States look to hire illegal immigrants to fatten struggling police departments

[Belk]

I already posted an excerpt of that portion of the article in Post# 65.

Yes, speculation as I said.

 

[Belk]

That's because the Moonie Times offers balanced reporting, unlike most of these Liberal yellow journalistic "news" outlets.

They present opinions from both sides of an issue. You might want to explore their articles more often. It's quite refreshing.

Your opinion is noted.

 

[Pommer]

I would consider that an axiom.

Do you have anything to add that might be relevant, in absence of anything to support your bare assertion?

Well, see, the issue is whether or not an illegal immigrant would be able to be a qualified candidate for a peace-officer position in the California (where the law is in effect).
Correct?

No.
They have to be “in the system” (AKA, not “illegal”).

So some random stranger would not be a candidate for such a peace-officer position in the State of California at this present time.

 

[HARK!]

Well, see, the issue is whether or not an illegal immigrant would be able to be a qualified candidate for a peace-officer position in the California (where the law is in effect).
Correct?

No.
They have to be “in the system” (AKA, not “illegal”).

So some random stranger would not be a candidate for such a peace-officer position in the State of California at this present time.

Did you read Post #65?

 

[Pommer]

Did you read Post #65?

I tried, but I got a “This is a subscriber only article”, and guess what?


I posted the actual text of the bill/law. Let’s use that, okay?

 

[HARK!]

I tried, but I got a “This is a subscriber only article”, and guess what?

You don't need to subscribe to read post #65.

I posted the actual text of the bill/law. Let’s use that, okay?

I gave you a Post# for my linked source. Care to reciprocate?

 

[Pommer]

I already posted an excerpt of that portion of the article in Post# 65.

Please stop pointing to evidence that is locked behind a paywall that no one is going to pay to see.
Argue your own points and stop using other opininators as a crutch, thank you.

 

[Pommer]

You don't need to subscribe to read post #65.




I gave you a Post# for my linked source. Care to reciprocate?

Here source bill

 

[HARK!]

Please stop pointing to evidence that is locked behind a paywall that no one is going to pay to see.
Argue your own points and stop using other opininators as a crutch, thank you.

I just searched this thread again; and I still don't see the law that you speak of.

 

[HARK!]

Here source bill

Oh here we go. We cross posted. I guess that you hadn't previously post this bill after all.

FYI, a bill isn't a law.

Here is an excellent rudimentary tutorial on that subject.

That said this movement is unfolding among several states. Providing a bill from a single state does not refute the article.

 

[Pommer]

I just searched this thread again; and I still don't see the law that you speak of.

Posts #48 and now #88
Sorry, my links tend to be embedded in the text and not a YouTube video or article from the Right-wing press.

 

[Pommer]

Oh here we go. We cross posted. I guess that you hadn't previously post this bill after all.

FYI, a bill isn't a law.

Here is an excellent rudimentary tutorial on that subject.

That said this movement is unfolding among several states. Providing a bill from a single state does not refute the article.

But the article is about the bill from a single state?

 

[HARK!]

But the article is about the bill from a single state?

No; and as I said before, a state does not determine Federal law.

The title of the thread should have answered your question before you asked.

"States" is plural.

 

[HARK!]

article from the Right-wing press.

I suppose that for the Far-Left balanced reporting is considered Right-Wing?

 

[Pommer]

No; and as I said before, a state does not determine Federal law.

The title of the thread should have answered your question before you asked.

"States" is plural.

Point taken.
But here’s a quote from this one bill in question in this one state:
“This bill would provide that those standards shall be interpreted and applied consistent with federal law and regulations, as specified.”

 

[Pommer]

I suppose that for the Far-Left balanced reporting is considered Right-Wing?

No, there’s going to be blue text and not some glitzy head turning colors to gawk at.
I posted the real actual BILL

 

[HARK!]

Point taken.
But here’s a quote from this one bill in question in this one state:
“This bill would provide that those standards shall be interpreted and applied consistent with federal law and regulations, as specified.”

I put together a few juicy tidbits from this article. In its' entirety, there is a lot of information.

I didn't realize that it was a 'subscription only' article. That is posted really clearly in the menu; and when I first posted this thread I didn't see this clear marking. I suspect that it was labeled for subscribers only, after the fact.

If no one but subscribers can read the article; this thread really isn't conducive to productive discussion.

I'm going to request that it be closed.

I'm out.

Until next time.

Bye.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread is closed at OP request.​