Posted on 11/14/2016 2:41:42 PM PST by Kaslin
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: From the UK Daily Mail: "Governor Andrew Cuomo Takes a Stand Against Trump and Offers People 'Under Attack' to Take Refuge in the Empire State -- Cuomo wrote: 'Whether you are gay or straight, Muslim or Christian, rich or poor, black or white or brown, we respect all people in the state of New York.'" That's BS. Just, what was it, a couple years ago Cuomo invited all pro-life, pro-gun conservatives to leave New York State? Does anybody remember this? He said New York is not open to conservatives. It's not going to be a welcoming place.
If I were Trump, I'd call Andrew Cuomo and say, "You want to do this?" But I'd call De Blasio, too. He's going to do the same thing in the city, and I think Rahm Emanuel is doing the same thing in Chicago. I'd call these guys and say, "Fine, you want to do this? You keep it up, and I'm gonna impound every dime of federal money your cities are getting. I'm not gonna sit here and openly tolerate lawlessness like you are encouraging, Governor Cuomo.
"Illegal immigration is illegal. Sanctuary cities are illegal. Sanctuary states are illegal. And we are not putting up with this. We're not gonna look the other way in the eyes of 'compassion' or what have you, while you continue to bring in undocumented hopefully soon to be registered Democrat voters under some premise that they're being discriminated against by a bunch of hatemongers because none of it's true. And if you want to keep getting federal money, you're gonna shut this down and stop this right now."
That's what I would do -- and if Trump asked me what he should, that's what I would tell him he should do. Trump has not asked me. Ha.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: By the way, the mayor of Los Angeles is also in on this, mayors, Governor Cuomo, city of Chicago, will continue as immigrant sanctuary and the mayors of New York and Los Angeles pledge to remain immigrant sanctuaries. All of this is Reuters, U.K. Daily Mail, AP. This is lawlessness. Sanctuary cities are against the law. Illegal immigration is against it law.
It is not rooted in racism. It isn't rooted in bigotry. It isn't rooted in anti-Hispanic. It isn't rooted in anything but the rule of law. And Democrat Party officials getting away unpunished with breaking the law has got to stop. If it doesn't, the Democrat Party is going to continue becoming an even bigger minority.
You know, the Democrats are always trying to help us do the right thing, aren't they? Chuck-U Schumer and Dingy Harry and Nancy Pelosi have been telling us that unless we reach out to Hispanics and unless we join this push for amnesty, that we are never gonna win the White House again, and look what happened.
Even on election night, even on Fox News, on Fox News they had people left and right talking about how Trump was gonna lose because all of the early voting Hispanics just had to be voting for Hillary. And Trump got the identical number of Hispanics that Romney got. We didn't lose any ground with Hispanics. We didn't lose anything with Trump's position on this. And many Hispanics actually ended up being Trump supporters.
So I'd like to help the Democrats like they have been offering us. And I'm gonna say, if you guys don't shut down your sanctuary cities, you're gonna continue to become an even smaller minority. People are gonna continue to vote against you. Maybe not in your city which is all left, all Democrat, maybe not in your state, but nationwide, the Democrat Party is not gonna provide a launching pad for you because there aren't gonna be enough people that are gonna vote for you because the fact that you continue to engage in wanton violation of United States law is going to be made clear and abundant to everybody.
And as long as the illegal immigrants that you continue to offer safe harbor continue to commit violent crime, it's gonna redound negatively to you, and I, Rush Limbaugh, am just trying to help you, Governor Cuomo. And I, Rush Limbaugh, am just trying to help you, Mayor de Blasio and the mayor of Los Angeles, whoever. You guys are making profound errors here, huge, huge mistakes, politically, aside from the fact that you are in wanton, open violation of the law.
You are not part of a governing majority nationwide in this country, and your way of thinking is not representative of a majority of the thinking in this country. It just isn't, and it hasn't been for a while. It's been an illusion that everybody bought, including me. Look, folks, I can't sit and chastise anybody. We all fell for this, and largely because of the way our own party leaders reacted over the years. I had them come here and tell me we couldn't win the White House ever again with just us. So whether I believed it or not, they did.
And look, look how one election, one election has exposed so much fraud! Fraud in the media, fraud in the Democrat Party. So much wanton illusion. So much purposeful lying to people exposed in one election. It's overwhelming. When you really get into it and dig deep, the meaning of this election and what has been put on display, what has been exhibited here. It's profound and it is deep.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: But here is Alan in Allentown, which we also own. Great to have you, sir. How you doing?
CALLER: I'm doing great, Rush. It's wonderful to talk to you. I've been listening for a very long time. I used to watch your TV show. Actually as a kid I introduced my father to your program when I --
RUSH: I know. There was somebody from Allentown in the TV audience every show. I'm not kidding.
CALLER: It was a wonderful program, and I was sad to see it go.
RUSH: I appreciate that. I really do.
CALLER: I'll get to my point. What maybe you could elaborate on is I seem to remember Democrats reminding Republicans that immigration is federal law and I just wondered if you could elaborate on that and maybe refresh my memory. I just remember there was a big to-do about that a couple years back where Republicans were trying to do things and we were reminded, "Hey, step aside, it's federal law."
RUSH: Yeah, I know exactly what you're talking about. I'll give you an example. You're talking about Arizona. State of Arizona, federal law is not being enforced immigration law, so the governor at the time, Jan Brewer, all right, we're gonna do our own set of laws here that are gonna mirror federal law, and we passed 'em, and they implemented them, and Obama sued them.
Obama's Department of Justice sued the state of Arizona claiming: You don't have any control over immigration. That's a federal purview. That's federal law. We run the borders. We protect the borders. We do all that with the border and you don't have anything to say about it. Our law trumps yours, no pun intended.
And they rendered Arizona's law, and a judge backed 'em up, every Obama judge they could find backed 'em up. So he's got a great point here. Federal government told a governor (raspberry) you. You have nothing to say over immigration. Now he's asking, well, how can the governor of New York and how can the governor of Chicago and the mayors of New York and Los Angeles get away with defying federal law by establishing their states and cities as sanctuary cities expressly for the purpose of housing and paying for illegal immigrants?
And the answer is -- dadelut dadelut dadelut -- according to the law, they can't. But Obama chose not to enforce it. Obama chose not to enforce very much of immigration law, which is why I said, if I were Trump, I'd call these guys and I would say, "If you don't renounce this, then every penny of federal money you get is gonna be impounded until you do."
Now, let me address something here. I've had a couple of emails from people, I opened the program by saying that, and I also opened the program by -- I mean literally, before I even greeted everybody and said hi, welcome to the program, I said, if it were up to me, if I were Trump, I would call Obama and I would call Hillary, and I would demand that he tell those protesters and rioters to stand down, or I will. And that I will call local law enforcement all over this country and I'm gonna tell 'em, do what you have to do; I have your back when I'm inaugurated in January.
And I've had a couple people email me, "You realize Trump can't do that right now?" And I've had a couple people email me and say, "Are you worried that Trump is softening, Rush? Are you worried that Trump's going to eventually cave?" No, no, no, no, no. I also said that I'm not Trump when I made those suggestions. I did say that if Trump called me and asked me, that that's what I would say, but that Trump hasn't called me.
END TRANSCRIPT
See tagline.
These arrogant demigods who when they talk sh## comes out should be Mussolini’d in the town square. They will fund these programs for savages at the cost of the state without the population of that state being asked. Cry all you want parasites trump will choke you and the American people applaud
Frankly, IMO as a President-Elect Trump, I’d not be listening to a Rush Limbaugh that has been like a “Maverick” that couldn’t commit in the most critical battle of all.
Trump did this on his own with no appreciable measure of help from Limbaugh. Rush is good at his aftermath story, but I listened to him in the run up to all this and he JUST WAS NOT THERE.
I wouldn’t listen to him. As Trump, I’d have better people around me.
I’d hold Cuomo charged with treason.
I think Cuomo, Rahm and Be Blabio have a great idea.
Yes, let’s insist all the murders, rapists, thieves, burglars, and people with bad breath or who wear polyester who are also illegal immigrants move to where they are “safe.”
Make them all move to New York, Chicago, and California. Let them all move to the Blue States, and make the Red States much safer as a result.
Great thinking, Anthony and Bill!
I can’t wait to see them whine when their dollars are taken or threatened to be taken every time they do something the government doesn’t like. Welcome to OUR world, Governor Cuomo.
ADD EMANUEL...
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/11/14/emanuel-tells-undocumented-immigrants-chicago-always-will-be-a-sanctuary-city/
But will he have the nuts to go after employers of illegals?
The advice remains good regardless of it's source. Victor Davis Hanson has long pointed out that "sanctuary cities" operate under the same basis as the Confederacy in declaring this or that federal law null and void.
States and therefore Cities as well, do not get to decide what federal law shall be. Congress decides and the States and Cities comply with it.
Limbaugh is exactly right. Pull every scrap of Federal money from them until they surrender. I would go further. I would send Federal Marshals to arrest the most prominent defiers in each major city.
You will either obey the law, or you will find yourself in jail. Make it simple for them.
I am way past sick of letting these arrogant bastards think they can dictate to the rest of us.
I like your use of “Mussolini” as a verb.
If they get their federal funds taken away, the only choice is to raise taxes on people living in the city to support all the social programs.
It will be funny to watch these bleeding heart liberals scream about their taxes going up.
A previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So probably most of the funding in question should have never left the state in the first place, such funding arguably state revenues stolen by the corrupt feds by means of unconstitutional federal taxes.
Cuomo should take a hint that he’s been supporting the wrong political party, constitutionally undefined political parties hopefully drained from the swamp when Trump pulls the plug.
These are programs that started in the past 50 years.
Many of FDR’s unconstitutional “New Deal” programs have been around longer than that. And FDR and the Democratc Congress at the time wrongy ignored first petitioning the states to amend the Constitution to grant the feds the specific power to establish FDR’s New Deal programs.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Consider the following excerpt from Thomas Jefferson’s writings.
"The States should be left to do whatever acts they can do as well as the General Government." --Thomas Jefferson to John Harvie, 1790.
But if the states decide that the feds should continue to manage bankrupt Social Security for example, then the states need to ratify a Social Security amendment to the Constitution so that later generations know that the states, not the feds, have the final word about Social Security.
Are you saying it’s unconstitutional to deny states funds for federal programs if they continue sanctuary cities?
Whoa !
We need to get the wires uncrossed.
For the record, I think it would be a good idea for the states to amend the Constitution to give the feds the specific power to regulate immigration. That said, please consider the following explanation concerning your question.
Note that the Founding States made the 10th Amendment (10A) to clarify that powers that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds are reserved uniquely to the states.
In fact, a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified this as follows.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
But not only have the states never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate immigration as evidenced by the Constitution's silence about immigration, 10A automatically making immigration and sanctuary cities uniquely a state power issue, also consider the following.
A previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had complimented 10A by clarifying that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So the states are receiving a bunch of federal funding for all sorts of things that the states have actually never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific powers to regulate, tax and spend for, low-information state leaders evidently clueless to this major constitutional problem.
Such funding is arguably stolen state revenues that the corrupt feds stole by means of unconstitutional federal taxes according to the Gibbons excerpt above.
And now the corrupt feds are essentially threatening to withhold state revenues that the feds stole from the states from the states if the states don’t close down 10A-protected sanctuary cities.
What is wrong with this picture?
Finally, note that regardless that the Constitution’s “Uniform Rule of Naturalization” Clause (1.8.4) is sometimes used to justify federal immigration laws, note that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Madison generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, had clarified, in terms of 10A nonetheless, that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate immigration. This is evidenced by the excerpts below.
Here is the relevant excerpt from Jeffersons writings.
” 4. _Resolved_, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that ”the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the - day of July, 1798, intituled ”An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force [emphasis added].” Thomas Jefferson, Draft of the Kentucky Resolutions - October 1798.
Here is the related excerpt from Madison's writings from the Virginia Resolutions.
"That the General Assembly doth particularly protest against the palpable and alarming infractions of the Constitution, in the two late cases of the ”Alien and Sedition Acts" passed at the last session of Congress; the first of which exercises a power no where delegated to the federal government, .... . .
. . . the General Assembly doth solemenly appeal to the like dispositions of the other states, in confidence that they will concur with this commonwealth in declaring, as it does hereby declare, that the acts aforesaid, are unconstitutional; and that the necessary and proper measures will be taken by each, for co-operating with this state, in maintaining the Authorities, Rights, and Liberties, referred to the States respectively, or to the people [emphasis added]. ” James Madison, Draft of the Virginia Resolutions - December 1798.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.