Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘His Fraudulency Donald The Trump’ Category

ICE is transferring 1,600 people detained pending administrative removal to Federal prisons. Note that these people have not been arrested. The term “arrest” means that they’ve been charged with a crime. Instead, they’ve been detained, pending appearance before an administrative law judge who will rule whether they are subject to removal or not.

This is not a trivial distinction. You cannot place someone into a Federal prison unless they have been indicted for a crime, or have been convicted of a crime. These immigrants have not been indicted for a crime — they haven’t been charged with a crime at all, because that would require the Federal government to provide them with a lawyer and due process rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, which requires due process and provision of a lawyer if you’re going to charge someone with a crime. Instead, they have been scheduled to appear before an administrative law judge pending administrative removal, which gets around that whole Constitution thing by *not* being a punishment, it’s just returning the person back to where they came from. The administrative detention in a civilian detention facility is not a punishment, it’s part of a removal process wherein people who have been cited for being here without authorization are temporarily held pending their hearing. They can waive their hearing and be removed immediately, so under the law they’re there voluntarily.

But that’s a civilian detention facility, which, I might point out, is not a prison and is not a punishment for a crime. A prison is a prison and is a punishment for a crime. Punishing someone by putting them in prison without an indictment, lawyer, or due process is a violation of the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments of the Constitution, which applies, I might remind you, to *all* people on US soil regardless of their citizenship (the Supremes have ruled on this repeatedly). But I guess the Constitution is just a piece of paper as far as the regime of Orange Julius Caesar is concerned.

— Badtux the Constitutional Penguin

Read Full Post »

So, Cheetoh Mussolini tweeted that it wasn’t him separating children from their mothers at the border. It was them mean Democrats and laws they’d passed. That is, of course, a bald-faced lie. So: What *IS* the truth, anyhow? Does the law require separating children from parents suspected of illegal immigration at the border?

A: No. Parents who are apprehended at the border are detained pending administrative deportation. They are not being jailed or put into prison, because they are not being charged with a crime. There is no law stating that children and parents cannot be detained in the same location.

CBP deliberately does not charge immigrants apprehended at the border with a crime, because being charged with a crime triggers Constitutional protections. Specifically, the Constitution guarantees a right to indictment by a grand jury, right to an attorney, and the right to a trial by jury for all Federal criminal charges. An administrative proceeding, on the other hand, can occur before a magistrate judge in an administrative hearing and incurs no right to a trial by jury, because the immigrant is not being punished, the immigrant is simply being removed back to where he/she came. CBP would rather not be tied down with having to put together grand juries and trials by jury and find lawyers for all these immigrants. Especially the lawyer part. They prefer their immigrants to be unrepresented by a lawyer, because that makes it easier to conduct a show trial whose sole goal is to deport the immigrant as swiftly as possible. Having to deal with a real trial in front of a jury in a Federal court, as vs a hearing before a magistrate judge, would bring the whole process to a standstill.

In cases where an immigrant is charged with a crime and is punished by being placed in jail or prison, children must be removed and placed with child protective services or a relative. That is because the Constitution does not allow jailing or imprisoning someone unless they have been charged with or convicted of a crime, and in general the children have neither been charged with nor convicted of a crime. This isn’t a law that Democrats passed. This is the Constitution. But as pointed out above, immigrants detained at the border aren’t being charged with a crime, they’re merely being held for administrative deportation. Being administratively detained has nothing to do with being punished, thus it’s perfectly legal for a child to be placed with a mother who is administratively detained. These detention camps may *look* like jails, but, legally, they are not.

So that’s the truth of the matter — there is no, zero, law requiring that children of parents who are being administratively detained be separated from those parents. This is because administrative detention is not a punishment, under the law. It is merely the temporary housing of those who are waiting for an administrative removal proceeding. In fact, until recently it was policy that women and children be placed together in ICE family detention facilities while waiting for their immigration hearings. It is only recently that a deliberate policy of ripping apart families and sending off the kids to foster care was instituted — a policy resulting in over 1500 children who cannot be located, children who may or may not be safe with relatives, who may or may not have been sold to the highest bidder via child trafficking.

– Badtux the Immigration Penguin

Read Full Post »

So, a prosecutor raids an attorney’s office. What, exactly, can he seize from there?

First of all, he cannot seize any documents protected by attorney-client privilege. No contracts, no transcripts, no tape recordings, no confidential work product. So what’s left?

Financial documents, primarily. How much was he paid. How did he handle client escrow funds, did he embezzle them for his own purposes? (Lots of attorneys have been sent to prison for embezzling client escrow funds). *EVIDENCE OF MONEY LAUNDERING* such as a foreign client putting an unduly large amount of money into an escrow fund and then the attorney disbursing it to entities controlled by a different client in order to launder its origins.

In short, embezzlement and money laundering are pretty much the *only* reasons a lawyer’s office would be raided. So Donald Trump’s lawyer’s office got raided? How many Russian clients did this lawyer have, and how much money did he disburse from these Russian clients’ escrow funds in order to benefit the Trump campaign?

That’s the *real* questions, not anything to do with Stormy Daniels — unless the question is, “was her payoff made with laundered Russian money?”. But nobody would issue a warrant if it was *just* Stormy Daniels. Someone in the New York US Attorney’s Office thinks Trump’s lawyer was laundering money from foreign sources in order to benefit the Trump campaign (which, I might add, is illegal), and any records seized will be financial records related directly to that question. The salacious details of the various contracts that Trump’s lawyer signed with various women he sexually assaulted over the years will just have to remain secret — unless Cohen runs out of money and sells those details to the highest bidder, of course.

— Badtux the Law Penguin

Read Full Post »

Trump’s new lawyer is a real scumbag and scam artist. In short, the protagonist of “Better Call Saul” in the flesh.

His Fraudulency Donald the Trump apparently throws a dart at the White House org chart to choose the new head of the Veterans’ Administration. The new head is White House physician Admiral Ronny Jackson, who, despite the misinformation in the referenced article, has been White House physician since 2012 (i.e., became such under Obama). The biggest thing that Dr. Jackson has ever managed is a surgical pod. Yeah, that’s great preparation for managing an agency with 360,000 employees…

In other news, triggered right wing snowflakes continue attacking children whose friends were murdered, mocking them and making up all sort of vile lies about them. Dudes. Being mean to children is not a good look. Ever. Agree or disagree with them, but being mean to them just makes you look like child-abusing shitbags. Laura Ingraham found out the hard way that nobody wants to associate with child-abusing shitbags, after losing half her advertisers. She then whined and issued an insincere apology. Sorry, Laura. Once you’ve already proven yourself to be a child-abusing shitbag, nobody wants to associate with you, no matter how many apologies you issue. Once a child-abusing shitbag, always a child-abusing shitbag.

And after all that nastiness, we need a cat picture:

The Mighty Fang admires himself in the mirror. He’s not vain, not at all!

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

Read Full Post »

Trump lied about a border agent’s death. So Trump invented an imaginary attack upon border patrol agents. It turns out that it was a simple auto accident — the driver ran off the road and slammed into a culvert, maybe after being sideswiped by a big rig.

But Trump used his trumped-up lie to tar a whole group of people as being evil criminals and as an excuse to instate brutal policies that tear families apart. And the MAGAts don’t seem to care that it’s all based on a lie. Because for a large subset of Americans, any chance to demonize brown people is fine, whether it’s true or a lie makes no difference to them.

If you wonder why I despise Trump, it’s not because he’s a Republican. It’s because he’s a liar, and I despise liars. They’re the 10 Commandments, not the 10 Suggestions, and one of those Commandments is “Thou shalt not bear false witness”. Add in the blatant bigotry, and, well.

— Badtux the Annoyed Penguin

Read Full Post »

So apparently, according to a bunch of criminals who happen to be elected Republican officials (plus Alex Jones, can’t forget him), there is a “secret society” within the FBI intent upon investigating the President. The evidence? They hold meetings in secret.

They hold meetings in secret.

Like every other investigative team like, well, evah.

Because, look. If a police agency is investigating someone, they don’t want the suspects to know about it. They don’t want the suspects to know what evidence they’ve found thus far, or even that they’re under investigation. Because then the suspects could hide evidence or flee the country or otherwise make it impossible to gather the evidence needed to get an indictment.

So law enforcement teams investigating wrongdoing don’t hold meetings in the open saying “Hi everybody, we’re investigating Jon Doh on suspicion of money laundering, and here’s the evidence we have right now!”. No. That’s not how it’s done. They collect evidence in secret, and they hold meetings in secret to share the evidence with each other that each team member has gathered. Then once they have sufficient evidence, they take the evidence before a grand jury and get a criminal indictment. Only after there is an indictment is their evidence shared with the criminals (or more likely with the criminals’ lawyers since only a fool represents himself when charged with a criminal charge).

That’s how it’s *done*, and how it’s been done for the entire history of the FBI, and for the entire history of most big city police departments for that matter. It’s called standard investigative procedures. And it’s not evidence of a conspiracy. It’s evidence of a police agency operating the way it’s supposed to work.

Which is a problem, I suppose, if you’re a criminal politician and you’re worried that you might go to jail at the end of the investigation….

— Badtux the Law Enforcement Penguin

Read Full Post »

According to a new study, withdrawing from NAFTA would cost 18 million jobs in the United States during the first year alone.

So where would those jobs be lost? Well, large swathes of the economy are dependent upon Mexico and China now. U.S. automakers Ford and Chrysler would be especially hard hit. I know Chrysler best, so here’s the scoop on what repealing NAFTA would do to Chrysler:

Roughly 40% of Chrysler’s engines are built in their Saltillo, Mexico engine plant, including 100% of their world-famous Hemi V8 engines and roughly 60% of their Pentastar V6 engines. 100% of Chrysler’s best-selling minivans are assembled in Windsor, Canada, and roughly 60% of their pickup trucks are assembled in Saltillo, Mexico, accounting for a significant portion of their profits. 100% of their large cars — the Charger, Challenger, and 300 — are assembled in Brampton, Canada.

In short, if NAFTA is repealed, Chrysler has no engines for their large vehicles, and many of their most profitable vehicles get stranded on the other side of the new Iron Curtain that Trump is trying to build. It’s unclear whether Chrysler would survive. Jeep is about the only thing actually built in the United States today, but Jeep isn’t enough to sustain an auto company, especially a Jeep that has no access to V8 engines and limited numbers of V6 engines.

But hey, gotta keep them darkies on the other side of the border. And make sure that none of them benefit from money spent by white folks. But there’s an interesting thing about walls. They not only keep people out. They keep people in, too.

Just like the original Iron Curtain.

– Badtux the Walls Penguin

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »