How about... making a list of lawyers and human rights workers to detain while crossing the border, notwithstanding a lack of any suspicion they did anything illegal.
Paul Manafort was just given an extremely light sentence by a Reagan appointed judicial activist.
Apparently, you can commit crimes while being a white collar criminal if you are a Republican. No sweat.
Trump is breathing a sigh of relief that he'll never ever face any consequences for a lifetime of breaking the law. Future law breaking and actual treason like acting as an unregistered foreign agent is fine too.
On Watergate I recently listened to a podcast series by Slate called Slow Burn. Not being very familiar with the history I was mildly surprised how long that Nixon could get away with hanging onto his secret tapings, and the amount of support he still received from his base. In some respects it felt like political dynamics haven't changed as much as I thought they had over the intervening years, or perhaps the spectacle of an embattled leader in a 2 party system will universally generate those sort of dramatic unities!
Paul Manafort was just given an extremely light sentence by a Reagan appointed judicial activist.
Apparently, you can commit crimes while being a white collar criminal if you are a Republican. No sweat.
Trump is breathing a sigh of relief that he'll never ever face any consequences for a lifetime of breaking the law. Future law breaking and actual treason like acting as an unregistered foreign agent is fine too.
They were trying to hit him with 24 years for tax fraud. The average sentencing for these things is 17 months.
The judge rightly called b.s, based on the history of sentencing for these sorts of crimes, which is nowhere within the same universe.
"Manafort had faced up to 24 years in prison under federal sentencing guidelines, but U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis called that calculation “excessive” and sentenced him instead to 47 months.
Ellis said the sentence he imposed was more in line with those of others who had been convicted on similar crimes.
“The government cannot sweep away the history of all these previous sentences” for similar crimes, the judge said."
They tried to hit him with a murder-length sentance for tax fraud my guy. I wouldn't call that light.
On Watergate I recently listened to a podcast series by Slate called Slow Burn. Not being very familiar with the history I was mildly surprised how long that Nixon could get away with hanging onto his secret tapings, and the amount of support he still received from his base. In some respects it felt like political dynamics haven't changed as much as I thought they had over the intervening years, or perhaps the spectacle of an embattled leader in a 2 party system will universally generate those sort of dramatic unities!
They haven't changed. I myself have been reading "The Final Days" and, contrary to revisionist history praising the bravery of Republicans at the time, they stood by him to the absolute bitter end, when there were no other conclusions to be drawn other than that Nixon was trying to declare himself completely and totally above the law. And he was claiming it in the name of (for the most part) national security. The mental gymnastics that were used to explain how Nixon was acting by those closest to him, in hindsight, are absolutey mind-boggling. In the end, Nixon had roughly the same amount of support leaving office as Trump has now (maybe slightly less). The Republican base has not changed. They are purely authoritarian in nature, and the focus in the subsequent half-century has not been on making sure Watergate never happens again, but to simply make sure that the next time it happens, there is an apparatus in place so they hold onto power regardless. Roger Ailes started FOX News in no small part BECAUSE of how Watergate ended. He was Nixon's media consultant. I've said it dozens of times, but the simple truth is, Nixon survives if he has FOX News.
Paul Manafort was just given an extremely light sentence by a Reagan appointed judicial activist.
Apparently, you can commit crimes while being a white collar criminal if you are a Republican. No sweat.
Trump is breathing a sigh of relief that he'll never ever face any consequences for a lifetime of breaking the law. Future law breaking and actual treason like acting as an unregistered foreign agent is fine too.
They were trying to hit him with 24 years for tax fraud. The average sentencing for these things is 17 months.
The judge rightly called b.s, based on the history of sentencing for these sorts of crimes, which is nowhere within the same universe.
"Manafort had faced up to 24 years in prison under federal sentencing guidelines, but U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis called that calculation “excessive” and sentenced him instead to 47 months.
Ellis said the sentence he imposed was more in line with those of others who had been convicted on similar crimes.
“The government cannot sweep away the history of all these previous sentences” for similar crimes, the judge said."
They tried to hit him with a murder-length sentance for tax fraud my guy. I wouldn't call that light.
Strongly disagree that being a traitor to the United States (unregistered foreign agent), lying to prosecutors, derailing investigations, illegally accepting tens of millions of dollars, and filing fraudulent tax returns deserves a light sentence. he should get way more than a four year sentence.
People get life sentences for marijuana, and a woman got an 8 year sentence for voting while ineligible once while black. Paul Manafort is a career criminal.
America is fundamentally broken if white collar criminals face no consequences.
Republican activist judges have broken America. Never again.
It is indisputably true that any parent who committed a misdemeanor border crossing has had an infinitely harsher punishment (ie. extrajudicial kidnapping of their children) than what Manafort just got for MULTIPLE felonies. As @smeagolheart just said, an African-American woman who mistakenly voted while on parole in Texas got FIVE YEARS for doing so. And then this, from a defense attorney on Twitter:
If I hear the words "law and order" and "equal justice under the law" for the rest of my life I think I'll need a bag to puke in. In this particular case, thank god for the fact that the jury was deciding his guilt or innocence rather than a judge, otherwise he would likely be going home right now. Of course, the consolation being that the OTHER judge (who was not drooling over him through the entire trial) can sentence him to 10 yeare that can be ordered to be served consecutively, not concurrently. Here's hoping. And if Paul Manafort is your cause celebre in regards to unfair sentencing, you have seriously lost the plot.
Federal Guidelines were 19-24 years, Manafort got less than 4.
Judge is TS Ellis, a Reagan appointee, who repeatedly made headlines during the case that with his overt bias and his confrontations with the prosecutors.
He fast tracked the trial even though there were concerns about the jury being able to absorb the complexity of the case. He made statements during trial that people interpreted as defending Trump. He admonished the prosecution during trial to the point that he had to apologize and instruct the jury to ignore his own statements.
The French had to resort to the French Revolution back in the day because their ruling class had gotten out of hand. The powerful and corrupt were so immune from consequences that people felt that they had to say screw it and tear down the whole fish which was rotting from the head.
This kind of blatant law breaking and immunity from consequences is leading us every so slowly towards that a "let them eat cake" moment here in the US.
Judge TS Eliot is a sick joke. A brainwashed old man who believes the pro-Trump propaganda and is pro-treason and pro-corruption. He is literally covering for up treason. He made sure to give Manafort a light sentence so there would be no way he would tell the truth about Trump working with Russia. Just keep your mouth shut and you get off easy - if you are a republican criminal it's all good.
Today is a very sad day for America. This ruling will embolden white collar criminals like Michael Cohen and Donald Trump and his administration. America loses. We are now officially an oligarchy and a kleptocracy.
Everything that is bad is because of Conservatives. They have not done anything good ever. They've changed their name but they have been on the wrong side of every issue seemingly ever.
Here's stuff they are against:
Civil rights? They opposed them. Minimum wage? Social Security? Medicare? They oppose it. 40 hour week? Opposed it. Child labor laws? opposed it. House of Representatives had a measure condemning hate and Republicans were on the wrong side of the issue TODAY - 23 Republicans voted against it and Steve King, noted racist, just voted present. TODAY! Medicare for all? They oppose it. Any progress we've ever made in this country to make things better has had to be over the objections of "conservatives" who do not want things better they just want more for them "Screw you I got mine". Totally disgusting.
Here's what they are for:
Unlimited bribes of politicians and Tax cuts for the rich. They are the pro-corruption party. They hide behind culture wars and lie and spin things to hide behind weasel words. Cowards.
How about... making a list of lawyers and human rights workers to detain while crossing the border, notwithstanding a lack of any suspicion they did anything illegal.
Has anyone hit Bingo yet? Surely somebody must have won this game of Two-Bit Tyrant Wannabe Bingo by now...
I kinda wanna know what the trumped (pun intended) up charges are for those arrested.
They weren't arrested; not charged with anything. Just detained by ICE under its nebulous authority to detain whomever they feel like. They pull you into a room/cell, demand to see/copy the contents of your cell phone, and don't let you go until you comply.
There's no finding of probable cause, no need to uphold 4th or 5th Amendmendment rights... just "broad authority" to police the border however they deem necessary. It's forking outrageous, if you ask me.
From the article:
"Symbols on the list show that by the time it was compiled 12 of the individuals had already been through additional questioning during border crossings and nine had been arrested."
That's not saying the journalist were arrested but I would like to know exactly what charges were filed.
Actually this gentleman was part of the last purge when pressure was being applied to the Trump's about being hypocritical about illegal immigration. Eric has a good quote in the story:
Eric Trump has described the process of firing workers as "truly heartbreaking," adding, "Our employees are like family, but when presented with fake documents, an employer has little choice.
"This situation is not unique to Trump Organization - it is one that all companies face," he said, "It demonstrates that our immigration system is severely broken and needs to be fixed immediately."
It is just, "how it should be fixed," there is a lot of differing opinions.
This worker was hired with a phony green card before the Trump's took over the property. I think it is safe to assume that the workers working there have already been vetted properly when another company takes over a business. Yes it might have been naïve of the Trump boys thinking that he was working legally, but would you personally question someone in that position as it sounds like it was an informal hiring when he was hired at the shooting range/hunting retreat.
You also can't say, he was hired so that he would be able to work less than minimum wage or under the table (usually an argument on why people seek out illegal workers) because the story also quotes him as first being paid more than NY's minimum wage ($15/hour to $13 min wage) and also getting a raise up to $18.75.
There is also a nice little quote about Trump:
"Once when Trump was playing at the course, Quintero remembers sitting on a tractor by the 14th hole. Trump shook his hand and asked Quintero how long he'd worked there, he recalled. Trump tipped him $50 and told him to buy his wife a nice lunch."
I honestly do not think the Trump's should be vilified for hiring/firing these people. Donald Trump should be vilified for some of his comments (or all of his comments) he made during the campaign trail and how he is handling the situation at the border now, but as Eric says what are they to do once they find out they are illegal? Show favouritism because they worked for the president? Sorry, it does not, and should not, work that way.
Manafort's judge sentenced William Jefferson(a black dem) to 13 years on corruption charges surrounding $90,000 in a freezer. Murderers often don't get 13 years. He's another corrupt Republican. He gives four years for hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal money, obstruction of justice, being a traitor ('unregistered' foreign agent who only registered retroactively after he got caught).
Actually this gentleman was part of the last purge when pressure was being applied to the Trump's about being hypocritical about illegal immigration. Eric has a good quote in the story:
Eric Trump has described the process of firing workers as "truly heartbreaking," adding, "Our employees are like family, but when presented with fake documents, an employer has little choice.
"This situation is not unique to Trump Organization - it is one that all companies face," he said, "It demonstrates that our immigration system is severely broken and needs to be fixed immediately."
It is just, "how it should be fixed," there is a lot of differing opinions.
This worker was hired with a phony green card before the Trump's took over the property. I think it is safe to assume that the workers working there have already been vetted properly when another company takes over a business. Yes it might have been naïve of the Trump boys thinking that he was working legally, but would you personally question someone in that position as it sounds like it was an informal hiring when he was hired at the shooting range/hunting retreat.
You also can't say, he was hired so that he would be able to work less than minimum wage or under the table (usually an argument on why people seek out illegal workers) because the story also quotes him as first being paid more than NY's minimum wage ($15/hour to $13 min wage) and also getting a raise up to $18.75.
There is also a nice little quote about Trump:
"Once when Trump was playing at the course, Quintero remembers sitting on a tractor by the 14th hole. Trump shook his hand and asked Quintero how long he'd worked there, he recalled. Trump tipped him $50 and told him to buy his wife a nice lunch."
I honestly do not think the Trump's should be vilified for hiring/firing these people. Donald Trump should be vilified for some of his comments (or all of his comments) he made during the campaign trail and how he is handling the situation at the border now, but as Eric says what are they to do once they find out they are illegal? Show favouritism because they worked for the president? Sorry, it does not, and should not, work that way.
I don't know how we are supposed to have a legitimate discussion about this issue when the default position is that the workers will always suffer legal consequences and the people who hire them won't. Ever. Under any circumstances. This plays right into the Manfort discussion, quite frankly. It's just another example of how the only thing that really matters as far as "justice" is concerned in a capitalistic society is how much money you have. At this point, I don't view it much differently than that Justin Timberlake sci-fi movie where the only currency is actually time left in your life which is transferred by bar-code. A society where getting a loan to float you buys you another 24 hours to get some more before you drop dead, yet there are those who have so much banked they will never run out. Just continuous, genuflecting worship of owners, who are immune from consequence completely, and workers who suffer all of them.
How is an employer supposed to know if they are hiring someone ineligible to work in the US? It’s not lawful to require a prospective employee to submit self check results and even if the prospect gives an employer a successful self check it does not protect the employer from prosecution if it later turns out that employee was not eligible to work.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
How is an employer supposed to know if they are hiring someone ineligible to work in the US? It’s not lawful to require a prospective employee to submit self check results and even if the prospect gives an employer a successful self check it does not protect the employer from prosecution if it later turns out that employee was not eligible to work.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
Where are these prosecutions of employers that are taking place?? I typed "employer convictions hiring illegal immigrants" in Google and the most you get is some examples of monetary fines and one guy in Nevada in 2012 who was sentenced to probation. There is an instance in the USA Today article near the top of this search where a guy in Tennessee knowingly hired 96 undocumented workers. He was arrested and plead guilty to federal crimes, but he his punishment was entirely monetary. And that is the MOST extreme example I can find. Have we not caught onto the fact that rich people don't care about breaking the law because their punishment is always going to be a fine and something that is not only probably worth the risk, but in the end may be profitable for them even when it all comes out in the wash??
How is an employer supposed to know if they are hiring someone ineligible to work in the US? It’s not lawful to require a prospective employee to submit self check results and even if the prospect gives an employer a successful self check it does not protect the employer from prosecution if it later turns out that employee was not eligible to work.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
Where are these prosecutions of employers that are taking place?? I typed "employer convictions hiring illegal immigrants" in Google and the most you get is some examples of monetary fines and one guy in Nevada in 2012 who was sentenced to probation. There is an instance in the USA Today article near the top of this search where a guy in Tennessee knowingly hired 96 undocumented workers. He was arrested and plead guilty to federal crimes, but he his punishment was entirely monetary. And that is the MOST extreme example I can find. Have we not caught onto the fact that rich people don't care about breaking the law because their punishment is always going to be a fine and something that is not only probably worth the risk, but in the end may be profitable for them even when it all comes out in the wash??
Punishment is up to the judge. Get some more liberals on the bench.
Actually this gentleman was part of the last purge when pressure was being applied to the Trump's about being hypocritical about illegal immigration. Eric has a good quote in the story:
Eric Trump has described the process of firing workers as "truly heartbreaking," adding, "Our employees are like family, but when presented with fake documents, an employer has little choice.
"This situation is not unique to Trump Organization - it is one that all companies face," he said, "It demonstrates that our immigration system is severely broken and needs to be fixed immediately."
It is just, "how it should be fixed," there is a lot of differing opinions.
This worker was hired with a phony green card before the Trump's took over the property. I think it is safe to assume that the workers working there have already been vetted properly when another company takes over a business. Yes it might have been naïve of the Trump boys thinking that he was working legally, but would you personally question someone in that position as it sounds like it was an informal hiring when he was hired at the shooting range/hunting retreat.
You also can't say, he was hired so that he would be able to work less than minimum wage or under the table (usually an argument on why people seek out illegal workers) because the story also quotes him as first being paid more than NY's minimum wage ($15/hour to $13 min wage) and also getting a raise up to $18.75.
There is also a nice little quote about Trump:
"Once when Trump was playing at the course, Quintero remembers sitting on a tractor by the 14th hole. Trump shook his hand and asked Quintero how long he'd worked there, he recalled. Trump tipped him $50 and told him to buy his wife a nice lunch."
I honestly do not think the Trump's should be vilified for hiring/firing these people. Donald Trump should be vilified for some of his comments (or all of his comments) he made during the campaign trail and how he is handling the situation at the border now, but as Eric says what are they to do once they find out they are illegal? Show favouritism because they worked for the president? Sorry, it does not, and should not, work that way.
I don't know how we are supposed to have a legitimate discussion about this issue when the default position is that the workers will always suffer legal consequences and the people who hire them won't. Ever. Under any circumstances. This plays right into the Manfort discussion, quite frankly. It's just another example of how the only thing that really matters as far as "justice" is concerned in a capitalistic society is how much money you have. At this point, I don't view it much differently than that Justin Timberlake sci-fi movie where the only currency is actually time left in your life which is transferred by bar-code. A society where getting a loan to float you buys you another 24 hours to get some more before you drop dead, yet there are those who have so much banked they will never run out. Just continuous, genuflecting worship of owners, who are immune from consequence completely, and workers who suffer all of them.
This individual committed fraud to obtain the job. His employer was duped into believing he was legal.
How would it play out if everyone with a Hispanic name was asked to provide further proof of citizenship everytime they applied for a job, or companies stopped hiring them all together to prevent being targeted for retribution on hiring illegally.
This wasn’t someone being paid under the table (it might have been an informal hire at the ranch but assumptions were made due to his previous work experience) where the company is benefiting from hiring an illegal immigrant. The golf course got no extra benefit from this individual being hired over someone legal. They really shouldn’t be punished unless you think e-verify should be mandatory in all hirings.
How is an employer supposed to know if they are hiring someone ineligible to work in the US? It’s not lawful to require a prospective employee to submit self check results and even if the prospect gives an employer a successful self check it does not protect the employer from prosecution if it later turns out that employee was not eligible to work.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
Where are these prosecutions of employers that are taking place?? I typed "employer convictions hiring illegal immigrants" in Google and the most you get is some examples of monetary fines and one guy in Nevada in 2012 who was sentenced to probation. There is an instance in the USA Today article near the top of this search where a guy in Tennessee knowingly hired 96 undocumented workers. He was arrested and plead guilty to federal crimes, but he his punishment was entirely monetary. And that is the MOST extreme example I can find. Have we not caught onto the fact that rich people don't care about breaking the law because their punishment is always going to be a fine and something that is not only probably worth the risk, but in the end may be profitable for them even when it all comes out in the wash??
Right. And that's the point. The guy I mentioned in the above example looked to be facing, at most, 1.5 million dollars in fines and back taxes. Great. That is an entirely meaningless punishment unless we know how much he personally profited from employing them in the first place. If he made more than that, it isn't a punishment at all. It's a business cost. This is to say nothing of how easy it would be to commit wage theft in these situations. An employer could easily just walk in and say "you're only getting half your check from now on, or I'm turning you in".
"In case you saw the conspiracy theory running around, conservative groups have now taken to spamming us by filing bogus ethics complaints so that Fox News can report on 'alleged,' untrue scandals," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. "This is how the misinformation machine works, folks.". -AOC
So Conservative groups are making fake allegations, then Fox News is reporting on them as if they are true. The worst part is any actual facts you present that doesn't fit their perfect narrative they have created is 'fake news'.
GOP is generating falsehoods and then claiming the fake news when proven otherwise. Orwellian.
"In case you saw the conspiracy theory running around, conservative groups have now taken to spamming us by filing bogus ethics complaints so that Fox News can report on 'alleged,' untrue scandals," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. "This is how the misinformation machine works, folks.". -AOC
So Conservative groups are making fake allegations, then Fox News is reporting on them as if they are true.
I noticed this as well, and for about a day I even fell for it, which is embarrassing. And this is the symbiotic relationship I am talking about among ALL conservative media. Those complaints weren't filed by happenstance and FOX News didn't immediately latch onto them by intrepid reporting. They were, of course, working together not to get an aspect of a story wrong, but to manufacture one of whole cloth. If you see something on FOX News, you shouldn't just be skeptical of whether it is true, but should assume (until proven otherwise) that the exact opposite is true.
How is an employer supposed to know if they are hiring someone ineligible to work in the US? It’s not lawful to require a prospective employee to submit self check results and even if the prospect gives an employer a successful self check it does not protect the employer from prosecution if it later turns out that employee was not eligible to work.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
Where are these prosecutions of employers that are taking place?? I typed "employer convictions hiring illegal immigrants" in Google and the most you get is some examples of monetary fines and one guy in Nevada in 2012 who was sentenced to probation. There is an instance in the USA Today article near the top of this search where a guy in Tennessee knowingly hired 96 undocumented workers. He was arrested and plead guilty to federal crimes, but he his punishment was entirely monetary. And that is the MOST extreme example I can find. Have we not caught onto the fact that rich people don't care about breaking the law because their punishment is always going to be a fine and something that is not only probably worth the risk, but in the end may be profitable for them even when it all comes out in the wash??
Right. And that's the point. The guy I mentioned in the above example looked to be facing, at most, 1.5 million dollars in fines and back taxes. Great. That is an entirely meaningless punishment unless we know how much he personally profited from employing them in the first place. If he made more than that, it isn't a punishment at all. It's a business cost. This is to say nothing of how easy it would be to commit wage theft in these situations. An employer could easily just walk in and say "you're only getting half your check from now on, or I'm turning you in".
Sorry, I edited. There is a max 6 months per undocumented employee.
Employers are important. Did that Tennessee guy have legal employees too? Should they all be tossed out because their boss went to jail?
I want to see major reform. Make a way for employers to legally hire people that want to work. It’s been proven that US citizens don’t want the jobs done by migrants so let’s find a way to get these people working legally.
Hiring illegal immigrants is a crime but @Grond0 has pointed out that it's difficult for the government to find it. It should be possible to track down, but apparently there are communication problems that get in the way. Presumably the agencies that could detect it do not have the resources to do so.
For the record, under normal circumstances I would not give a single shit about the Trump family employing undocumented workers under normal circumstances. But we are not under normal circumstances. They have created an atmosphere where they have demanded we crack down on the issue at all costs. The entire Presidency is premised on it. It's possible and necessary to stomach certain levels of hypocrisy, but not this. Not in the cultural climate they have stoked and created.
Elizabeth Warren is certainly swinging for the fences, coming out this morning with an official policy position to break up Google, Amazon, and Facebook Teddy Roosevelt-style. This is definitely......bold, if nothing else. This is almost certainly to drive the primary debate to the left, and at the moment I don't see anyone but her and Bernie making that push, but I don't see where her votes come from because too many of the people who would support her are 100% behind Sanders.
Mind you, it's going to be incredibly hard for the new generation of conservatives to argue against this since they have been explicitly calling for similar action to be taken against YouTube and Twitter for the last two years and counting.
Good for Warren. It's about time we saw a genuine trust-busting effort coming out of the White House.
The entire premise of capitalism is that free competition forces corporations to cater to consumers, and that premise is shattered when a company does not face serious competition. It's not healthy for the economy or society for a handful of incredibly powerful companies to dominate the nation.
We've done it before. Teddy Roosevelt did it, and rightly so. It's not like this is an untested, radical idea. Politicians have just been too afraid of challenging powerful companies.
Comments
I kinda wanna know what the trumped (pun intended) up charges are for those arrested.
Apparently, you can commit crimes while being a white collar criminal if you are a Republican. No sweat.
Trump is breathing a sigh of relief that he'll never ever face any consequences for a lifetime of breaking the law. Future law breaking and actual treason like acting as an unregistered foreign agent is fine too.
They were trying to hit him with 24 years for tax fraud. The average sentencing for these things is 17 months.
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Tax_Fraud_FY17.pdf
The judge rightly called b.s, based on the history of sentencing for these sorts of crimes, which is nowhere within the same universe.
"Manafort had faced up to 24 years in prison under federal sentencing guidelines, but U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis called that calculation “excessive” and sentenced him instead to 47 months.
Ellis said the sentence he imposed was more in line with those of others who had been convicted on similar crimes.
“The government cannot sweep away the history of all these previous sentences” for similar crimes, the judge said."
They tried to hit him with a murder-length sentance for tax fraud my guy. I wouldn't call that light.
It's actually pretty cruel.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/paul-manafort-sentencing/2019/03/07/77f527b2-3e94-11e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?utm_term=.4db7b21f3816
They haven't changed. I myself have been reading "The Final Days" and, contrary to revisionist history praising the bravery of Republicans at the time, they stood by him to the absolute bitter end, when there were no other conclusions to be drawn other than that Nixon was trying to declare himself completely and totally above the law. And he was claiming it in the name of (for the most part) national security. The mental gymnastics that were used to explain how Nixon was acting by those closest to him, in hindsight, are absolutey mind-boggling. In the end, Nixon had roughly the same amount of support leaving office as Trump has now (maybe slightly less). The Republican base has not changed. They are purely authoritarian in nature, and the focus in the subsequent half-century has not been on making sure Watergate never happens again, but to simply make sure that the next time it happens, there is an apparatus in place so they hold onto power regardless. Roger Ailes started FOX News in no small part BECAUSE of how Watergate ended. He was Nixon's media consultant. I've said it dozens of times, but the simple truth is, Nixon survives if he has FOX News.
This is just one of two sentencing as well.
The bigger one, the one related to Mueller’s probe is just around the corner.
People get life sentences for marijuana, and a woman got an 8 year sentence for voting while ineligible once while black. Paul Manafort is a career criminal.
America is fundamentally broken if white collar criminals face no consequences.
Republican activist judges have broken America. Never again.
If I hear the words "law and order" and "equal justice under the law" for the rest of my life I think I'll need a bag to puke in. In this particular case, thank god for the fact that the jury was deciding his guilt or innocence rather than a judge, otherwise he would likely be going home right now. Of course, the consolation being that the OTHER judge (who was not drooling over him through the entire trial) can sentence him to 10 yeare that can be ordered to be served consecutively, not concurrently. Here's hoping. And if Paul Manafort is your cause celebre in regards to unfair sentencing, you have seriously lost the plot.
Judge is TS Ellis, a Reagan appointee, who repeatedly made headlines during the case that with his overt bias and his confrontations with the prosecutors.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/06/manafort-trial-judge-prosecution-765100
He fast tracked the trial even though there were concerns about the jury being able to absorb the complexity of the case. He made statements during trial that people interpreted as defending Trump. He admonished the prosecution during trial to the point that he had to apologize and instruct the jury to ignore his own statements.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort-judge/u-s-judge-apologizes-to-prosecutors-in-former-trump-aide-manaforts-trial-idUSKBN1KU1Y7
He even mocked the prosecution, accusing them of "tearing up".
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/400677-manafort-trial-judge-suggests-prosecutor-so-frustrated-hes-tearing
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/04/judge-in-paul-manafort-case-criticizes-robert-mueller-probe.html
So basically this judge is lunatic drunk on his own power and a judicial activist piece of crap and there was no justice done.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-presidents-sons-entrusted-their-private-hunting-retreat-to-a-caretaker-he-was-working-in-the-country-illegally/2019/03/06/d86b4e80-35f9-11e9-a400-e481bf264fdc_story.html?utm_term=.2ba0176226e3
The French had to resort to the French Revolution back in the day because their ruling class had gotten out of hand. The powerful and corrupt were so immune from consequences that people felt that they had to say screw it and tear down the whole fish which was rotting from the head.
This kind of blatant law breaking and immunity from consequences is leading us every so slowly towards that a "let them eat cake" moment here in the US.
Judge TS Eliot is a sick joke. A brainwashed old man who believes the pro-Trump propaganda and is pro-treason and pro-corruption. He is literally covering for up treason. He made sure to give Manafort a light sentence so there would be no way he would tell the truth about Trump working with Russia. Just keep your mouth shut and you get off easy - if you are a republican criminal it's all good.
Today is a very sad day for America. This ruling will embolden white collar criminals like Michael Cohen and Donald Trump and his administration. America loses. We are now officially an oligarchy and a kleptocracy.
Everything that is bad is because of Conservatives. They have not done anything good ever. They've changed their name but they have been on the wrong side of every issue seemingly ever.
Here's stuff they are against:
Civil rights? They opposed them. Minimum wage? Social Security? Medicare? They oppose it. 40 hour week? Opposed it. Child labor laws? opposed it. House of Representatives had a measure condemning hate and Republicans were on the wrong side of the issue TODAY - 23 Republicans voted against it and Steve King, noted racist, just voted present. TODAY! Medicare for all? They oppose it. Any progress we've ever made in this country to make things better has had to be over the objections of "conservatives" who do not want things better they just want more for them "Screw you I got mine". Totally disgusting.
Here's what they are for:
Unlimited bribes of politicians and Tax cuts for the rich. They are the pro-corruption party. They hide behind culture wars and lie and spin things to hide behind weasel words. Cowards.
From the article:
"Symbols on the list show that by the time it was compiled 12 of the individuals had already been through additional questioning during border crossings and nine had been arrested."
That's not saying the journalist were arrested but I would like to know exactly what charges were filed.
Actually this gentleman was part of the last purge when pressure was being applied to the Trump's about being hypocritical about illegal immigration. Eric has a good quote in the story:
Eric Trump has described the process of firing workers as "truly heartbreaking," adding, "Our employees are like family, but when presented with fake documents, an employer has little choice.
"This situation is not unique to Trump Organization - it is one that all companies face," he said, "It demonstrates that our immigration system is severely broken and needs to be fixed immediately."
It is just, "how it should be fixed," there is a lot of differing opinions.
This worker was hired with a phony green card before the Trump's took over the property. I think it is safe to assume that the workers working there have already been vetted properly when another company takes over a business. Yes it might have been naïve of the Trump boys thinking that he was working legally, but would you personally question someone in that position as it sounds like it was an informal hiring when he was hired at the shooting range/hunting retreat.
You also can't say, he was hired so that he would be able to work less than minimum wage or under the table (usually an argument on why people seek out illegal workers) because the story also quotes him as first being paid more than NY's minimum wage ($15/hour to $13 min wage) and also getting a raise up to $18.75.
There is also a nice little quote about Trump:
I honestly do not think the Trump's should be vilified for hiring/firing these people. Donald Trump should be vilified for some of his comments (or all of his comments) he made during the campaign trail and how he is handling the situation at the border now, but as Eric says what are they to do once they find out they are illegal? Show favouritism because they worked for the president? Sorry, it does not, and should not, work that way.
Manafort's judge sentenced William Jefferson(a black dem) to 13 years on corruption charges surrounding $90,000 in a freezer. Murderers often don't get 13 years. He's another corrupt Republican. He gives four years for hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal money, obstruction of justice, being a traitor ('unregistered' foreign agent who only registered retroactively after he got caught).
https://www.nola.com/politics/2009/11/william_jefferson_sentenced_ye.html
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/live_finland_reacts_to_surprise_resignation_of_government/10679514
I don't know how we are supposed to have a legitimate discussion about this issue when the default position is that the workers will always suffer legal consequences and the people who hire them won't. Ever. Under any circumstances. This plays right into the Manfort discussion, quite frankly. It's just another example of how the only thing that really matters as far as "justice" is concerned in a capitalistic society is how much money you have. At this point, I don't view it much differently than that Justin Timberlake sci-fi movie where the only currency is actually time left in your life which is transferred by bar-code. A society where getting a loan to float you buys you another 24 hours to get some more before you drop dead, yet there are those who have so much banked they will never run out. Just continuous, genuflecting worship of owners, who are immune from consequence completely, and workers who suffer all of them.
You really have to hire someone before you can find out if they are eligible to work. It’s pretty crazy actually.
https://www.e-verify.gov/mye-verify/self-check/employers
Edit: an additional link. Form I-9 (work authorization) cannot be filed until the employee has accepted a job offer.
https://www.uscis.gov/faq-page/i-9-central-completing-form-i-9#t17103n48577
Where are these prosecutions of employers that are taking place?? I typed "employer convictions hiring illegal immigrants" in Google and the most you get is some examples of monetary fines and one guy in Nevada in 2012 who was sentenced to probation. There is an instance in the USA Today article near the top of this search where a guy in Tennessee knowingly hired 96 undocumented workers. He was arrested and plead guilty to federal crimes, but he his punishment was entirely monetary. And that is the MOST extreme example I can find. Have we not caught onto the fact that rich people don't care about breaking the law because their punishment is always going to be a fine and something that is not only probably worth the risk, but in the end may be profitable for them even when it all comes out in the wash??
Punishment is up to the judge. Get some more liberals on the bench.
Max is 6 months jail per undocumented worker.
https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1908-unlawful-employment-aliens-criminal-penalties
This individual committed fraud to obtain the job. His employer was duped into believing he was legal.
How would it play out if everyone with a Hispanic name was asked to provide further proof of citizenship everytime they applied for a job, or companies stopped hiring them all together to prevent being targeted for retribution on hiring illegally.
This wasn’t someone being paid under the table (it might have been an informal hire at the ranch but assumptions were made due to his previous work experience) where the company is benefiting from hiring an illegal immigrant. The golf course got no extra benefit from this individual being hired over someone legal. They really shouldn’t be punished unless you think e-verify should be mandatory in all hirings.
Right. And that's the point. The guy I mentioned in the above example looked to be facing, at most, 1.5 million dollars in fines and back taxes. Great. That is an entirely meaningless punishment unless we know how much he personally profited from employing them in the first place. If he made more than that, it isn't a punishment at all. It's a business cost. This is to say nothing of how easy it would be to commit wage theft in these situations. An employer could easily just walk in and say "you're only getting half your check from now on, or I'm turning you in".
So Conservative groups are making fake allegations, then Fox News is reporting on them as if they are true. The worst part is any actual facts you present that doesn't fit their perfect narrative they have created is 'fake news'.
GOP is generating falsehoods and then claiming the fake news when proven otherwise. Orwellian.
I noticed this as well, and for about a day I even fell for it, which is embarrassing. And this is the symbiotic relationship I am talking about among ALL conservative media. Those complaints weren't filed by happenstance and FOX News didn't immediately latch onto them by intrepid reporting. They were, of course, working together not to get an aspect of a story wrong, but to manufacture one of whole cloth. If you see something on FOX News, you shouldn't just be skeptical of whether it is true, but should assume (until proven otherwise) that the exact opposite is true.
Sorry, I edited. There is a max 6 months per undocumented employee.
Employers are important. Did that Tennessee guy have legal employees too? Should they all be tossed out because their boss went to jail?
I want to see major reform. Make a way for employers to legally hire people that want to work. It’s been proven that US citizens don’t want the jobs done by migrants so let’s find a way to get these people working legally.
Mind you, it's going to be incredibly hard for the new generation of conservatives to argue against this since they have been explicitly calling for similar action to be taken against YouTube and Twitter for the last two years and counting.
The entire premise of capitalism is that free competition forces corporations to cater to consumers, and that premise is shattered when a company does not face serious competition. It's not healthy for the economy or society for a handful of incredibly powerful companies to dominate the nation.
We've done it before. Teddy Roosevelt did it, and rightly so. It's not like this is an untested, radical idea. Politicians have just been too afraid of challenging powerful companies.