends to hold hearings to investigate the release of large amounts of water from existing dams just before winter.

Allow me now, at this point, to illuminate some additional Leftist hypocrisy, if you will.

Jerry Brown solicits more illegal aliens into Fornicalia, but refuses to expand the necessary infrastructure for water and power.

Jerry Brown has thrown Fornicalia’s political power and wherewithal into electric cars, but he refuses to see the obvious: just where will we acquire the electricity necessary to recharge this massive fleet of change?

There are NO electrical generation stations “in the works” now in Fornicalia.

On the current system, with hot days, the CalISO can’t even find sufficient power to forestall brownouts, much less expand power to potential hundreds-of-thousands of electric vehicles.

Fornicalia has, simply, One Party Political Power.  People have historically had to flee from those kinds of governments around the world.

It is alive and well in Fornicalia.

Which is why I shall leave this state when I retire.  It is about to go straight to Hell and I shall not be complicit in that ride.

BZ

 

 Share