Jump to content

Cuz Merica

Ratwagon1600

By Ratwagon1600
in General Discussion

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 28k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • KoHeartsGPA

    2561

  • datzenmike

    2330

  • Draker

    2054

  • a.d._510_n_ok

    2012

Top Posters In This Topic

angliagt Veteran

angliagt

Posted
Posted

Zarate was only convicted for a felon in possession of a firearm, but there is a federal arrest warrant for Zarate for charges including felon in possession of a firearm, involuntary manslaughter, and assault with a deadly weapon. Not sure if he can be tried twice for the same crime though.

 

He was an illegal alien who was deported from the U.S. a total of five times, had seven felony convictions, and was on probation in Texas at the time of the shooting.

 

He was convicted of his first drug charge in Arizona in1991.

 

In 1993, he was convicted three times in Washington state for felony heroin possession and manufacturing narcotics.

 

Another drug conviction and jail term, this time in Oregon.

 

Finally INS deported Zarate in June 1994.

 

Within two years he was convicted again of heroin possession in Washington state and deported for the second time in 1997

 

In February 1998, Zarate was deported for the third time, after reentering the U.S. through Arizona.

 

Six days later Border Patrol caught him at an Arizona border crossing and a federal court sentenced him to five years and three months in federal prison for unauthorized reentry.

 

He was deported again in 2003 for his fourth deportation, but he reentered the U.S. through the Texas border, eventually caught, jailed for another federal prison sentence for reentry, and in June 2009 was deported for the fifth time.

 

Less than three months after his fifth deportation, Zarate was caught attempting to cross the border in Texas, pleaded guilty to felony reentry, and placed in a federal medical facility. 

 

After completing a prison term in San Bernardino for entering illegally, the San Francisco Sheriff's Department wanted a piece of him for outstanding drug warrants. as it was for pot possession many years earlier the SF DA dropped the charges.

 

Thanks to San Francisco's moronic “Due Process for All” ordinance, because he had no current violent felony charges or past violent felony convictions they ignored the ICE detainer and let him go on April 15, 2015. He was out in SF for less than 2 1/2 months.

 

If it makes anyone feel better, the Mayor of San Francisco Ed Lee who signed the Due Process for All ordinance into law, died of heart failure two weeks after the Zarate verdict, so maybe justice was served after all. Or is that just poetic justice. 

 

Aloha   ;)

 

                    He should have served his time in a Mexican prison instead.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
datzenmike Grand Master

datzenmike

Posted
Posted

Last I checked staring isn't harassment. 

 

 

 

 

In theory this could be true. I would not want to test that in practice. If a woman complained that you were ogling or trying to intimidate her you may have a hard time proving otherwise.

Link to comment
Draker Proficient

Draker

Posted
Posted

MENLO PARK, CA—Tech titan Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, came out strongly against the repeal of net neutrality Friday, calling the rollback of the Obama-era regulation an “injustice.”


 

“Internet Service Providers should not be able to decide what people can see online,” the man who decides what two billion people can see online every day said in a Facebook video that was placed in front of the precise amount of people he wished. “It’s a violation of a free and open internet.”


“Furthermore, ISPs should not be able to charge more for certain content,” Zuckerberg intoned, though part of his $523 billion company’s revenue comes from throttling the reach of publishers’ content unless the publisher pays Facebook to show their content to people who signed up to see it anyway.


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Jesse C. Mentor

Jesse C.

Posted
Posted

Can we all just agree that irregardless isn't a word and move on?

 

 

I was able to hold my tongue both times this was used today, but I'm laughing now. Thank you

 

Merriam-Webster says “the most frequently repeated remark about irregardless is that ‘there is no such word.’ There is such a word, however.” It has been used (mistakenly) in place of regardless since the early 1900s and has now been admitted into dictionaries. So even though it is a word, irregardless is still far from being widely accepted. And judging by the scorn it receives online, it won’t be widely accepted anytime soon. Merriam-Webster’s advice: “Use regardless instead.”

Link to comment
a.d._510_n_ok Mentor

a.d._510_n_ok

Posted
Posted

California lawmakers propose health coverage for immigrants

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. >> California, flush with cash from an expanding economy, would eventually spend $1 billion a year to provide health care to immigrants living in the state illegally under a proposal announced Wednesday by Democratic lawmakers.

 

The proposal would eliminate legal residency requirements in California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, as the state has already done for young people up to age 19.

 

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/12/14/breaking-news/california-lawmakers-propose-health-coverage-for-immigrants/

Link to comment
Duncan Mentor

Duncan

Posted
Posted

fixed..

 

California lawmakers propose health coverage for immigrants

SACRAMENTO, Calif. >> California, flush with cash from a one party rule where they raised gasoline and vehicle registration taxes which they stated were intended for road maintenance, would eventually spend $1 billion a year to provide health care to immigrants living in the state illegally under a proposal announced Wednesday by ruling Kalifornia Democratic communists.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Jesse C. Mentor

Jesse C.

Posted
Posted

California lawmakers propose health coverage for immigrants

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. >> California, flush with cash from an expanding economy, would eventually spend $1 billion a year to provide health care to immigrants living in the state illegally under a proposal announced Wednesday by Democratic lawmakers.

 

The proposal would eliminate legal residency requirements in California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, as the state has already done for young people up to age 19.

 

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/12/14/breaking-news/california-lawmakers-propose-health-coverage-for-immigrants/

 

It was nice having citizenship privileges while they lasted. 

Link to comment
john510 Veteran

john510

Posted
Posted

California lawmakers propose health coverage for immigrants

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. >> California, flush with cash from an expanding economy, would eventually spend $1 billion a year to provide health care to immigrants living in the state illegally under a proposal announced Wednesday by Democratic lawmakers.

 

The proposal would eliminate legal residency requirements in California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, as the state has already done for young people up to age 19.

 

http://www.staradvertiser.com/2017/12/14/breaking-news/california-lawmakers-propose-health-coverage-for-immigrants/

Why is it these wonderful ideas seem to come from politicians in San Francisco ? can we get San Francisco to secede from California and the U.S. ? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept