On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:03:14 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

John H
I found this very interesting. Probably won't see it on CNN:

The caravan invasion - Why they went where they did.

The blue path is the one that the migrants took to the San Ysidro Port of Entry at Tijuana/San
Diego, CA. The red path is the one that they could have taken to the Hidalgo Port of Entry at
Reynosa/McAllen, TX.

http://funkyimg.com/i/2PXvz.png

Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300 miles long; whereas the path to
San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan travelled more than twice as far as it
needed to.

Why in the world would they do that? They didn't have their own vehicles, and they weren't carrying
enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.

There are two reasons.

The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The caravan members have been advised
by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the migrants coached on what to say when
claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.

Travelling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take the migrants to the Ninth Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to minimize the President's statutory
authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And the presence of similar federal
judges at the district level in California would increase the probability that the migrants'
attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.

And that's exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised his authority under 8 U.S.C.
1182(f) to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate," a federal
judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order blocking the President's action. The
Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if the Trump Administration prevails
in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a year to reverse the district
judge's ruling.

The second reason for travelling twice the distance is that California is a sanctuary state with
dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Those jurisdictions will actively
seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.

On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal immigration enforcement. State
Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue the federal government to stop the
use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal government from shutting down ports of
entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge that might not matter.
In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas Department of Public Safety cooperate
with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure, there are some sanctuary cities in
Texas too; but it's nothing like California.

In short, the migrants' attorneys made sure that the caravan went the extra mile - or extra 1,400
miles - to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the United States. And their advice
appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement personnel can still prevail, but the
playing field is tilted against them.


...........


That is interesting. Especially the course of the map. Thanks!


===

And if the Mexican authorities had any back bone they would have been
stopped long before reaching Tiajuana, maybe at the Guatemalan border
even.

They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city.

On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:
- show quoted text -
"They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city."


That very thing happened with your Haitian refugees...mostly from your state.
They are scared Trump would round them up and send them packing so they are crossing the border into a more civilized culture...mostly in Quebec at this point.

On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 8:01:52 PM UTC-5, True North wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:
- show quoted text -
"They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city."


That very thing happened with your Haitian refugees...mostly from your state.
They are scared Trump would round them up and send them packing so they are crossing the border into a more civilized culture...mostly in Quebec at this point.

You're welcome.

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 17:01:50 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:


On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:
- show quoted text -
"They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city."


That very thing happened with your Haitian refugees...mostly from your state.
They are scared Trump would round them up and send them packing so they are crossing the border into a more civilized culture...mostly in Quebec at this point.

We have about 11 million more, I will tell Trump to bus them on up
there.
BTW how do you know all of your Haitians came from Florida? There are
a ****load in New York alone.

On 1/8/19 1:46 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 17:01:50 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote:


On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:
- show quoted text -
"They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city."


That very thing happened with your Haitian refugees...mostly from your state.
They are scared Trump would round them up and send them packing so they are crossing the border into a more civilized culture...mostly in Quebec at this point.

We have about 11 million more, I will tell Trump to bus them on up
there.
BTW how do you know all of your Haitians came from Florida? There are
a ****load in New York alone.


You better call Trump about that, because if you sent him a letter, he
wouldn't read it and the way the White House is bleeding staff, there
won't be anyone there to read it to him.

On 1/7/19 7:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:03:14 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

John H
I found this very interesting. Probably won't see it on CNN:

The caravan invasion - Why they went where they did.

The blue path is the one that the migrants took to the San Ysidro Port of Entry at Tijuana/San
Diego, CA. The red path is the one that they could have taken to the Hidalgo Port of Entry at
Reynosa/McAllen, TX.

http://funkyimg.com/i/2PXvz.png

Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300 miles long; whereas the path to
San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan travelled more than twice as far as it
needed to.

Why in the world would they do that? They didn't have their own vehicles, and they weren't carrying
enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.

There are two reasons.

The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The caravan members have been advised
by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the migrants coached on what to say when
claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.

Travelling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take the migrants to the Ninth Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to minimize the President's statutory
authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And the presence of similar federal
judges at the district level in California would increase the probability that the migrants'
attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.

And that's exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised his authority under 8 U.S.C.
1182(f) to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate," a federal
judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order blocking the President's action. The
Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if the Trump Administration prevails
in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a year to reverse the district
judge's ruling.

The second reason for travelling twice the distance is that California is a sanctuary state with
dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Those jurisdictions will actively
seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.

On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal immigration enforcement. State
Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue the federal government to stop the
use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal government from shutting down ports of
entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge that might not matter.
In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas Department of Public Safety cooperate
with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure, there are some sanctuary cities in
Texas too; but it's nothing like California.

In short, the migrants' attorneys made sure that the caravan went the extra mile - or extra 1,400
miles - to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the United States. And their advice
appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement personnel can still prevail, but the
playing field is tilted against them.


...........


That is interesting. Especially the course of the map. Thanks!


===

And if the Mexican authorities had any back bone they would have been
stopped long before reaching Tiajuana, maybe at the Guatemalan border
even.

They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city.


I notice that you right-wingers don't mention the really large illegal
immigration problem, the foreigners who enter this country on limited
term visas and overstay those visas. Oh, wait...they're mostly not
darker-skinned Latinos.

On 1/8/2019 8:58 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/7/19 7:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:03:14 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

John H
I found this very interesting. Probably won't see it on CNN:

The caravan invasion - Why they went where they did.
The blue path is the one that the migrants took to the San Ysidro
Port of Entry at Tijuana/San
Diego, CA. The red path is the one that they could have taken to the
Hidalgo Port of Entry at
Reynosa/McAllen, TX.
http://funkyimg.com/i/2PXvz.png
Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300
miles long; whereas the path to
San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan
travelled more than twice as far as it
needed to.
Why in the world would they do that? They didn't have their own
vehicles, and they weren't carrying
enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.
There are two reasons.
The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The
caravan members have been advised
by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the
migrants coached on what to say when
claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.
Travelling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take the
migrants to the Ninth Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to
minimize the President's statutory
authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And
the presence of similar federal
judges at the district level in California would increase the
probability that the migrants'
attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.
And that's exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised his
authority under 8 U.S.C.
1182(f) to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may
deem to be appropriate," a federal
judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order blocking
the President's action. The
Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if the
Trump Administration prevails
in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a
year to reverse the district
judge's ruling.
The second reason for travelling twice the distance is that
California is a sanctuary state with
dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco. Those
jurisdictions will actively
seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.
On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal
immigration enforcement. State
Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue the
federal government to stop the
use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal
government from shutting down ports of
entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge that
might not matter.
In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas
Department of Public Safety cooperate
with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure,
there are some sanctuary cities in
Texas too; but it's nothing like California.
In short, the migrants' attorneys made sure that the caravan went
the extra mile - or extra 1,400
miles - to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the United
States. And their advice
appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement personnel
can still prevail, but the
playing field is tilted against them.
...........


That is interesting. Especially the course of the map.Â* Thanks!


===

And if the Mexican authorities had any back bone they would have been
stopped long before reaching Tiajuana, maybe at the Guatemalan border
even.

They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city.


I notice that you right-wingers don't mention the really large illegal
immigration problem, the foreigners who enter this country on limited
term visas and overstay those visas. Oh, wait...they're mostly not
darker-skinned Latinos.


Harry hit the "racist" button again. He's been well trained.

On 1/8/19 9:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/8/2019 8:58 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/7/19 7:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:03:14 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

John H
I found this very interesting. Probably won't see it on CNN:

The caravan invasion - Why they went where they did.
The blue path is the one that the migrants took to the San Ysidro
Port of Entry at Tijuana/San
Diego, CA. The red path is the one that they could have taken to
the Hidalgo Port of Entry at
Reynosa/McAllen, TX.
http://funkyimg.com/i/2PXvz.png
Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300
miles long; whereas the path to
San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan
travelled more than twice as far as it
needed to.
Why in the world would they do that? They didn't have their own
vehicles, and they weren't carrying
enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.
There are two reasons.
The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The
caravan members have been advised
by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the
migrants coached on what to say when
claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.
Travelling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take
the migrants to the Ninth Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to
minimize the President's statutory
authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And
the presence of similar federal
judges at the district level in California would increase the
probability that the migrants'
attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.
And that's exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised
his authority under 8 U.S.C.
1182(f) to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may
deem to be appropriate," a federal
judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order
blocking the President's action. The
Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if
the Trump Administration prevails
in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a
year to reverse the district
judge's ruling.
The second reason for travelling twice the distance is that
California is a sanctuary state with
dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Those jurisdictions will actively
seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.
On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal
immigration enforcement. State
Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue the
federal government to stop the
use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal
government from shutting down ports of
entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge that
might not matter.
In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas
Department of Public Safety cooperate
with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure,
there are some sanctuary cities in
Texas too; but it's nothing like California.
In short, the migrants' attorneys made sure that the caravan went
the extra mile - or extra 1,400
miles - to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the
United States. And their advice
appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement personnel
can still prevail, but the
playing field is tilted against them.
...........


That is interesting. Especially the course of the map.Â* Thanks!


===

And if the Mexican authorities had any back bone they would have been
stopped long before reaching Tiajuana, maybe at the Guatemalan border
even.

They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city.


I notice that you right-wingers don't mention the really large illegal
immigration problem, the foreigners who enter this country on limited
term visas and overstay those visas. Oh, wait...they're mostly not
darker-skinned Latinos.


Harry hit the "racist" button again.Â* He's been well trained.

I call out racism as and when I see it. Can't wait to read the
transcript of Trump's presentation tonight of Border Security Crisis
Bull****. Too bad the nets can't provide Instant He's Bull****ting Us
Again Checks as a crawl underneath Trump when he speaks.

7:59 AMKeyser Soze
- show quoted text -
I notice that you right-wingers don't mention the really large illegal
immigration problem, the foreigners who enter this country on limited
term visas and overstay those visas. Oh, wait...they're mostly not
darker-skinned Latinos.

........


Funny, no one sees you addressing that problem either.

Or is it a problem for you, Harry?

On 1/8/2019 9:24 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/8/19 9:17 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/8/2019 8:58 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/7/19 7:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:22:38 -0500,
wrote:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:03:14 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

John H
I found this very interesting. Probably won't see it on CNN:

The caravan invasion - Why they went where they did.
The blue path is the one that the migrants took to the San Ysidro
Port of Entry at Tijuana/San
Diego, CA. The red path is the one that they could have taken to
the Hidalgo Port of Entry at
Reynosa/McAllen, TX.
http://funkyimg.com/i/2PXvz.png
Notice the difference? The path to McAllen is approximately 1,300
miles long; whereas the path to
San Diego is approximately 2,700 miles long. So the caravan
travelled more than twice as far as it
needed to.
Why in the world would they do that? They didn't have their own
vehicles, and they weren't carrying
enough food or resources to justify the longer journey.
There are two reasons.
The first reason can be summed up in two words: Ninth Circuit. The
caravan members have been advised
by liberal immigration attorneys all along. Not only were the
migrants coached on what to say when
claiming asylum, they were also evidently coached on where to go.
Travelling the extra 1,400 miles to Tijuana/San Diego would take
the migrants to the Ninth Circuit
of the U.S. Court of Appeals, with its numerous judges willing to
minimize the President's statutory
authority to restrict entry of aliens into the United States. And
the presence of similar federal
judges at the district level in California would increase the
probability that the migrants'
attorneys would obtain an initial ruling in their favor.
And that's exactly what happened. When President Trump exercised
his authority under 8 U.S.C.
1182(f) to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may
deem to be appropriate," a federal
judge in San Francisco issued a temporary restraining order
blocking the President's action. The
Ninth Circuit will likely agree with the district judge. Even if
the Trump Administration prevails
in any appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, it will take at least a
year to reverse the district
judge's ruling.
The second reason for travelling twice the distance is that
California is a sanctuary state with
dozens of sanctuary cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Those jurisdictions will actively
seek to protect the migrants who enter illegally from deportation.
On top of that, the state may interfere more directly with federal
immigration enforcement. State
Attorney General Xavier Becerra said recently that he might sue
the federal government to stop the
use of tear gas to defend the border or to stop the federal
government from shutting down ports of
entry. His argument is full of holes, but with the right judge
that might not matter.
In contrast, in Texas, law enforcement agencies like the Texas
Department of Public Safety cooperate
with federal officials to improve border enforcement. To be sure,
there are some sanctuary cities in
Texas too; but it's nothing like California.
In short, the migrants' attorneys made sure that the caravan went
the extra mile - or extra 1,400
miles - to arrive where the rule of law is the weakest in the
United States. And their advice
appears to be paying off. Federal immigration enforcement
personnel can still prevail, but the
playing field is tilted against them.
...........


That is interesting. Especially the course of the map.Â* Thanks!


===

And if the Mexican authorities had any back bone they would have been
stopped long before reaching Tiajuana, maybe at the Guatemalan border
even.

They tried that and found themselves in a similar position as we are
in. They had a riot and were teargassing the illegals. I am not sure a
couple were not shot but the public backlash made hem stand down.
I wonder if Don would be happier in they were knocking on the Canadian
border.
Maybe we should just hold them till spring and then bus them north,
spread out across the whole 3000 miles. We would not want to do to
them what is happening in Tijuana with all of them piling in to one
city.


I notice that you right-wingers don't mention the really large
illegal immigration problem, the foreigners who enter this country on
limited term visas and overstay those visas. Oh, wait...they're
mostly not darker-skinned Latinos.


Harry hit the "racist" button again.Â* He's been well trained.



I call out racism as and when I see it. Can't wait to read the
transcript of Trump's presentation tonight of Border Security Crisis
Bull****. Too bad the nets can't provide Instant He's Bull****ting Us
Again Checks as a crawl underneath Trump when he speaks.


Predictably, you are passing judgement on what he presents before he
presents it.

I have a hunch he is going to play the video of the report
Kirstjen Nielsen attempted to present at the meeting with
Schumer and Pelosi in which they kept rudely interrupting her so she
couldn't complete it.

She was accused by them of giving "false facts" in *her* report.
Kirstjen Nielsen responded with, "It's not *my* report. It's
a report on the *facts*.

Pelosi and Schumer just didn't want to hear the facts.