Shouldn’t a DHS Secretary know that illegal immigration is a crime?
posted at 12:16 pm on April 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The boss is all over an interview of Janet Napolitano on CNN this weekend, in which the Secretary of Homeland Security — the department that secures our borders — blithely asserts that illegal immigration is not a criminal offense. No, really:
KING: A lot of Democrats in Congress want to you investigate [Joe Arpaio]. They think he is over the line. He says he is just enforcing the law and the problem is the federal government.
NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, Sheriff Joe, he is being very political in that statement, because he knows that there aren’t enough law enforcement officers, courtrooms or jail cells in the world to do what he is saying.
What we have to do is target the real evil-doers in this business, the employers who consistently hire illegal labor, the human traffickers who are exploiting human misery.
And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.
That makes perfect sense, except for a troubling entry in the actual penal code, as Julie Kirchner points out:
8 USC Sec. 1325
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Hint to the DHS Secretary: We don’t toss people in prison for losing civil lawsuits. The penal code makes illegal immigration a crime, one which Napolitano’s department is supposed to investigate and prosecute. One might think that a person put in charge of the Department of Homeland Security would have familiarized herself with this particular law after having been in the position for several months.
But of course, Napolitano knows that illegal immigration is a crime. She and the administration she serves don’t want to enforce that law; they want to pretend it doesn’t exist. The DHS seems a lot more concerned about the danger of American combat veterans returning home than they do illegal aliens crossing the borders, which speaks volumes about the political bent of the Obama administration.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Will you ever tire of repeating discredited lies?
MarkTheGreat on April 21, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Good advice.
scalleywag on April 21, 2009 at 1:24 PM
Getalife is just putting that other leftist, Joseph Goebbel’s, axiom into practice: “Tell a lie long enough and it becomes the truth”
rbj on April 21, 2009 at 1:24 PM
That’s more than I can say for whoever programmed you.
MarkTheGreat on April 21, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Getalife doesn’t do hypothicallys and is limited to being specific. He uses the John Kerry model on his plan for Iraq back in 04, or what was it John? Anyway the getalife does not have a solution to stop illegal entering, unless his own house is illegal entered but again he doesn’t do hypothically questions. Getalife has no plan for any other problem facing the nation. He is specific on very little. By the way what City would you sacrifice GETALIFe?
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I don’t want to necessarily change GETalife, I just want specific answers.
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Looks like we need a torture thread Ed.
getalife on April 21, 2009 at 1:30 PM
Amen brother Ed.
therightscoop on April 21, 2009 at 1:32 PM
getaclue,
Can you tell us exactly what waterboarding is and why it is or is not classified as torture?
I mean, most of the libs that I have been forced to talk to throw that word out there but have no clue what it actually is. Tell us or give us a link…
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Forget it Mark, this clownish, buffoonish troll simply lives to spew more of his smegma towards thinking Americans.
SeniorD on April 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM
If and when an illegal alien sneaks across the border who happens to be white, anti-abortion, pro-gun, wearing a chain with a cross on it, has a sunburned red neck, makes more than $250,000 per year, is a retired vet and might look like a conservative the alarm bells and red lights are going to go off in Napolitano’s office.
Within hours the happless individual will be hanging from a lamppost in front of the DHS building as an example.
Yoop on April 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Fumpbum can you also ask if she is willing to give up her city or suburb in order to keep Waterboarding?
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 1:34 PM
Any thread where you show up is torture.
fogw on April 21, 2009 at 1:34 PM
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 1:34 PM
I doubt that the getabrain would even be willing to give up it’s mother’s basement where it types it’s nonsense while surrounded by Pelosi blow up dolls!
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 1:36 PM
“8 USC Sec. 1325″
While that is true, the person is also entitled to “due process” which means there must be a hearing. So if every single illegal requested their hearing, then the Secretary is correct, there wouldn’t be enough places to hold them or enough judges to hear the cases.
Also, the judge that hears the case has a lot of leeway. The judge can allow the person to stay or issue a deportation order. If they waive their hearing, then they are generally deported. Having been deported once ups the stakes for getting caught a second time. But the first time, you get a hearing. They can simply jam the court if they want to. How long would it take to hear 100,000 cases let alone 12 million?
crosspatch on April 21, 2009 at 1:37 PM
LOL! you have got to be about 12, I’d say. Let’s hear what your lifes’ accomplishments are!
rightside on April 21, 2009 at 1:37 PM
Words mean something right? That’s why we use two words to describe immigrants. There’s legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. The illegal immigrants have commited a crime in order to get into this country.
Is that simple enough for Obama voters and Cabinet officials? Or are the words to big?
hawksruleva on April 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM
hmmmm,
is the getalife actually looking something up? Sure is taking a while to respond.
Maybe mommy came down and said it was naptime!
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM
In other words, it isn’t a crime until a judge rules that it is unless the person waives their hearing.
crosspatch on April 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Getalife,,, looks like we need a “answer specifically thread. You expect specifics, why can’t you?
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 1:39 PM
The Japanese were prosecuted for far more than just water boarding dumb-a$$. Which are you lazy or ignorant? My money is on both.
jdkchem on April 21, 2009 at 1:40 PM
It gets better. Once the illegal immigrant makes their first court hearing they are generally granted bond!
I cannot understand that since the minute they walk out of the courthouse on bond they are, once again, illegal! I wish we had a federal courthouse in my city as my arrest numbers would skyrocket! I would just hang out on the steps and arrest them all as they walked out the door!
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM
tor⋅ture
/ˈtɔrtʃər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [tawr-cher] Show IPA noun, verb, -tured, -tur⋅ing.
–noun
1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
2. a method of inflicting such pain.
3. Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4. extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5. a cause of severe pain or anguish.
stonemeister on April 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM
From a TV interview/public relations standpoint, Napolitano is quickly turning into the Jocelyn Elders of the Obama Administration.
jon1979 on April 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Oh – almost forgot. Is this a Janet Napolitano thread? Looks like it. Then it behooves me to mention the fact that our new Secretary of Homeland Security is in charge of FEMA. In her previous job, Governor of Arizona, she lead their Dept. of Emergency Management to one of the lowest rankings in the nation.
hawksruleva on April 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Homeland per se Security per se.
LibTired on April 21, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Immigration law enforcement? Border enforcement?
Sorry. That’s not included in the Hopeandchange Class Warfare Rules of Engagement.
—– —–
Tons of cash for class warfare battalions at ACORN, et al, in the name of social justice, er, uh, neighborhood stabilisation?
Sure. Why not? It’s in the Battle Plan.
hillbillyjim on April 21, 2009 at 1:43 PM
I’m sorry, but since when do we base the prosecution of our laws on how many courtrooms and jail cells we have?
See how this attitude works? Ignore the laws you think aren’t important enough to worry about! Easy fix, just claim there aren’t nearly enough officers to deal with rape and murder.
TheBlueSite on April 21, 2009 at 1:43 PM
My goodness, illegal aliens crossing the border in the middle of the night or in the light of day is not illegal? Then, let’s all go to Mexico and try to do the same thing….
What? They have laws? 2 Years in prison, you say for illegally crossing into Mexico?
What? You can’t get a job in Mexico if you are not a citizen of Mexico?
What? You can’t own land if you are not a citizen of Mexico?
I think it is time for Janet ‘earnest borgnine’ Napolitano to finally admit she is an idiot and go back to Arizona.
BTW, are all poltiticians that come from Arizona stupid or is it in the water?
HornetSting on April 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM
stonemeister on April 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM
The beauty is that waterboarding doesn’t actually cause a person to drown. It makes them FEEL as if they are drowning when in fact they are not.
Aside from that, it is EFFECTIVE!!! I personally wouldn’t have a problem with pulling out fingernails or skinning a terrorist alive if it would save American lives, but that’s just me!
fumpbump on April 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM
getalife on April 21, 2009 at 1:17 PM
It’s not hypothetical, as the non-released memo’s seem to show.
If you are not willing to use the techniques as even outlined in the released memo’s then you must be willing to accept that American lives could be lost, indeed an American city perhaps could be attacked/destroyed as a result.
catmman on April 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM
“It” is an idiot! It continues to stick to the “water boarding is illegal and we prosecuted the Japenese for it” meme while conveniently ignoring the real atrocities. It ignorantly assumes that everyone knows as little about history as it does.
jdkchem on April 21, 2009 at 1:45 PM
I cannot WAIT until hurricane season. Get your popcorn now, because this lady can’t find her a$$ with two hands and a flashlight.
HornetSting on April 21, 2009 at 1:45 PM
I do believe this is first time in the history of America that a president and his administration have made war on their own country. Well at least since Abrahan Lincoln and his “War of Northern Aggression” for you all Johny Rebs.
MB4 on April 21, 2009 at 1:46 PM
rightside on April 21, 2009 at 1:37 PM
He couldn’t give you an answerr anyway. He doesn’t deal in hypotheticals…
catmman on April 21, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Folks, we need to leave GetALife alone. It’s name tells you all you need to know.
It has no life and comes here to get one.
Pity the poor thing. All of it’s posts read the same
To wit; Notice me! Notice me! Oh please notice me!
oldernwiser on April 21, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Well, that’s an easy defense. We all know that clearing interrogation tactics is not a crime per se
Trafalgar on April 21, 2009 at 1:47 PM
The Obama Narcissistic personality disorder.
Johan Klaus on April 21, 2009 at 1:49 PM
“Trafalgar on April 21, 2009 at 1:47 PM”
MAJOR HEH
Buckaroo on April 21, 2009 at 1:51 PM
I would simply like to point out that the fact that an activity is illegal does not truly make it a crime, except in a very literal interpretation of a law. For example, smoking marijuana is illegal in most jurisdictions, but is truly not a crime. Stealing from others (e.g., what the Federal government is best at) is a crime, though insofar as taxation is concerned, is not illegal.
Henry Bowman on April 21, 2009 at 1:53 PM
“Henry Bowman on April 21, 2009 at 1:53 PM”
er, the pothead thread is a couple doors down …
/eyeroll
Buckaroo on April 21, 2009 at 1:54 PM
What a lovely bunch of coconuts.
Cheshire Cat on April 21, 2009 at 1:56 PM
You need to understand laws in the United States. Violations of law are broken down into felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. As to marijuana law, in some jurisdictions possession of less than a certain amount for personal use has been reduced to an infraction (on the same level as traffic violations). That has nothing to do with illegal border crossing which is punishable by imprisonment, making it most certainly a crime.
Trafalgar on April 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM
I’ll inform the Supreme Court and Westlaw of their sudden irrelevancy.
Enter Bowman, the Lawgiver.
BobMbx on April 21, 2009 at 2:00 PM
And by the way, what other interpretation of our laws is there than a ‘literal’ one?
Trafalgar on April 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM
And by the way, what other interpretation of our laws is there than a ‘
literal’liberal one?Trafalgar on April 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM
FIFY
BobMbx on April 21, 2009 at 2:02 PM
(queue the Jeopardy music…)
“What is every discussion with liberal getalife?”
dominigan on April 21, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Janet is originally from New Mexico.
And yes, we certainly have our share of idiot politicians here (it’s not the water — we don’t have that much water), but we do have some elected officials here who are actually trying to enforce our laws (e.g., Joe Arpaio, Jeff Flake, etc.). And AZ didn’t fall into Obama’s win column last November.
AZCoyote on April 21, 2009 at 2:03 PM
Illegal Entry is treated as an administrative crime, since certain immigration officers can order Removals without a Judge’s finding. The burden of proof is on the alien to establish that he is Present With Admission, not the Government’s to prove he is not.
Speeding tickets are examples of civil crimes. Can you be jailed for speeding? Sometimes, yes.
They may request a hearing. He can contest the agent’s determination, but most do not, and are simply “Returned” to their home country.
cadetwithchips2 on April 21, 2009 at 2:06 PM
Johan Klaus on April 21, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Smoking marijuana is not, technically, a crime, however, possessing it is- and it’s still a Federal crime, irrespective of local jurisdiction’s laws/ordinances.
cadetwithchips2 on April 21, 2009 at 2:09 PM
First off, lose the 12 million figure. That is over 20 years old. It’s more like 40 million and you know it – everybody does.
Also, why should they get a hearing? Just round them up and deport them. That’s what we should have been doing all along. Mexico’s immigration laws are draconian, yet they call us big meanies because we want to enforce ours.
What we need is another Operation Wetback! Once started, ost will self deport as they did then.
vapig on April 21, 2009 at 2:11 PM
I’ve never accepted ‘as fact’ that there’s just no way to repatriate the illegals already in this country, and that their staying here would have to be a fait accompli when considering any type of immigration reform. Regardless of how one slices it, doing so would be the ultimate reward for bad behavior, and would accelerate some already unhealthy trends within this country.
I for one would favor a phased-in approach to repatriation, one which rewards those who come forward first (say within the first eighteen months) with the highest degree of logistical and financial assistance as well as some consideration as to the date and manner of their departure. Those in the next wave (say nineteen to thirty-six months,) would be afforded less largesse and flexibility, but would still receive as humane a treatment as possible. After thirty-six months, all bets are off and we would empower ICE and state and federal law-enforecement to embark on a campaign of identification and arrest for those still on the loose.
Granted, the dates may be far too optimistic, but dates can be refined with additional analysis; the point remains that the idea that there’s “just not enough buses” presupposes a mass-exodus that need not happen all at once, but definitely could happen over time.
Obviously it’ll never happen with this crew, but I’d sure like to see it become part of someone’s platform for 2012.
CaptFlood on April 21, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Do you have a link? Would love to have that info to toss at politicians.
Tom
marinetbryant on April 21, 2009 at 2:15 PM
There is very little water in Arizona, comparatively speaking. Perhaps dehydration of the brain?
Yoop on April 21, 2009 at 2:25 PM
With you in here, I think we’re there.
Black Adam on April 21, 2009 at 2:27 PM
This word of wisdom and advice goes to getalife (and the rest of you Liberals who lurk here, please check the following site for a book which my give you the gift of understanding. Understanding yourselves.
http://www.amazon.com/Born-Liberal-Raised-Right-Bradley/dp/1935071009/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240329198&sr=8-1.
Few liberals (and sadly, some conservatives) rarely consider WHY they believe WHAT they believe. Happy reading!
getalife on April 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM
oldleprechaun on April 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
This is strike two. That politicalized report and now pretended ignorance of the emigration laws. One more and she should be tossed.
petunia on April 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM
If you count up all the illegals in the sanctuary cities I am sure you would come up with 7 million, rememeber its hard to document since its almost illegal to ask them for papers. I just go by all the hamburger places turning into taco places and other businesses going hispanic. I know that doesn’t mean they are illegal but they know that there is a huge illegal population that prefers tacos over American cuisine.
garydt on April 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
AZCoyote,
Can’t seem to copy and paste…damn computer…
It does not surprise me that Janet is from NM, the politicians in our own state are beyond ignorant. Unfortunately, we have Albuquerque and Sante Fe, full of granola eating fruitloops to thank for that. I love Sheriff Joe and hope he can continue doing his good work.
HornetSting on April 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM
Center of Deportation:
A bus returning from a raid containing illegal immigrants pulls up. Empty bus just ahead of it. One by one, the immigrants are asked by a judge, do you have papers, visa, etc. stating you can be here legally? Oh, you took a job, no working visa? On the bus with you. Next. Maybe you need a couple buses. 1 that drives straight to mexico, the other that goes to the nearest airport.
ammon_of_cs on April 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Now that Janet has moved into Federal power she has the Feds after Joe. Janet had a running war with him all the time she was governor now she has the power to silence and discredit him. That alone is a good reason to demand she step down. She is using her new found influence to pursue a personal grudge.
petunia on April 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM
OK…Let me make sure I’ve got this right. It’s OK to prosecute CIA agents who interrogated terrorists,using approved guidelines, to obtain information that could potentially save thousands of lives but we will not prosecute people who intentionally break the law? Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…My head!!! My head!!!
sdd on April 21, 2009 at 2:40 PM
Oh yeah! I went to San Diego (from Phoenix) a couple of weeks ago. We had to stop 3 times going into California, roll down our windows, and wave to the nice immigration folks…. but on the way back to AZ we only had to stop once. That’s weird.
I saw a fence on the border by the way. And lots of four wheelers…
petunia on April 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM
Whew, everyone is tearing into Gibbs at today’s press briefing! Sweet.
racecar05 on April 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM
I think your timetable is just fine. We just need the political will to implement it. Bush never had the will and Obama is apparently going to swing the doors all the way open.
Just for the sake of perspective – I don’t believe McCain (Mr. Shamnesty) would have been any better regarding this issue.
vapig on April 21, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Everyone now knows what the good people of Arizona had to deal with, with this dim-wit Obama selected dunce!
byteshredder on April 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM
I really did not need to have that image in my head. I think I’ll have to be pouring disinfectant in my head for the next month at least. Thanks a lot.
Gospel Moody on April 21, 2009 at 3:15 PM
One would think that the person put in charge of the Department of the Treasury would not be a tax cheat either… but these are not normal times.
percysunshine on April 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM
You cut off the benefits, such as free healthcare and welfare, stop the anchor baby scam, and start jailing employers of illegal aliens, the illegal aliens will self-deport themselves with no more teat to suckle from.
I saw a story about a memo, from 2006, that stated from the sanctuary city of Houston, county of Harris, that the Harris County medical system was having to eat about $500 million in healthcare for illegal aliens over a three year period. We have enough people, small business owners, that don’t have the money to pay for healthcare because of cost and no way to get ‘discount’ rates for bigger companies. WE need to take care of our own and throw out the leaches.
HornetSting on April 21, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Wish I had links at my finger tips but back about 4-5 years ago two hospitals in Tucson AZ. went belly up because of the expense of treating illegals
oldernwiser on April 21, 2009 at 3:34 PM
It is hideous the cost of illegal immigration, but every likes their cheap labor and the cheap votes. This is a quick way to clean up government spending…..enforce immigration laws at the top. No welfare and stop anchor baby fraud….you have to be in good standing with the law for your child to be a US citizen. Start protesting in front of illegal alien employers and throw them in jail.
HornetSting on April 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Great memory, those weren’t the only two…along with threats from the gov. that if they don’t treat, they won’t get funding.
right2bright on April 21, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Napolitano is just Janet Reno in a different suit, she doesn’t CARE what the law is, she’s a scumbag who is more interested in attacking American Citizens and taking THEIR constitutional rights than enforcing laws she doesn’t like.
Napolitano hasn’t looked at the FBI Most Wanted list for Domestic Terrorists, which is posted in EVERY DHS office in the country because she supports the criminals on that list. Every person ON that FBI list is a left-wing extremist but don’t DARE ask Napolitano about that…YOU might end up on a list somewhere.
nelsonknows on April 21, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Oh, but Ed, don’t you know that a person can’t be illegal?
/sarc
mwdiver on April 21, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Wow, Napolitano NEEDS to be fired. And Sheriff Joe is right, the problem IS the federal Gvt.
Unfit For The Internet on April 21, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Lord help me, I’m about to defend Napolitano . . .
In truth, a crime can only be committed by a person who is subject to the sovereign which promulgates the law. The tricky question with immigration is whether the act of crossing over a nation’s border simultaneously: (1) subjects the individual to the sovereign’s laws and (2) is an offense against those laws.
This really is one of those questions that depends on the meaning of the word “is”–to quote that famous ethical scholar.
I for one side with Napolitano on this question. (There, I said it. Does that mean I’m no longer a “right-wing extremist” now?) Thus, I think it impossible to be subject to a sovereign’s law until after passing over the border. This is why I’m more outraged by those who cross over the border and then wind up in prison on the taxpayer’s dime.
A better term for what our society calls “illegal immigration” would really be “irregular immigration” or something similar.
Of course, saying it’s “irregular” or whatever doesn’t mean one prefers these persons be given a path to citizenship. We can debate this question as a society. But our debate has long been deportation vs. citizenship. Frankly, I’m for option C: let ‘em stay, but don’t give them incentive to do so.
This brings us to the other common misunderstanding that these persons have constitutional rights. Baloney. Only citizens have those rights, not resident aliens.
So Lefties, stop demanding we pay for their medical care or their education, or that we give them jobs. If they don’t enjoy our hospitality, they’re free to go elsewhere.
cackcon on April 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Please someone tell me?Who is dumber.This dimwit or a big pile of dirt.
thmcbb on April 21, 2009 at 5:26 PM
I researched this and found that exactly one Japanese officer was convicted of torturing prisoners. Water torture was the last item on the list.
Of the senior command, very few were tried and convicted. Don’t take my word for it, go do the research and see for yourself. You might also get some facts, getalife, for you have none that I’ve seen.
Illegally entering the US IS a crime, Janet dumbass.
dogsoldier on April 21, 2009 at 6:16 PM
hmmm my first sentence is a mistatement. Many minor Japanese officers were convicted of torture. only one charge sheet contained water torture.
Sorry for the mis post.
dogsoldier on April 21, 2009 at 6:18 PM
She is using her new found influence to pursue a personal grudge.
petunia on April 21, 2009 at 2:39 PM
I’ve got to disagree. The Gov stayed clear of Sherrif Joe whenever possible…he’s the most powerful person in AZ and she knew it. She did not openly oppose the employer sanctions law passed by referendum a few years back. And for her acquicence, she even rec’d Joe’s support a few elections back.
Now if you want to talk about the AZ Dems as a whole, they most certainly hate and fear Joe.
DrW on April 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Thing is, the DOJ has chosen not to enforce this provision of the federal statute, most likely because there is no way in hell it will ever have the resources to prosecute all the aliens who made illegal entries, at least not without a massive expansion of government (imagine how many more federal prosecutors, ICE agents, judges, and support staff we have to hire just to prosecute everyone who falls under the code section) and higher taxes. The question for conservatives is do we want the bigger government and higher taxes for the sake of making a point on immigration?
NorthernCross on April 21, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Napolitano is playing word games.
Her statement is legally correct. The crime occurs only if a person crosses the border AND the location is not an official border crossing with immigration officers.
slp on April 21, 2009 at 7:29 PM
Giver her a break. Her job exists because we wanted to be protected from unwanted intruders making it into our country, not to protect us from unwanted intruders making it into our country.
Oh…wait…never mind.
Daggett on April 21, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Welp, I didn’t think it could be done, but Obama found someone wackier than John Ashcroft to deal w the nuance of illegality vs criminality
scottm on April 21, 2009 at 8:43 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »