Posted on 04/16/2019 4:30:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
In the category of Mad magazine's "scenes we'd like to see," comes President Trump's threat to transport migrants to cities and states that have declared themselves sanctuaries. Apparently he thinks such a move would force Democrats in Congress who represent these places to vote to fund the wall along our southern border.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls the president's threat "unworthy of the presidency." In fact, it is Congress that has been unworthy for a long time. Here is a body that passes laws everyone else must obey, but in too many cases is exempt from adhering to some of them.
In 1995, the House and Senate passed the Congressional Accountability Act, which finally applied many civil rights, labor and workplace safety statutes to the legislative branch, yet two very important laws, the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, do not apply to Congress. There are others.
Wealthy members of Congress might take offense should immigrants move into their neighborhoods. They don't seem to care about the harm caused to ranchers and other property owners in states along the southern border.
Legal experts say it would be illegal under current law to move people to sanctuary cities and states. This crosses the border of ridiculousness. Some governors and mayors are protecting those who enter the country illegally from the law. If they were protecting other lawbreakers -- drug dealers, or murderers, for example (which the president argues they are) -- the law would consider them accessories after the fact and they would face prosecution and prison time. But because politicians refuse to update laws that are full of loopholes the current problem is their doing.
For those unfamiliar with the concept of sanctuary cities, here is a short lesson. Sanctuary cities were established in Old Testament law (Numbers 35:11) to protect someone who had killed another person by accident and without malice aforethought from "the avenger of blood," who might be a close relative of the dead person. Under the priestly code, the accused was removed from the city and put on trial. If he was found innocent of murder, he was returned under guard to the sanctuary city in which he had claimed asylum. He enjoyed protection until the Jewish high priest died, at which point he was free to leave the city without fear of harm.
The Mishnah, the oral law given alongside the written Torah, states that the high priest's mother (not the government) would traditionally supply clothing and food to those claiming asylum in the cities of refuge, so that relatives of the dead person would not wish for the death of her son because he harbored the accused. The Talmud argues that the natural death of the high priest was a type of atonement because he was considered pious. Maimonides argued that the death of the high priest was an event so upsetting to the Israelites that they dropped all thoughts of vengeance.
Today's sanctuary cities and states have nothing to do with their original intent or outcome. Those living in this country without legal permission have broken the law, but are simultaneously protected by the law. Does this make sense? Name other laws American citizens could break and not be held accountable. Try breaking the tax laws this week and see where that gets you.
One of the president's problems has been his lack of focus. He throws proposals against a congressional wall to see if any will stick. He should stick with one and bring public opinion with him. The ultimate solution lies with a do-nothing Congress and only it can solve the problem. For political reasons, members of both parties refuse to do so. Those who support sanctuary cities ought to experience the consequences of that support in their own front and backyards.
The one I liked the best was the illegal going to law school and then suing to take the bar exam.
That would be called the wall, Cal Thomas, and it doesn't surprise me that you remain as useless as teats on a bull.
Sp these "legal experts" believe there is a law that protects "sanctuary cities" from having illegal aliens sent to them, even though they offer them "sanctuary", but does NOT protect all the small towns in rural America that president present sent illegal aliens to?
typical liberals. They think they can say Yes and No at the same time...
Legal experts say it would be illegal under current law to move people to sanctuary cities and states.
Bullsh##!!! where were these so called legal experts when the imposter Obama was doing it in the dead of night
No, no, no, no, no, Cal. You have it completely wrong about President Trump. He does not lack ‘focus’. He has an ability to hyper focus. And his mind runs at a truly staggering megahertz. This allows him to aim his laser focus at one thing at a time, shifting swiftly from one topic to the next. It is not President Trump’s fault that you can’t keep up.
No one lacking in focus could accomplish what the President has in what has to be in the wordl’s toughest and harshest commercial real estate market.
That job requires the ability to ‘focus’ on dozens of things, in real time, most of them catastrophes.
Cal, darling, you clearly know nothing about the hotel business. Put the hotel in NYC and you make running it basically impossible, thanks to unruly union thugs, corrupt politicians, and daily, if not hourly visits from inspectors looking for their bribes. We need not even get into all of the troubles with personnel and vendors.
Lack of focus, my arse.
What the President has so brilliantly accomplished with his threat to force the MS 13 admirers (who can resist that Spark of Divinity?) to own their hypocrisy.
It seems unlikely that he will actually do this. The inevitable crime rate explosion would be blamed squarely on the President. Irrational, of course; but, politically, not a great look.
“Those who support sanctuary cities ought to experience the consequences of that support in their own front and backyards.”
AMEN
But-when it comes to actually BEING a sanctuary as the result of self-identifying AS a sanctuary... Ha!! that's another thing!
THAT'S where THEIR money, THEIR individual security, THEIR community stability, THEIR economies, THEIR lawful environments, etc. are at stake.
The Sanctuary Cities are already bastions of liberalism and stupidity: increasing the numbers of Latino interest groups and then voters, cements the liberal/Left craziness in power for perpetuity.
there should be a US atoll somewhere that we could use to dump these people until they want to return to their home country.
a sanctuary atoll, perhaps!
More illegal than when they invaded in the first place?
Feed em fish heads! They want em, they can have em!
If these legal experts were really concerned about this administration conforming to the law, they would not stand in the way of enforcing the law by blocking Trumps actions. I wonder exactly who these so called experts happen to be?
Let all of these “sanctuary cities” ban and confiscate guns while at the same time allow all of these “poor immigrants” flood their communities.
See how all that works out.
Unfortunately you have billionaires who will fund their trips to red states!! Don’t ever underestimate the enemy and their agenda!! THEY ARE FREAKIN EVVVVVVIIIILLL!!!
FROM sanctuary cities to red states...ala influx from CALImexico to Texas, Arizona, Florida, Utah ,Georgia etc.! They’re invading red states no matter what sanctuary cities open their doors to them..it’s just a gateway to them!!
One of the liberal talking heads from CNN stated that the President wants to spread pestilence.
Jeffrey Toobin, chief legal analyst for CNN, appearing on Anderson Cooper’s show “360,” called the proposed policy “really grotesque” after describing the plan as akin to “using human beings to spread a form of pestilence around the country.”
So, is Toobin acknowledging that these 3rd world savages, that he says he loves so much and deserve a chance at the American dream, spread?
pes·ti·lence ... a fatal epidemic disease, especially bubonic plague.
As usual, the talking heads on the Left are so dumb that they don’t even know what they’re saying half the time. I guess, when you’re in a room full of like minded folks, that tell each other how great they are and pat themselves, and each other, on the back, it’s easy to be stupid.
FROM sanctuary cities to red states...ala influx from CALImexico to Texas, Arizona, Florida, Utah ,Georgia etc.! They’re invading red states no matter what sanctuary cities open their doors to them..it’s just a gateway to them!!
________________________________________________________
I fear you are right. This looks like a rope-a-dope with conservatives as the victims. Implicit in this way of thinking is that they have the right to stay in the first place. I think we might be getting played as suckers.
The list goes like this -
1) southern barrier;
2) require eVerify to hire;
3) end all chain migration;
4) birthright per Minor v. Happersett (plural parents);
5) end work visas;
6) 10-year moratorium on all new applications for citizenship (40 years to allow workplace automation effects on downsizing population)
7) demonstrate English proficiency to acquire citizenship
(8) Eliminate, or heavily tax, transfers of money to Mexico.
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.