Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.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.
FYI, federal law trumps state law. Sanctuary cities violate federal law. The Feds sit by and watch.
How miserable is your life? 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.
How miserable is your life? 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.
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.
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?
So the president sends letters to every victim of shooting deaths in America? Or just ones you want 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.
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.
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.
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.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.
If complaining on a message board about the current president could make a difference, then things should be changing soon.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.
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."
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.
I was simply answering a question. I didn't say it was effective.If complaining on a message board about the current president could make a difference, then things should be changing soon.
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.
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.
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/
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.