DeSantis Martha's Vineyard Stunt

phiwum said:
The quote you excerpted refers to "the final destination in Massachusetts." If they were told that destination was Boston and they were told of benefits they would receive there (though they were ineligible), then they were hornswaggled and that form doesn't change that fact.
Click to expand...


Well, it isn't a promise to go to Boston, now is it? The form they signed makes no mention of a specific city.

Looks to me like they got exactly what they signed up for. The McD's gift certificates were just an added bonus.
 
Last edited:
Stout said:
The explanation in The Miami Herald makes it look like a federal agency is dealing with a federal issue and trying to spread the cases throughout the country. You have to figure Self would know this as this is, after all, literally her job.
Click to expand...

I'm puzzled by what you mean here. It sounds like you're saying the DHS themselves participated in moving the migrants to Martha's Vineyard. I don't see any hint that this is true. So far as I know, the only reference to DHS "participation" has to do with processing the migrants as they entered the country.

As far as what a Massachusetts attorney should know about how the DHS processes migrants on the southern border, it seems to me plausible that she can competently do her job without ever seeing such a form. I'll bet that most asylum seekers who come to Massachusetts entered the US in a different way or already with an address where they planned to stay.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and hazard a guess that the documents have been translated into Spanish by at least one of the myriad of aid agencies and churches in the border states and go out even further and suggest they're freely available. If I'm wrong, then somebody needs to get with the program, pronto.

What needs to happen now is Massachusetts needs to amend their refugee aid program to include asylees as well as refugees and push the sanctuary state to a whole new level.
Click to expand...

Why on earth should Massachusetts do that? It's an option, sure, but I don't see that it's required for moral consistency or anything.

And, keep in mind that the sanctuary state status is a matter of a court ruling, not a legislative choice. There is no court ruling that the treatment of asylum seekers must be on par with the treatment of refugees.

Finally, no matter what MA should do, the fact is that the brochure was simply a baldfaced lie. When considering which parties aren't living up to basic moral convictions, I suppose I'd point the finger first at those who deceived the migrants in order to score political points.
 
I see some are giving undue credence to DeSantis despite his history of pandering to MAGA by going as low as he possibly can. No we aren't giving this opportunistic asshat the benefit of the doubt.
 
Warp12 said:
Well, it isn't a promise to go to Boston, now is it? The form they signed makes no mention of a specific city.

Looks to me like they got exactly what they signed up for. The McD's gift certificates were just an added bonus.
Click to expand...

You're ignoring the promised benefits that do not exist.

Moreover, I would bet that if I lie to you about the benefits of travel to MA, the fact that you sign a document clearing me of responsibility is of little matter. The migrants were swindled, no matter the document they signed.

However, I know very little of contract law, so my wager isn't worth much. Perhaps we will see what a court says, though perhaps not.
 
phiwum said:
I'm puzzled by what you mean here. It sounds like you're saying the DHS themselves participated in moving the migrants to Martha's Vineyard. I don't see any hint that this is true. So far as I know, the only reference to DHS "participation" has to do with processing the migrants as they entered the country.
Click to expand...


Look at the vid linked in the OP. At around 1:58 it is stated that DHS gave them "falsified" paperwork before they boarded the planes. It seems like they were at least present?
 
phiwum said:
You're ignoring the promised benefits that do not exist.

Moreover, I would bet that if I lie to you about the benefits of travel to MA, the fact that you sign a document clearing me of responsibility is of little matter. The migrants were swindled, no matter the document they signed.

However, I know very little of contract law, so my wager isn't worth much. Perhaps we will see what a court says, though perhaps not.
Click to expand...


Did any of them also claim that they were promised new Cadillacs?
 
Warp12 said:
Look at the vid linked in the OP. At around 1:58 it is stated that DHS gave them "falsified" paperwork before they boarded the planes. It seems like they were at least present?
Click to expand...

"Before they boarded the planes" is ambiguous. Were they about to board the planes when the DHS gave them the paperwork? Or was it some unspecified time before they boarded the planes? (Is the attorney certain one way or the other or was she speaking loosely?)

Yesterday, I quoted an article from the Miami Herald.

While they did not directly respond to the claims, officials with DHS now say the allegation is not only unrelated to what they called DeSantis’ “stunt” of sending planes to sanctuary jurisdictions, but also appears to be a misunderstanding of how they process migrants at the border. When migrants cross the border and enter a processing center — such as those who crossed at Eagle Pass before making their way to San Antonio — they fill out a digital “notice to appear” form with the assistance of an agent, and print it out with their approval of the address. Migrants are asked if they have somewhere specific to go, and if they do not, are assigned a random location for their court appearance, DHS officials explained.
Click to expand...

If the DHS explanation is accurate, then the paperwork was done at a processing center when the individual migrants arrived and declared a desire to seek asylum. At least for now, this casts significant doubt on the presumption that the DHS were involved in the DeSantis scheme in any way.

Of course, if other evidence arises, we can revisit this. But I don't see the attorney's comments as definitive so far.
 
Warp12 said:
Did any of them also claim that they were promised new Cadillacs?
Click to expand...

There is a brochure that shows they were promised the benefits of a refugee. It's easily available online.

Sure, I guess it's possible that the brochure has been faked, but it's not the same as a migrant simply saying he was promised a Caddy. And faking the brochure would be a damned stupid thing to do, since it would seriously harm any chance at a victory in court.

So, I'll say we do have some evidence they were promised non-existent benefits. We have no evidence that a Cadillac was one of those benefits.
 
phiwum said:
However, I know very little of contract law, so my wager isn't worth much. Perhaps we will see what a court says, though perhaps not.
Click to expand...

Well I do as a matter of fact as I have dealt with both sides of contacts on and off for about 30 years - and I can to tell you that a contract is void if the contractor or contractee has lied or made false claims on the contact, and any related clause, whether it is part of that contract, another contract or separately signed declaration indemnifying either party, is also void.
 
Upchurch said:
Again, you're assuming facts not in evidence.
Click to expand...


Too funny. Everyone lost their mind and was going on an on about all of the claims in that video. In fact,, that is the basis for most of what is in this thread. But now we are going to pick out one piece that doesn't 100% fit the preferred narrative, and shout "facts not in evidence!"?

This place is hilarious. If you go back, you will see that I already posted that we should not take what "angry Jane Curtin" says as fact, but that was not met with much acceptance. Look in the OP, citing the video as evidence that it is "worse than we thought".

Warp12 said:
I should also add, most of what is being reported is from claims made by "angry Jane Curtin", from the twitter vid that was linked. Lets see how those claims are supported by evidence that stands up in court, and the legality of the actions, before we proclaim them as fact.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Shipped back out in less than 48 hours! How NIMBY! One of the wealthiest areas in the US can't deal with 48 people. Imagine living in Texas.

DeSantis is a genius. I hope and pray Migrants are settled all across the US in every state. Open borders for all as it should be.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Shipped back out in less than 48 hours! How NIMBY! One of the wealthiest areas in the US can't deal with 48 people. Imagine living in Texas.

DeSantis is a genius. I hope and pray Migrants are settled all across the US in every state. Open borders for all as it should be.
Click to expand...

Skipped learning anything about what happened before commenting, eh?
 
Upchurch said:
Neat. Don't care.

Do you have evidence that DHS was involved in DeSantis's human trafficking or not?
Click to expand...


Why are you on and on about this? That woman's word seems to be good enough for everyone on every other point. Why not this one?

I already said her spew shouldn't be considered as fact, pages ago. And you will notice that I said it "seems" DHS was present based on her "testimony". It's no skin off my rear, either way. But the way she tells it, that was the case.

Warp12 said:
Look at the vid linked in the OP. At around 1:58 it is stated that DHS gave them "falsified" paperwork before they boarded the planes. It seems like they were at least present?
Click to expand...


Remember, I am OK with the actions of DeSantis.
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Shipped back out in less than 48 hours! How NIMBY! One of the wealthiest areas in the US can't deal with 48 people. Imagine living in Texas.

DeSantis is a genius. I hope and pray Migrants are settled all across the US in every state. Open borders for all as it should be.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? They were moved to the mainland, where there are more resources. They are still on the Cape, far as I know, at Otis Joint Base.

Martha's Vineyard was a particularly unsuitable area for migrants. It's an island. The Cape is much more flexible.

(Just to be clear, they were moved less than twenty miles.)
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Shipped back out in less than 48 hours! How NIMBY! One of the wealthiest areas in the US can't deal with 48 people. Imagine living in Texas.

DeSantis is a genius. I hope and pray Migrants are settled all across the US in every state. Open borders for all as it should be.
Click to expand...


FailStamp.png


If you knew anything at all about Martha's Vineyard, you would know that all the "wealthy" people you are talking about there have already left to return to their regular homes. The vast majority of those still there are the permanent residents - the workers, cleaners. shop assistants, small business owners, fishermen and people in other service industries.
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
What are you talking about? They were moved to the mainland, where there are more resources. They are still on the Cape, far as I know, at Otis Joint Base.

Martha's Vineyard was a particularly unsuitable area for migrants. It's an island. The Cape is much more flexible.
Click to expand...

Indeed! That probably why scumbag DeSantis chose it. There would be almost no work for migrants on the island at this time of your, which means they would have to go to the mainland for work. The Wood's Hole ferry is $20 return per person. That is expensive if you have to do it daily, and more if you want to take anything with such as a bike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom