ADVERTISEMENT

Obama sent personal letters to the 46 felons he released but never contacted Kate Steinle's family

My opinon is that Kate's killer is an illegal alien in a sanctuary city violating federal law and Obama doesn't even want to acknowledge that.
 
As far as the letters to the pardoned people, I assume that's standard procedure for any POTUS. As far as not contacting the woman's family, assuming he didn't, I don't know why he didn't. Maybe something to do with politics.
 
As far as the letters to the pardoned people, I assume that's standard procedure for any POTUS. As far as not contacting the woman's family, assuming he didn't, I don't know why he didn't. Maybe something to do with politics.
If he's pardoning the prisoners, I can't imagine why they wouldn't get letters from him regarding that action. With respect to the family of the murdered woman, the person responsible was released based on a policy set by the local government. The feds wanted the guy released to their custody.
 
If he's pardoning the prisoners, I can't imagine why they wouldn't get letters from him regarding that action. With respect to the family of the murdered woman, the person responsible was released based on a policy set by the local government. The feds wanted the guy released to their custody.

Absolutely true, but IMO the feds are as obligated to act upon city officials who conduct their work that way as much as the federal government should act if local government corruption is hurting the citizens in that locality.
 
If he's pardoning the prisoners, I can't imagine why they wouldn't get letters from him regarding that action. With respect to the family of the murdered woman, the person responsible was released based on a policy set by the local government. The feds wanted the guy released to their custody.

FYI, federal law trumps state law. Sanctuary cities violate federal law. The Feds sit by and watch.
 
FYI, federal law trumps state law. Sanctuary cities violate federal law. The Feds sit by and watch.

How miserable is your life? :joy: Honestly. All you do is bitch and moan about everything. Were you like this under Republican leadership? Or is it just you can't take a Democrat in the White House? Serious question. I mean this thread is a prime example of your hatred. You are making it out as if President Obama sat down, wrote these letters personally, and sent them. Fact is, he's probably never seen the letters. His signature stamped on there by a staffer. And this is a routine procedure. Happens at the state level as well when governors do it.

As for the sanctuary cities...this is the state vs. federal argument AGAIN. I don't understand, you don't want BIG government when it comes to such things as finally removing a traitorous flag, but you do when it fits your agenda. About right? And before you say it, the sanctuary law did cost a young lady her life.....and the flag was a symbol of the deaths of 1,000's throughout the south, and I'm not talking during the Civil War, but during the Civil Rights years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keyser76
How miserable is your life? :joy: Honestly. All you do is bitch and moan about everything. Were you like this under Republican leadership? Or is it just you can't take a Democrat in the White House? Serious question. I mean this thread is a prime example of your hatred. You are making it out as if President Obama sat down, wrote these letters personally, and sent them. Fact is, he's probably never seen the letters. His signature stamped on there by a staffer. And this is a routine procedure. Happens at the state level as well when governors do it.

As for the sanctuary cities...this is the state vs. federal argument AGAIN. I don't understand, you don't want BIG government when it comes to such things as finally removing a traitorous flag, but you do when it fits your agenda. About right? And before you say it, the sanctuary law did cost a young lady her life.....and the flag was a symbol of the deaths of 1,000's throughout the south, and I'm not talking during the Civil War, but during the Civil Rights years.

Obama signed the letters personally. Your simply excusing his very poor choice. The Feds are enabling sanctuary cities. She and others have lost their lives as a result. Libs like you want Hispanic votes so much, you excuse and enable harm to Americans.
 
How miserable is your life? :joy: Honestly. All you do is bitch and moan about everything. Were you like this under Republican leadership? Or is it just you can't take a Democrat in the White House? Serious question. I mean this thread is a prime example of your hatred. You are making it out as if President Obama sat down, wrote these letters personally, and sent them. Fact is, he's probably never seen the letters. His signature stamped on there by a staffer. And this is a routine procedure. Happens at the state level as well when governors do it.

As for the sanctuary cities...this is the state vs. federal argument AGAIN. I don't understand, you don't want BIG government when it comes to such things as finally removing a traitorous flag, but you do when it fits your agenda. About right? And before you say it, the sanctuary law did cost a young lady her life.....and the flag was a symbol of the deaths of 1,000's throughout the south, and I'm not talking during the Civil War, but during the Civil Rights years.

Btw, I don't care about the flag, I've simply said its a state decision. But I, unlike you, understand why some people like the flag and unlike you, I don't accuse them of racism.

You seem awfull angry.
 
Btw, I don't care about the flag, I've simply said its a state decision. But I, unlike you, understand why some people like the flag and unlike you, I don't accuse them of racism.

You seem awfull angry.

Go back, see where I have used "racism" as a reason to take down the flag. I've said it numerous times that the flag, itself, is NOT RACIST. It's treasonous.

Do you have proof of Obama personally signing the letters? No, you don't. It's like almost every mass government letter. It's written by a staffer and stamped with the government leader's signature.
 
Go back, see where I have used "racism" as a reason to take down the flag. I've said it numerous times that the flag, itself, is NOT RACIST. It's treasonous.

Do you have proof of Obama personally signing the letters? No, you don't. It's like almost every mass government letter. It's written by a staffer and stamped with the government leader's signature.

Traitors vs racist. Both evil. No difference. Even if Obama sent just a form letter he sent NOTHING to the Steinle's. Letters to felons nothing to an innocent girl's family. Speeches, letters, the FBI and DOJ, representatives to funerals for Martin, Btown and Gray. Nothing for Kate. Keep throwing out lame excuses.
 
Traitors vs racist. Both evil. No difference. Even if Obama sent just a form letter he sent NOTHING to the Steinle's. Letters to felons nothing to an innocent girl's family. Speeches, letters, the FBI and DOJ, representatives to funerals for Martin, Btown and Gray. Nothing for Kate. Keep throwing out lame excuses.

So the president sends letters to every victim of shooting deaths in America? Or just ones you want politicized?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keyser76
So the president sends letters to every victim of shooting deaths in America? Or just ones you want politicized?

Just a quick question, I'm confused. Did you mean to imply that President Obama sends out letters to victims families and sends government representatives to victims funerals to the ones he wants politicized?
 
Just a quick question, I'm confused. Did you mean to imply that President Obama sends out letters to victims families and sends government representatives to victims funerals to the ones he wants politicized?

The OP was saying that the president sent letters to pardoned criminals, but not to a shooting victim. What happened to this young lady is tragic. Was it preventable? Most want to say "yes". But we don't know that. It probably would have saved her life, but someone else could have gotten killed by your normal every day AMERICAN thug killer. What's the real difference? A life was lost by a person who got a gun that shouldn't have gotten one. It happens every day by AMERICAN citizens against AMERICAN citizens.

If this had been a massacre or something like the shooting of a senator/representative (like in Arizona a while back), I'm sure the president would have sent a letter. I'm not saying one life is less precious, just that is how things are. Some tragedies are worse than others, but equal in heartache.
 
The OP was saying that the president sent letters to pardoned criminals, but not to a shooting victim. What happened to this young lady is tragic. Was it preventable? Most want to say "yes". But we don't know that. It probably would have saved her life, but someone else could have gotten killed by your normal every day AMERICAN thug killer. What's the real difference? A life was lost by a person who got a gun that shouldn't have gotten one. It happens every day by AMERICAN citizens against AMERICAN citizens.

If this had been a massacre or something like the shooting of a senator/representative (like in Arizona a while back), I'm sure the president would have sent a letter. I'm not saying one life is less precious, just that is how things are. Some tragedies are worse than others, but equal in heartache.

This murder, committed by a 7 Time felon who was deported 5 times, caught and released by San Francisco in direct violation of a federal law the Administration won't enforce should have never happened. This has happened over and over again because politicians want votes and are willing to sacrifice American lives to accomplish it.
 
The OP was saying that the president sent letters to pardoned criminals, but not to a shooting victim. What happened to this young lady is tragic. Was it preventable? Most want to say "yes". But we don't know that. It probably would have saved her life, but someone else could have gotten killed by your normal every day AMERICAN thug killer. What's the real difference? A life was lost by a person who got a gun that shouldn't have gotten one. It happens every day by AMERICAN citizens against AMERICAN citizens.

If this had been a massacre or something like the shooting of a senator/representative (like in Arizona a while back), I'm sure the president would have sent a letter. I'm not saying one life is less precious, just that is how things are. Some tragedies are worse than others, but equal in heartache.

I think you are missing the broader point. Here it is... do you think the President picks certain events to politicize and what is his criteria? Example; he went all out about Martin,Brown and Gray, but not a peep about Steinle. Not trying to flame, I just believe its a fair question.
 
I think you are missing the broader point. Here it is... do you think the President picks certain events to politicize and what is his criteria? Example; he went all out about Martin,Brown and Gray, but not a peep about Steinle. Not trying to flame, I just believe its a fair question.

It is a fair question. And I really don't have an answer other than maybe there is already too much dividing this country that he thinks one more thing will be too much? We have Iran, Confederate Flag, Bill Cosby, among other things. Personally, I don't think he is not sympathetic to what happened to her.

Every politician politicizes events that may help them or their party. Trump is doing it with the immigration stuff. If Americans want WWIII, they will vote for Trump as Commander-in-Chief. He's nuts. That's not the democrat in me, that's the rational voter in me.
 
San Fran passed the sanctuary city ordinance in 1989. Lots of presidents have sat idly by on this front, and San Fran was not the first city to pass one of these ordinances. Those have been around since 1979 at least. 31 US cities have similar policies.
 
San Fran passed the sanctuary city ordinance in 1989. Lots of presidents have sat idly by on this front, and San Fran was not the first city to pass one of these ordinances. Those have been around since 1979 at least. 31 US cities have similar policies.

The simple reason Obama has not responded is that this is an illegal immigration issue. He doesn't want to shine anymore light on this issue for fear of alienating Hispanics. Kate is not the first to die because of San Fran's lawlessness and she won't be the last. Even the USA Today has called for an end to this outrageous policy. Maybe there will be some good that comes from her needless assassination.
 
The simple reason Obama has not responded is that this is an illegal immigration issue. He doesn't want to shine anymore light on this issue for fear of alienating Hispanics. Kate is not the first to die because of San Fran's lawlessness and she won't be the last. Even the USA Today has called for an end to this outrageous policy. Maybe there will be some good that comes from her needless assassination.

First off, not an assassination. A little dramatical aren't you? Murders happen every day in this country.

Secondly, why are you not criticizing George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush for not doing anything about it? You waited until this murder, why? You said that she wasn't the first, and won't be the last, yet you are ONLY blaming the current president? And you call yourself unbiased? It's obvious you are not. Take the blinders off.
 
First off, not an assassination. A little dramatical aren't you? Murders happen every day in this country.

Secondly, why are you not criticizing George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush for not doing anything about it? You waited until this murder, why? You said that she wasn't the first, and won't be the last, yet you are ONLY blaming the current president? And you call yourself unbiased? It's obvious you are not. Take the blinders off.

First of all, I never called myself unbiased. I am conservative. Secondly, Obama injected himself in the Martin, Brown and Gray cases. Those were local issues yet he got involved and he involved both the FBI and the DOJ. Once a President starts to do that, it is very fair to ask why not this case.

Thirdly, the Obama administration has sued Arizona and other states that were using local law enforcement to enforce federal statutes. They were pissed because the locals were doing the fed's jobs and jailing illegal aliens. Yet, in this case, the Feds are saying we are leaving up to local officials. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Lastly, this was an assassination. Cold blooded assassination. Her last words were, "Help me dad."
 
First off, not an assassination. A little dramatical aren't you? Murders happen every day in this country.

Secondly, why are you not criticizing George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W Bush for not doing anything about it? You waited until this murder, why? You said that she wasn't the first, and won't be the last, yet you are ONLY blaming the current president? And you call yourself unbiased? It's obvious you are not. Take the blinders off.
Because bitching about past presidents is unproductive. They have no influence to make change. The current one does and should. 1 more example of poor leadership on his part.
 
Because bitching about past presidents is unproductive. They have no influence to make change. The current one does and should. 1 more example of poor leadership on his part.
If complaining on a message board about the current president could make a difference, then things should be changing soon.
 
First of all, I never called myself unbiased. I am conservative. Secondly, Obama injected himself in the Martin, Brown and Gray cases. Those were local issues yet he got involved and he involved both the FBI and the DOJ. Once a President starts to do that, it is very fair to ask why not this case.

Thirdly, the Obama administration has sued Arizona and other states that were using local law enforcement to enforce federal statutes. They were pissed because the locals were doing the fed's jobs and jailing illegal aliens. Yet, in this case, the Feds are saying we are leaving up to local officials. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Lastly, this was an assassination. Cold blooded assassination. Her last words were, "Help me dad."

A lot of murder victim's last words were "Help me". Almost all murders are done in "cold blood".

You are avoiding the situation and question. If George HW Bush or George W Bush had done their job (as you say), then this guy wouldn't have been here in the United States. Right? They had the first chances to do something and chose not to. Just because they kept their mouths shut on other situations means they get a free pass? You are the type of person that is destroying this nation. Honestly. You have blinders on and admit to it. You constantly bitch about the other side of politics unless it is favoring your ideas, and then when your beliefs are favored and others bitch you attack them. Come on.
 
Because bitching about past presidents is unproductive. They have no influence to make change. The current one does and should. 1 more example of poor leadership on his part.

It's not that with this guy or yourself. It's that this president is a Democrat, and one you all despise. You aren't saying anything about the Bush's not doing anything about immigration because it would go against your MO, which is attack the Democrats at every opportunity. I mean, if the Bush's had done their job, then this lady would have been alive....right?
 
If complaining on a message board about the current president could make a difference, then things should be changing soon.
I was simply answering a question. I didn't say it was effective.
 
A lot of murder victim's last words were "Help me". Almost all murders are done in "cold blood".

You are avoiding the situation and question. If George HW Bush or George W Bush had done their job (as you say), then this guy wouldn't have been here in the United States. Right? They had the first chances to do something and chose not to. Just because they kept their mouths shut on other situations means they get a free pass? You are the type of person that is destroying this nation. Honestly. You have blinders on and admit to it. You constantly bitch about the other side of politics unless it is favoring your ideas, and then when your beliefs are favored and others bitch you attack them. Come on.

This guy was deported 5 times. He was captured in San Fran. The Feds detainer order was ignored by the Sheriff. He was released based on San Fran policy. He kills an innocent girl.

The Feds, under Obama, have sued states seeking to jail illegal immigrants. No other President has ever done that. Yet, in San Fran, the Administration said we must leave this up to the local police. Do you notice the hypocrisy?

My original post asked why Obama sent convicts a letter but ZERO contact with Kate's family. I also asked why the Feds got involved with Martin, Brown and Gray but not this case. My guess is that Obama wants to highlight racial issues but wants to downplay illegal immigration issues.
 
This guy was deported 5 times. He was captured in San Fran. The Feds detainer order was ignored by the Sheriff. He was released based on San Fran policy. He kills an innocent girl.

The Feds, under Obama, have sued states seeking to jail illegal immigrants. No other President has ever done that. Yet, in San Fran, the Administration said we must leave this up to the local police. Do you notice the hypocrisy?

My original post asked why Obama sent convicts a letter but ZERO contact with Kate's family. I also asked why the Feds got involved with Martin, Brown and Gray but not this case. My guess is that Obama wants to highlight racial issues but wants to downplay illegal immigration issues.

OK, a little hypocritical. You say he wants to downplay illegal immigration, yet you also said that under Obama the Feds have sued states to jail illegal immigrants. So, which is it?
 
OK, a little hypocritical. You say he wants to downplay illegal immigration, yet you also said that under Obama the Feds have sued states to jail illegal immigrants. So, which is it?

No, you misunderstood or I poorly explained. The Administration sued Arizona because Arizona required the police to arrest and jail illegal immigrants. The Feds claimed that it was their job and not the states to make those arrests.

In this case, the Feds are arguing that the local police need to make the call on releasing illegals, not the Feds.
 
No, you misunderstood or I poorly explained. The Administration sued Arizona because Arizona required the police to arrest and jail illegal immigrants. The Feds claimed that it was their job and not the states to make those arrests.

In this case, the Feds are arguing that the local police need to make the call on releasing illegals, not the Feds.

In the Arizona case, if I remember correctly, the law allowed authorities to racial profile. That is against federal law. Simply looking at someone and seeing they are of Mexican descent and say "let me see your papers" is no different than during the slave days when blacks had to show their papers constantly. You don't agree that this was a bad idea?
 
In the Arizona case, if I remember correctly, the law allowed authorities to racial profile. That is against federal law. Simply looking at someone and seeing they are of Mexican descent and say "let me see your papers" is no different than during the slave days when blacks had to show their papers constantly. You don't agree that this was a bad idea?

Here is a description of the Feds lawsuit. The Feds claimed the state was overstepping its authority. In San Fran, just the opposite. The Feds are leaving it up to local authorities.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/06/arizona.immigration.lawsuit/
 
Here is a description of the Feds lawsuit. The Feds claimed the state was overstepping its authority. In San Fran, just the opposite. The Feds are leaving it up to local authorities.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/06/arizona.immigration.lawsuit/

Yes, I know what it says. You avoided the question. Do you think it is OK for authorities to look at someone as racially profile them? That's what is being done. And if someone didn't have their legal documents, they could be detained until it was sorted out. So, you better bring your papers or you are going to jail. Yeah, sounds like a great idea!
 
Yes, I know what it says. You avoided the question. Do you think it is OK for authorities to look at someone as racially profile them? That's what is being done. And if someone didn't have their legal documents, they could be detained until it was sorted out. So, you better bring your papers or you are going to jail. Yeah, sounds like a great idea!

I don't believe in racial profiling. I also don't believe in the rank hypocrisy that enabled this ruthless killer to take an innocent American life.
 
I don't believe in racial profiling. I also don't believe in the rank hypocrisy that enabled this ruthless killer to take an innocent American life.

So, what you are saying is that Obama was wrong to sue Arizona for their racist law allowing for racial profiling, but you are against racial profiling. Explain. How can you be for something but against it. Oh....you are a conservative....that's how....:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
 
This can't be this hard for you to understand:

Justice Department lawyers argued that the state statute should be declared invalid because it has improperly preempted federal law.
"In our constitutional system, the power to regulate immigration is exclusively vested in the federal government," the brief said. "The immigration framework set forth by Congress and administered by federal agencies reflects a careful and considered balance of national law enforcement, foreign relations, and humanitarian concerns -- concerns that belong to the nation as a whole, not a single state."

In this case, the Feds claim that the state is preempting federal law. In San Fran, they make just the opposite argument. That San Fran is free to ignore Federal law (detainers) since it is best to leave this decision up to the local authorities.
 
The President should never get involved in little things the way he did, now he is expected to comment and weight in on every social issue that plagues this country. The pick and choose visits were too much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Big Skipbowski
ADVERTISEMENT