Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: White House loses it over sanctuary cities:

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    lived in 5 states traveled extensively in Europe middle East and Asia.
    Posts
    14,853
    Thanks
    1,989
    Thanked 2,041 Times in 1,658 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default White House loses it over sanctuary cities:

    Who knew victory could be this bruising?

    After battling back from near total decimation, Republicans clawed their way to control of the federal government in November — only to be consumed by bitter intra-party fighting. Led by the White House, Republicans are now literally threatening to shutdown the government in order to extract concessions from themselves.

    When Congress returns from its two-week recess, it will have just five days to avoid a shutdown before federal funding runs out on April 28. As if successfully negotiating amongst Republicans hasn’t proven difficult enough with the disastrous failure of Trumpcare, immigration hardliners in the Trump administration and Congress are reportedly threatening to shut down the government in an effort to compel so-called sanctuary cities to cooperate with federal law enforcement officials.

    According to Politico, budget director Mick Mulvaney is asking Congress to include language in its next must-pass budget bill that would hold potentially billions of dollars in state grants hostage. The crackdown on so-called sanctuary cities — jurisdictions that refuse to arrest undocumented immigrants solely for deportation — is an effort to lure the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus into voting for the budget.

    Trump had vowed during his presidential campaign to “cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities,” and shortly after taking office, the president signed an executive order that sought to force localities to comply with the federal requests. Trump even directed federal officials to publish a weekly list of declined detainers and the immigrants who were released by so-called sanctuary cities. That plan was aborted this week, however, due to concerns about the report’s inaccuracies.

    Any budget bill will need at least eight Democratic votes in the Senate to pass. Democrats have called the White House’s request for additional funding for Trump’s border wall money a “poison pill” that would shut down the government. And a spokesman for House Appropriations Committee ranking member Nita Lowey has already called Mulvaney’s maneuver “a non-starter,” according to Politico.

    Mulvaney, who has a Republican House member voted in favor of the 2015 government shutdown, recently told CNBC’s John Harwood that while he doesn’t believe there is a high likelihood the government will be forced to temporarily shutdown, “consequences have been blown out of proportion.”

    “If you measure it in terms of the dollars out the door, about 83 percent of the government stays open in a government shut-down,” he explained.

    “Elections have consequences,” Trump’s budget director told WBT. “The president needs to see his priorities funded.”
    http://www.salon.com/2017/04/12/whit...ment-shutdown/

    Trump cannot deny cities any funding unless it is aimed at immigration, any other funding is safe from Trump's anger. It is only congress who can take away all of their funding and to do that they must also eliminate funding from all cities who get funding. You simply cannot legally pick and choose any and all funding on those sanctuary cities.
    Trump's obvious lies make it impossible to believe anything he says that might be true. His presidency is falling apart fast.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    8,374
    Thanks
    2,091
    Thanked 1,247 Times in 1,076 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    http://www.salon.com/2017/04/12/whit...ment-shutdown/

    Trump cannot deny cities any funding unless it is aimed at immigration, any other funding is safe from Trump's anger. It is only congress who can take away all of their funding and to do that they must also eliminate funding from all cities who get funding. You simply cannot legally pick and choose any and all funding on those sanctuary cities.

    Yes ... and it was ONLY CONGRESS who could have CHANGED IMMIGRATION LAWS ... which IMPOSTER Obama PRETENDED TO CHANGE by UNQUALIFIED Executive Order, instead of ENFORCING LAWS, which CONGRESS put into place long ago, as was his SWORN DUTY!
    Last edited by solver; 04-13-2017 at 09:22 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    lived in 5 states traveled extensively in Europe middle East and Asia.
    Posts
    14,853
    Thanks
    1,989
    Thanked 2,041 Times in 1,658 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    You obviously have no concept of what sanctuary cities are. Much less why they are doing what they are doing.

    They depend upon witnesses to crimes or even victims of crime to come forward and assist the local police and given the regulations offered by Trump they are scared to do that for fear of being deported. The locals have merely refused to turn people over to I.C.E. but have not stopped them from doing their duty.

    You cannot federalize the local police to get them to do for the federal government what it is supposed to do itself. Nobody is stopping the ICE agents from doing their jobs, they are not making it any easier though.

    Last time I checked it was the republicans who were loudly declaring "states rights" now the tide has turned and the shoe is on the other foot. Just maybe they should drop the whole states rights slogan and figure out if they want a huge federal government or not. As long as they continue to want a small federal government they need to reconsider their stance on sanctuary cities. Obviously, the people of those cities want them to be sanctuaries and who is the federal government to deny them their wishes.

    Solver must face the contradictory nature of what you are asking. You cant have it both ways. If you continue to demand obedience to the federal government then you have no logical basis in demanding anything else when your issues come up and you want to work differently than the feds. After you figure that out come back and explain yourself.
    Trump's obvious lies make it impossible to believe anything he says that might be true. His presidency is falling apart fast.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    8,374
    Thanks
    2,091
    Thanked 1,247 Times in 1,076 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    You obviously have no concept of what sanctuary cities are. Much less why they are doing what they are doing.

    They depend upon witnesses to crimes or even victims of crime to come forward and assist the local police and given the regulations offered by Trump they are scared to do that for fear of being deported. The locals have merely refused to turn people over to I.C.E. but have not stopped them from doing their duty.

    You cannot federalize the local police to get them to do for the federal government what it is supposed to do itself. Nobody is stopping the ICE agents from doing their jobs, they are not making it any easier though.

    Last time I checked it was the republicans who were loudly declaring "states rights" now the tide has turned and the shoe is on the other foot. Just maybe they should drop the whole states rights slogan and figure out if they want a huge federal government or not. As long as they continue to want a small federal government they need to reconsider their stance on sanctuary cities. Obviously, the people of those cities want them to be sanctuaries and who is the federal government to deny them their wishes.

    Solver must face the contradictory nature of what you are asking. You cant have it both ways. If you continue to demand obedience to the federal government then you have no logical basis in demanding anything else when your issues come up and you want to work differently than the feds. After you figure that out come back and explain yourself.

    The SPECIFIC CRIME of illegal immigrants is THEIR ILLEGAL PRESENCE in the United States ... which, if ELIMINATED, there would be NO NEED for any sanctuary cities!

    There were LEGAL WAYS to immigrate to the United States, which were in place long before Barack Hussein Obama was ever BORN ... no matter WHERE or WHEN he was actually born! Democrats needing MORE VOTES was NEVER a valid reason for SUSPENDING IMMIGRATION LAWS!
    Last edited by solver; 04-13-2017 at 11:44 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    6,320
    Thanks
    872
    Thanked 1,020 Times in 866 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    You obviously have no concept of what sanctuary cities are.
    You sure about that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    Much less why they are doing what they are doing.
    I'll take "Pandering for voters for $400, Alex"....

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    They depend upon witnesses to crimes or even victims of crime to come forward and assist the local police...
    The Left says this alot....it's not true. First...they should be here to be either witness or victim of crimes. Second...they're often the victim of crime becuase they're here illegally and already in a bad situation/bad neighborhood....Third, many of the illegals are the ones committing the crimes on citizens....to include child molestation....

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    ...The locals have merely refused to turn people over to I.C.E. but have not stopped them from doing their duty.
    They actually have a duty to notify federal authorities...it's covered in the Immigration and Nationality Act which is Federal Law.....but Democrats aren't interested in laws they don't like....

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    You cannot federalize the local police to get them to do for the federal government what it is supposed to do itself.
    a) you can and they do...
    b) The federal gov't provides a lot of funding to state/local law enforcement.....maybe we should just end that funding?

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    Nobody is stopping the ICE agents from doing their jobs, they are not making it any easier though.
    Not true...List of Jurisdictions That Rejected ICE Immigrant Detainer Requests

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    Last time I checked it was the republicans who were loudly declaring "states rights" now the tide has turned and the shoe is on the other foot.
    So how does it feel? The Left wanted raw application of political power to achieve their goals. Seems some on the Right finally woke up. This won't end well but I'm pretty much tired of playing "heads I win, tails I lose."....

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    ...and figure out if they want a huge federal government or not.
    In fairness, you're correct...there are plenty of "Big Government" Republicans....

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    As long as they continue to want a small federal government they need to reconsider their stance on sanctuary cities.
    Agree....cut off federal funding to states/localities...let them figure it out. It's gonna get horrible for lots of people and won't end well, but no one on the Left seems to care about that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    Obviously, the people of those cities want them to be sanctuaries....
    You sure about that? Americans overwhelmingly oppose sanctuary cities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    ...who is the federal government to deny them their wishes.
    Funny how Leftist decry the unquestionable power of the Federal Gov't when they have control of it...and absolutely reject it when they don't. hmmmmmmm.....curious.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste View Post
    ...You cant have it both ways.
    Democrats reserve that right for themselves...
    “You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong...You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” - Ronald Reagan
    "This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves." Ronald Reagan (1964)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •