Obama's aunt appeals deportation order

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Many people have many appeals. If she is being given special treatment because her nephew is the President, then please provide evidence for this by showing how she is being given special and extremely unusual dispensation by the court that other immigrants with similar resources don't get, or that the manner by which her appeal was granted are illegal or improper.

I have no idea if it is or not, and I'm not even asking for a smoking gun... just some idea that her treatment is particularly unusual even for someone who obviously would have significant legal resources at their disposal. You guys are throwing around an awful lot of accusations with absolutely no proof. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way.

She's in this country illegally. Do you dispute that?

Nope, it would appear that she is. Of course the reality of immigration law is much more complicated than all that, but I can already see what you're trying to do.

Yeah, I'm trying to get an illegal to actually re4spect and obey our damn laws. They seem to think they're too good for that though.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Many people have many appeals. If she is being given special treatment because her nephew is the President, then please provide evidence for this by showing how she is being given special and extremely unusual dispensation by the court that other immigrants with similar resources don't get, or that the manner by which her appeal was granted are illegal or improper.

I have no idea if it is or not, and I'm not even asking for a smoking gun... just some idea that her treatment is particularly unusual even for someone who obviously would have significant legal resources at their disposal. You guys are throwing around an awful lot of accusations with absolutely no proof. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way.

She's in this country illegally. Do you dispute that?

Nope, it would appear that she is. Of course the reality of immigration law is much more complicated than all that, but I can already see what you're trying to do.

Yeah, I'm trying to get an illegal to actually re4spect and obey our damn laws. They seem to think they're too good for that though.

Nope, you're trying to circumvent the judicial process in service of your agenda. Why don't you try respecting the law?

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: ahurtt

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Not if the only reason she can appeal again is because her nephew is POTUS.

She's been living off the taxpayers and has contributed nothing to our system. Why should she get to stay? Give me some good reasons??

Care to explain how she is 'living off the taxpayers and has contributed nothing to our system'? I'd love to see your proof of this statement.

I'd love it even more if you could prove it wrong, but you can't.

LINK

From the link...

Onyango did a good job as a public health advocate on behalf of the Boston Housing Authority. She also works as a volunteer computer systems co-ordinator for the Experience Corps, a program in which adults over 55 mentor children in their communities.

It also mentions she had a SS card so it sounds like she contributed to the system and community. Now go back under your bridge.

LOL@U

http://www.theaustralian.news....578185-5017121,00.html

An Associated Press story about poor people buying lottery tickets at cheque-cashing shops, from Cambridge, Massachusetts, on May 25, 2003, quotes a Zeituni Onyango, described as out of work and without much money. "It's like when I feel luck might fall I do that, like manna might come from heaven. That's when I buy it," she told AP.

A staff member at the Boston Housing Authority office, 50m from her house, said Ms Onyango had been a volunteer resident health advocate between December last year and August this year. She worked six hours a week for a small stipend.

Ms Onyango is also listed on the internet as a volunteer with Experience Corps, a program in which adults over 55 mentor children in their communities.

Where's evidence of the part where she was suckling off the taxpayer teet? (Since that is what your original claim was.) I don't see where it says she was using welfare payments to buy those lottery tickets or anything.

I guess you missed the part where she was living in public housing and where she had back surgery. Who do you think paid for that, her insurance company from her 6 hour/week job?

I didn't read the part about her living in public housing because it wasn't in the quoted excerpt you posted. I admittedly did not click the link and read the full article. This was because it stood to reason to me that if there was some evidence in the article that proved your original assertion that she lived off the taxpayer's teet then you would have opted to post that excerpt rather than the part you did post which does nothing to prove your original assertion. The part you did post says nothing but that she bought lotto tickets, had little money, and worked 6 hours a week. If I was supposed to deduce that she lived in public housing because the excerpt mentions that her house is 50 meters away from the Boston Housing Authority then you should have said so. However, that proximity does not overtly prove that she lived in public housing. However I will to take a look at the full article now.

EDIT: Ok, read it. Nowhere did it mention back surgery or that she lives in public subsidized housing. If she had back surgery, I won't hazard a guess as to who might have paid for it because I just don't know. But I will not just jump to the hasty conclusion that it must have been taxpayers like me who footed the bill without hard evidence. (I'll give you that I have my personal suspicions that it was at least taxpayer subsidized but suspicion is not proof.)

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

You do not have many appeals with the INS.

You get one chance to prove your case against the evidence.
If the court rules against you; you are given (if the INS allows it) a set time frame to put your affairs in order and then you report to a processing center.

The court ruled against her and she ran / hid instead of reporting.

When the INS picks up a runner, they are kept in a holding area and put on a plane within a week to their own country.

In her case, she have been given two court dates since she was exposed; one right after Obama was elected and then the current one which allowed another year for review. That is not normal procedures.

Why is she being handled with kid gloves when there are others that are under a depoeration order and being given airline tickets every day?>

People with no legal resources certainly don't get many appeals with the INS. She quite likely has significant legal resources at her disposal at this point. What people with legal resources get vs. what people without them get are two INCREDIBLY different things and you know it.

So once again, can you provide me with any links or supporting evidence that she has gotten something that someone with comparable legal resources could not get?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

You do not have many appeals with the INS.

You get one chance to prove your case against the evidence.
If the court rules against you; you are given (if the INS allows it) a set time frame to put your affairs in order and then you report to a processing center.

The court ruled against her and she ran / hid instead of reporting.

When the INS picks up a runner, they are kept in a holding area and put on a plane within a week to their own country.

In her case, she have been given two court dates since she was exposed; one right after Obama was elected and then the current one which allowed another year for review. That is not normal procedures.

Why is she being handled with kid gloves when there are others that are under a depoeration order and being given airline tickets every day?>

People with no legal resources certainly don't get many appeals with the INS. She quite likely has significant legal resources at her disposal at this point. What people with legal resources get vs. what people without them get are two INCREDIBLY different things and you know it.

So once again, can you provide me with any links or supporting evidence that she has gotten something that someone with comparable legal resources could not get?

Immigration judge gives Obama's aunt an extension

As expected, immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro's decision came under sharp scrutiny and some criticism yesterday. Bloggers and others contended that she was receiving special treatment, from the decision to reopen her case to the heavy security she re ceived in court. She was ordered deported twice; first in 2003, and then in 2004 after she sought to reopen her case.

"I'm very disappointed that the rule of law means nothing in my nation anymore," said William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, which has called for her deportation. "It's pretty apparent that some powerful people behind the scenes are pulling some strings for her."

 

[Red Dawn]

When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

You do not have many appeals with the INS.

You get one chance to prove your case against the evidence.
If the court rules against you; you are given (if the INS allows it) a set time frame to put your affairs in order and then you report to a processing center.

The court ruled against her and she ran / hid instead of reporting.

When the INS picks up a runner, they are kept in a holding area and put on a plane within a week to their own country.

In her case, she have been given two court dates since she was exposed; one right after Obama was elected and then the current one which allowed another year for review. That is not normal procedures.

Why is she being handled with kid gloves when there are others that are under a depoeration order and being given airline tickets every day?>

People with no legal resources certainly don't get many appeals with the INS. She quite likely has significant legal resources at her disposal at this point. What people with legal resources get vs. what people without them get are two INCREDIBLY different things and you know it.

So once again, can you provide me with any links or supporting evidence that she has gotten something that someone with comparable legal resources could not get?

Immigration judge gives Obama's aunt an extension

As expected, immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro's decision came under sharp scrutiny and some criticism yesterday. Bloggers and others contended that she was receiving special treatment, from the decision to reopen her case to the heavy security she re ceived in court. She was ordered deported twice; first in 2003, and then in 2004 after she sought to reopen her case.

"I'm very disappointed that the rule of law means nothing in my nation anymore," said William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, which has called for her deportation. "It's pretty apparent that some powerful people behind the scenes are pulling some strings for her."

Which sends a doubly bad message that if you are ordered deported, just ignore it and stay and as long as you aren't stupid enough to bring it up again, nobody will bother you unless you press the issue.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

You do not have many appeals with the INS.

You get one chance to prove your case against the evidence.
If the court rules against you; you are given (if the INS allows it) a set time frame to put your affairs in order and then you report to a processing center.

The court ruled against her and she ran / hid instead of reporting.

When the INS picks up a runner, they are kept in a holding area and put on a plane within a week to their own country.

In her case, she have been given two court dates since she was exposed; one right after Obama was elected and then the current one which allowed another year for review. That is not normal procedures.

Why is she being handled with kid gloves when there are others that are under a depoeration order and being given airline tickets every day?>

People with no legal resources certainly don't get many appeals with the INS. She quite likely has significant legal resources at her disposal at this point. What people with legal resources get vs. what people without them get are two INCREDIBLY different things and you know it.

So once again, can you provide me with any links or supporting evidence that she has gotten something that someone with comparable legal resources could not get?

Immigration judge gives Obama's aunt an extension

As expected, immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro's decision came under sharp scrutiny and some criticism yesterday. Bloggers and others contended that she was receiving special treatment, from the decision to reopen her case to the heavy security she re ceived in court. She was ordered deported twice; first in 2003, and then in 2004 after she sought to reopen her case.

"I'm very disappointed that the rule of law means nothing in my nation anymore," said William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, which has called for her deportation. "It's pretty apparent that some powerful people behind the scenes are pulling some strings for her."

So you think a report talking about a blogger complaining counts as evidence? Come on guys, you must be able to do better than that.

 

[sciwizam]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

So you think a report talking about a blogger complaining counts as evidence? Come on guys, you must be able to do better than that.

The report that she was ordered deported twice counts as evidence. BTW, the article is from the Boston Globe, not some blog.

 

[CitizenKain]

nobodyknows proves why its not worth the effort to argue with most republicans. They stomp around and complain about not being taken seriously while they go on tirades like this over a non-issue, and call anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with them bots. Also I have proof that nobodyknows is on welfare and leeches from the government at every opportunity, I don't need to back this up, I did research.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

You do not have many appeals with the INS.

You get one chance to prove your case against the evidence.
If the court rules against you; you are given (if the INS allows it) a set time frame to put your affairs in order and then you report to a processing center.

The court ruled against her and she ran / hid instead of reporting.

When the INS picks up a runner, they are kept in a holding area and put on a plane within a week to their own country.

In her case, she have been given two court dates since she was exposed; one right after Obama was elected and then the current one which allowed another year for review. That is not normal procedures.

Why is she being handled with kid gloves when there are others that are under a depoeration order and being given airline tickets every day?>

People with no legal resources certainly don't get many appeals with the INS. She quite likely has significant legal resources at her disposal at this point. What people with legal resources get vs. what people without them get are two INCREDIBLY different things and you know it.

So once again, can you provide me with any links or supporting evidence that she has gotten something that someone with comparable legal resources could not get?

Immigration judge gives Obama's aunt an extension

As expected, immigration Judge Leonard I. Shapiro's decision came under sharp scrutiny and some criticism yesterday. Bloggers and others contended that she was receiving special treatment, from the decision to reopen her case to the heavy security she re ceived in court. She was ordered deported twice; first in 2003, and then in 2004 after she sought to reopen her case.

"I'm very disappointed that the rule of law means nothing in my nation anymore," said William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, which has called for her deportation. "It's pretty apparent that some powerful people behind the scenes are pulling some strings for her."

So you think a report talking about a blogger complaining counts as evidence? Come on guys, you must be able to do better than that.

If you're not worried about the public's perception of Aunt Zeiti then why are you so tenaciously attempting to defend her? Let's ask Obama to get the "truth" about her out. What is her income? Who paid for her surgery? Her food?

Or are they hiding/afraid of something?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain
nobodyknows proves why its not worth the effort to argue with most republicans. They stomp around and complain about not being taken seriously while they go on tirades like this over a non-issue, and call anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with them bots. Also I have proof that nobodyknows is on welfare and leeches from the government at every opportunity, I don't need to back this up, I did research.

And I have proof you are a world class idiot AND fool.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

I guess the "fix" is in. I wonder if all of Obama's relaitives who came over for his Presidential Inaguaration are staying too?

How is the fix in? You are allowed to appeal the decision for removal (or as we refer to it, deportation). Talk to an immigration lawyer, this is not at all uncommon. You're grasping at straws.

She had her day in court and lost. What has changed except the fact that Obama has been elected POTUS?

The fix is in, only a blind Obamabot wouldn't see it.

Do you know what an appeal is? That's what you do when you have your day in court and lose.

Seriously, are you that dense, nobodyknows? Someone very close to me just went through a similar situation, this is how it works. You're being paranoid and irrational. You're also just unfamiliar with just how many chances we give illegals to stay here.

Someone comes to temporarily visit out country and then doesn't leave and ignores a judges orders to leave and you say I'm the dense one??? :laugh:

Listen carefully, I'm not arguing whether or not she should stay. I say send her back ASAP. The fact stands, she has the right to appeal, you don't seem to get that. There is no "fix" this is just the way it works.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

They Haitians should be classified as refugees.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

:thumbsup:

 

[whylaff]

Originally posted by: Hacp
Also, why the hell is Marian Robinson living in the White House? She should be living in a hotel nearby. She's wasting taxpayer dollars. Enough of "I'm taking care of the children" BS. She just wants to live in a mansion paid for by you and me.

You do know that unless it is a State sponsored function or event, the President is billed for a number of the services that are provided to him, his family and his guests at the White House, right? Meals (the cost of food and preparation) would be one example.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: eskimospy

So you think a report talking about a blogger complaining counts as evidence? Come on guys, you must be able to do better than that.

The report that she was ordered deported twice counts as evidence. BTW, the article is from the Boston Globe, not some blog.

No, it would only count as evidence if people of similar resources and in similar situations were deported after that.

I know it's from the Boston Globe... and the Boston Globe is using the complaints of bloggers as the basis for that paragraph.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: eskimospy

So you think a report talking about a blogger complaining counts as evidence? Come on guys, you must be able to do better than that.

The report that she was ordered deported twice counts as evidence. BTW, the article is from the Boston Globe, not some blog.

No, it would only count as evidence if people of similar resources and in similar situations were deported after that.

I know it's from the Boston Globe... and the Boston Globe is using the complaints of bloggers as the basis for that paragraph.

You are attempting to twist the situation around based on the current situation vs when she was ORDERED out of the coiuntry twice.

When Obama was Senator, he could have attemtped to intervene. Did she not contact him, or was he not enough a big shot? The resources were there.
What is the difference between 4 years ago and now. He is POTUS

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

They Haitians should be classified as refugees.

Why? I know plenty of Haitians that are here legally and while they say things are a lot better here Haiti isn't a war zone nor is it anywhere as bad as it was when Duvalier's were running things

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

Plenty of illegal Italians, Irish and Canadians too.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

Plenty of illegal Italians, Irish and Canadians too.

Plenty of Irish and Italians doing illegal things:laugh:

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
When they are done with her there's a whole bunch of illegal Haitians and Brazilians in Boston that need to get the boot too

Plenty of illegal Italians, Irish and Canadians too.

Plenty of Irish and Italians doing illegal things:laugh:

That too!

 

[colonel]

who cares if she stay o not, I hope she stay so she can bake cookies.

 

[piasabird]

Send OBamma back too.

 

[SViscusi]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Send OBamma back too.

To Hawaii?