Attorney General Jeff Sessions Announces Coming Crackdown on Sanctuary City Funding..

[MMC]

Thas Right AG Sessions.....take that money from those Liberal and Illiberal governed Cities. Although, really you should have just surprised the leftists snowflakes.



In a surprise appearance at the White House Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions further warned sanctuary cities against harboring dangerous criminal illegal aliens and noted how they will face consequences in the near future for doing so.


"Some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws. This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws. For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime. The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder," Sessions said. "Such policies cannot continue. They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets."


Sessions went on to stress that local jurisdictions knowingly harboring criminal illegal aliens will face elimination of federal funding.


"Today I am urging all states and local jurisdictions to comply with all federal laws, including 8 U.S.C. Section 1373. Moreover, the Department of Justice will require jurisdictions seeking or applying for Department grants to certify compliance with Section 1373 as a condition for receiving these awards," Sessions said. "This policy is entirely consistent with the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) guidance issued last July under the previous administration. This guidance requires state and local jurisdictions to comply and certify compliance with Section 1373 in order to be eligible for OJP grants. It also made clear that failure to remedy violations could result in withholding of grants, termination of grants, and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants."


"The Department of Justice will also take all lawful steps to claw-back any funds awarded to a jurisdiction that willfully violates Section 1373. In the current fiscal year, department’s OJP and Community Oriented Policing Services anticipate awarding more than $4.1 billion dollars in grants," he continued. "I urge our nation’s states and cities to consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to enforce our immigration laws, and to re-think these policies. Such policies make their cities and states less safe, and put them at risk of losing valuable federal dollars.".....snip~


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/03/27/sessions-on-sanctuary-cities-n2304855

[del]

federal detainer requests have been ruled unconstitutional numerous times.

if jiffy was a real lawyer, he'd know that

http://ktrh.iheart.com/articles/houston-news-121300/judge-rules-ice-detainers-are-unconstitutional-15202309/

http://chicagoreporter.com/federal-judge-stops-immigration-authorities-from-issuing-detainers/

[Bethere]

Thas Right AG Sessions.....take that money from those Liberal and Illiberal governed Cities. Although, really you should have just surprised the leftists snowflakes.



In a surprise appearance at the White House Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions further warned sanctuary cities against harboring dangerous criminal illegal aliens and noted how they will face consequences in the near future for doing so.


"Some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws. This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws. For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime. The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder," Sessions said. "Such policies cannot continue. They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets."


Sessions went on to stress that local jurisdictions knowingly harboring criminal illegal aliens will face elimination of federal funding.


"Today I am urging all states and local jurisdictions to comply with all federal laws, including 8 U.S.C. Section 1373. Moreover, the Department of Justice will require jurisdictions seeking or applying for Department grants to certify compliance with Section 1373 as a condition for receiving these awards," Sessions said. "This policy is entirely consistent with the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) guidance issued last July under the previous administration. This guidance requires state and local jurisdictions to comply and certify compliance with Section 1373 in order to be eligible for OJP grants. It also made clear that failure to remedy violations could result in withholding of grants, termination of grants, and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants."


"The Department of Justice will also take all lawful steps to claw-back any funds awarded to a jurisdiction that willfully violates Section 1373. In the current fiscal year, department’s OJP and Community Oriented Policing Services anticipate awarding more than $4.1 billion dollars in grants," he continued. "I urge our nation’s states and cities to consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to enforce our immigration laws, and to re-think these policies. Such policies make their cities and states less safe, and put them at risk of losing valuable federal dollars.".....snip~


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/03/27/sessions-on-sanctuary-cities-n2304855

This leftist snowflake would encourage heroic warrior patriots such as yourself to stick it in your wax-encrusted ear.

[MMC]

This leftist snowflake would encourage heroic warrior patriots such as yourself to stick it in your wax-encrusted ear.
Cmon now.....we can save 4 billion and still let the Leftists governing do what they do.

[rcfieldz]

Is it an invasion? Is it mass refrugee relocation? Is it a silent super cell awaiting it's next order? New voters?

[Bethere]

Cmon now.....we can save 4 billion and still let the Leftists governing do what they do.

If you want us to play then you need to treat liberals with respect. Someday we could be gone and you and your playmates would have to play with yourselves.

[MMC]

federal detainer requests have been ruled unconstitutional numerous times.

if jiffy was a real lawyer, he'd know that

http://ktrh.iheart.com/articles/houston-news-121300/judge-rules-ice-detainers-are-unconstitutional-15202309/

http://chicagoreporter.com/federal-judge-stops-immigration-authorities-from-issuing-detainers/

8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.....

(a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.


(b) Additional authority of government entitiesNotwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, a Federal, State, or local government entity from doing any of the following with respect to information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual: (1) Sending such information to, or requesting or receiving such information from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

(2) Maintaining such information.

(3) Exchanging such information with any other Federal, State, or local government entity.


(c) Obligation to respond to inquiries The Immigration and Naturalization Service shall respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information......snip~


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1373



Looks like the Real Attorney and AG knows how to play the game with your kind. Imagine that!

[exotix]

I thought Sessions tried to outlaw 'em here in Alabama ?


Oh that's right, white farmers of the Confederacy and along with their illegals protested like Libs day-in and day-out at our soon to be impeached Governor ... culminating in forgetting about that fucked-up idea.

[MMC]

If you want a debate then you need to treat liberals with respect. Someday we could be gone and you and your playmates would have to play with yourselves.

Promises Promises. :grin:

I did say that the leftists governing could still do what they do. They would just have less of other people monies.

[Abby08]

Never mind all the "legalities" of it, it shouldn't have to come down to that.

What about the morality of it?

Putting, not only illegals, but, criminal illegals, before legal citizens and, believing it's ok?

Talk about mixed up priorities.

Having liberal beliefs is one thing, but, that defies all logic.

[MMC]

Never mind all the "legalities" of it, it shouldn't have to come down to that.

What about the morality of it?

Putting, not only illegals, but, criminal illegals, before legal citizens and, believing it's ok?

Talk about mixed up priorities.

Having liberal beliefs is one thing, but, that defies all logic.

At least California will be SOL.....they will lose a good chunk of that 4 Billion.

[del]

especially when the new health care bill kicks in

lol

[Scrounger]

Actually, it was the right that set the precedent that California is following. In my thread Immigration not a crime, I wrote this:

"In the 1990s Sheriff Richard Mack went through the courts to establish that local law enforcement is not obligated to enforce federal laws. So, local sheriffs can refuse to enforce federal gun laws and it is constitutional. Likewise, using the same precedent, the state of California can say they do not have to enforce federal immigration laws."

The foreigners still cannot become citizens and the federal government can cut off any funding if they determine the people in sanctuary cities benefit off of federal tax dollars. If California wants the undocumented foreigners and they can afford to keep them up, who are you to dictate who they allow into their state as guests?"

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime/page6

The right tapped out on that thread and now we're going to rehash the theories behind it again? Are they STILL advocating against precedents set by the constitutionalists?

Hey, let California have sanctuary cities. Applaud them for using the law. If they can have a sanctuary city and not take federal money, why in the name of common sense would any of you care? And if they fail, they would have to eat crow, deport foreigners and go see Sessions with hat in hand, begging for money. The reality is, the anti-immigrant lobby has no faith in their own philosophy, can't defend what they believe in, and they are not educated in how the law works.

[Mini Me]

If you want us to play then you need to treat liberals with respect. Someday we could be gone and you and your playmates would have to play with yourselves.

They already do! Its a "mutual masturbation society" LOL!

[Ransom]

Actually, it was the right that set the precedent that California is following. In my thread Immigration not a crime, I wrote this:

"In the 1990s Sheriff Richard Mack went through the courts to establish that local law enforcement is not obligated to enforce federal laws. So, local sheriffs can refuse to enforce federal gun laws and it is constitutional. Likewise, using the same precedent, the state of California can say they do not have to enforce federal immigration laws."

The foreigners still cannot become citizens and the federal government can cut off any funding if they determine the people in sanctuary cities benefit off of federal tax dollars. If California wants the undocumented foreigners and they can afford to keep them up, who are you to dictate who they allow into their state as guests?"

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime/page6

The right tapped out on that thread and now we're going to rehash the theories behind it again? Are they STILL advocating against precedents set by the constitutionalists?

Hey, let California have sanctuary cities. Applaud them for using the law. If they can have a sanctuary city and not take federal money, why in the name of common sense would any of you care? And if they fail, they would have to eat crow, deport foreigners and go see Sessions with hat in hand, begging for money. The reality is, the anti-immigrant lobby has no faith in their own philosophy, can't defend what they believe in, and they are not educated in how the law works.

You're just as wrong with this pile os steaming error as you were then.

[Ransom]

Good for Trump and Sessions, it's about time. Don't follow federal law, don't take hard earned taxpayer money.

Draining the swamp is sweaty work.

[Green Arrow]

If they want to take away funding, fine. The cities should respond by witholding the taxes their residents send to the feds.

[Safety]

I thought Sessions tried to outlaw 'em here in Alabama ?


Oh that's right, white farmers of the Confederacy and along with their illegals protested like Libs day-in and day-out at our soon to be impeached Governor ... culminating in forgetting about that fucked-up idea.

Yea, imagine if they rounded up the slaves and forced the plantation owners to stop sipping mint julep tea and actually redden their neck.

[MMC]

Yea, imagine if they rounded up the slaves and forced the plantation owners to stop sipping mint julep tea and actually redden their neck.
Yeah just imagine if you had a time machine and can go back in time. Then you could say you were actually there. :rollseyes:

[Safety]

Yeah just imagine if you had a time machine and can go back in time. Then you could say you were actually there. :rollseyes:

As long as we are imagining things, how about you imagine making sense for a change.

[exotix]

Yeah just imagine if you had a time machine and can go back in time. Then you could say you were actually there. :rollseyes:Oh no no no no no ... nothing has changed since the Hebrew *exodus* ... its still here ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4gzps0lm1E

[DGUtley]

If they want to take away funding, fine. The cities should respond by witholding the taxes their residents send to the feds.

I like how you think but withholding funding is legal, signed by Obama; but withholding contributions is not. Moreover, it's not the city that withholds federal funds (unless for city workers), it's the employers. Remember what happened in 2010 with the TP started messing with the feds money, it got real ugly real fast. Mordor on the Potomac doesn't like it when you mess with its money.

[Tahuyaman]

federal detainer requests have been ruled unconstitutional numerous times.

if jiffy was a real lawyer, he'd know that

http://ktrh.iheart.com/articles/houston-news-121300/judge-rules-ice-detainers-are-unconstitutional-15202309/

http://chicagoreporter.com/federal-judge-stops-immigration-authorities-from-issuing-detainers/

The Supreme Court has never made that ruling.

[Tahuyaman]

If they want to take away funding, fine. The cities should respond by witholding the taxes their residents send to the feds.

How would the city redirect my federal taxes?

[del]

The Supreme Court has never made that ruling.
once again you step up to deny something no one has asserted.

bravo

[Green Arrow]

I like how you think but withholding funding is legal, signed by Obama; but withholding contributions is not. Moreover, it's not the city that withholds federal funds (unless for city workers), it's the employers. Remember what happened in 2010 with the TP started messing with the feds money, it got real ugly real fast. Mordor on the Potomac doesn't like it when you mess with its money.
If contributions can't be withheld then neither can funding. Nobody has a right to tell the citizens of a city or state that they can't get back the money they pay in taxes.

[Tahuyaman]

once again you step up to deny something no one has asserted.

bravo

It would be kind of cool if you were smarter so you could actually participate in a discussion.

[Safety]

wut?

[Bethere]

I like how you think but withholding funding is legal, signed by Obama; but withholding contributions is not. Moreover, it's not the city that withholds federal funds (unless for city workers), it's the employers. Remember what happened in 2010 with the TP started messing with the feds money, it got real ugly real fast. Mordor on the Potomac doesn't like it when you mess with its money.

The tp isn't done. Wait till trump learns about what a debt ceiling is.

[Bethere]

How would the city redirect my federal taxes?

It wouldn't. Tell know-it-all green arrow that cities don't withhold taxes for anyone except their own employees.

[Scrounger]

You're just as wrong with this pile os steaming error as you were then.

You tapped out in the discussion on my thread and now you're here blowing smoke up our ass as if what you say has any authority. Check this out:

http://www.courant.com/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-sanctuary-cities-20161227-story.html

HELD by the United States Supreme Court:

"Finally, and most conclusively in these cases, the Court's jurisprudence makes clear that the Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program."

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/521/898.html

[Bethere]

You tapped out in the discussion on my thread and now you're here blowing smoke up our ass as if what you say has any authority. Check this out:

http://www.courant.com/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-sanctuary-cities-20161227-story.html

HELD by the United States Supreme Court:

"Finally, and most conclusively in these cases, the Court's jurisprudence makes clear that the Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program."

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/521/898.html

Good work!

[Green Arrow]

How would the city redirect my federal taxes?

I don't know, but I assume a method could be developed. Perhaps cities could develop their own tax return and encourage their citizens to file those instead of a federal return.

[Abby08]

I don't know, but I assume a method could be developed. Perhaps cities could develop their own tax return and encourage their citizens to file those instead of a federal return.

Why go to all that trouble!? There's a simple solution.......get rid of the illegals they are harboring! Quit supporting and shielding criminals! You wanna do right by your citizens? Prove it, put them first.....damn it!

Sheesh, it shouldn't be that hard to figure out!

[Green Arrow]

Why go to all that trouble!? There's a simple solution.......get rid of the illegals they are harboring! Quit supporting and shielding criminals! You wanna do right by your citizens? Prove it, put them first.....damn it!

Sheesh, it shouldn't be that hard to figure out!

Apparently the citizens of those cities are okay with being a sanctuary city. If they decide otherwise they can vote in new leaders.

[Tahuyaman]

I don't know, but I assume a method could be developed. Perhaps cities could develop their own tax return and encourage their citizens to file those instead of a federal return.

The creation of a city tax will not relieve you from the responsibility to pay federal income tax.

[Scrounger]

Why go to all that trouble!? There's a simple solution.......get rid of the illegals they are harboring! Quit supporting and shielding criminals! You wanna do right by your citizens? Prove it, put them first.....damn it!

Sheesh, it shouldn't be that hard to figure out!

There is another one that tapped out on that "criminal" charge and comes back here to try and deceive you again.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime

[MMC]

As long as we are imagining things, how about you imagine making sense for a change.


http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Safety http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=1976694#post1976694) Yea, imagine if they rounded up the slaves and forced the plantation owners to stop sipping mint julep tea and actually redden their neck.


Try practicing what you preach.....I know its difficult for you. But at least give it a try.

[del]

does that make any sense to anyone?

[decedent]

I thought Sessions tried to outlaw 'em here in Alabama ?


Oh that's right, white farmers of the Confederacy and along with their illegals protested like Libs day-in and day-out at our soon to be impeached Governor ... culminating in forgetting about that fucked-up idea.

I wonder if immigrants will get similar protection in cities.

[Ransom]

You tapped out in the discussion on my thread and now you're here blowing smoke up our ass as if what you say has any authority. Check this out:

http://www.courant.com/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-sanctuary-cities-20161227-story.html

HELD by the United States Supreme Court:

"Finally, and most conclusively in these cases, the Court's jurisprudence makes clear that the Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program."

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/521/898.html
This was my tap out....:biglaugh:

Slapping my hand on the table in laughter.

[MMC]

There is another one that tapped out on that "criminal" charge and comes back here to try and deceive you again.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime



Here try this one. See if you can get around it.

8 U.S. Code § 1373 - Communication between government agencies and the Immigration and Naturalization Service.....

(a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.


(b) Additional authority of government entities Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, no person or agency may prohibit, or in any way restrict, a Federal, State, or local government entity from doing any of the following with respect to information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual:

(1) Sending such information to, or requesting or receiving such information from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

(2) Maintaining such information.

(3) Exchanging such information with any other Federal, State, or local government entity.


(c) Obligation to respond to inquiries The Immigration and Naturalization Service shall respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information......snip~


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1373

[Ransom]

Let us also expose the disingenuous rabble for what it is.....and take a look at exactly what Jeff Sessions is doing, exactly what he's saying.

"Some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws. This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws. For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime. The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder," Sessions said. "Such policies cannot continue. They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets."

This is nothing more than the President....as promised...taking to the f'n woodshed those harboring dangerous criminal illegal aliens and detailing coming consequences from the Feds for doing so.

He details, he gives examples.....the day of liberals hiding illegal dangerous criminals and opposing federal laws are over, there is a new f'n Sheriff in town.

[Abby08]

There is another one that tapped out on that "criminal" charge and comes back here to try and deceive you again.

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime

It's deception, according to you. Is it not true, are there not cities and states, offering sanctuary to ILLEGAL CRIMINALS!?

So, doesn't it then stand to reason, if cities are being withheld federal money for doing such, for those cities to STOP doing it? If they expect to get federal funding?

They're selling out their own people, to harbor criminals.

Maybe, it wasn't the CONTENT of your "immigration" thread......ever think of that?

[Subdermal]

This leftist snowflake would encourage heroic warrior patriots such as yourself to stick it in your wax-encrusted ear.

rage rage against the dying of the light....

Go away, Rage Boy.

[Subdermal]

This leftist snowflake would encourage heroic warrior patriots such as yourself to stick it in your wax-encrusted ear.


If you want us to play then you need to treat liberals with respect. Someday we could be gone and you and your playmates would have to play with yourselves.

Hypocrisy alert.

[MMC]

It's deception, according to you. Is it not true, are there not cities and states, offering sanctuary to ILLEGAL CRIMINALS!?

So, doesn't it then stand to reason, if cities are being withheld federal money for doing such, for those cities to STOP doing it? If they expect to get federal funding?

They're selling out their own people, to harbor criminals.

Maybe, it wasn't the CONTENT of your "immigration" thread......ever think of that?

I just gave him some content. Give him time.....he's still looking to see if SCOTUS will overrule themselves.

[Common]

Good long long overdo

[Safety]

does that make any sense to anyone?

When my son started babbling, I understood him better than what was posted.

[texan]

I really don't get the liberal argument on this topic.

[resister]

Let us also expose the disingenuous rabble for what it is.....and take a look at exactly what Jeff Sessions is doing, exactly what he's saying.

"Some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws. This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws. For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime. The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder," Sessions said. "Such policies cannot continue. They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets."

This is nothing more than the President....as promised...taking to the f'n woodshed those harboring dangerous criminal illegal aliens and detailing coming consequences from the Feds for doing so.

He details, he gives examples.....the day of liberals hiding illegal dangerous criminals and opposing federal laws are over, there is a new f'n Sheriff in town.17657

[Abby08]

I really don't get the liberal argument on this topic.

It defies all logic, not to mention, common sense.

[resister]

It defies all logic, not to mention, common sense.This applies to most liberal concepts.

[stjames1_53]

If you want us to play then you need to treat liberals with respect. Someday we could be gone and you and your playmates would have to play with yourselves.

the same respect you show conservatives? You're already getting what you've earned............n
Liberals gone? HA!!! naw, we'd just go hunting and fishing and raising our families the way we want

[stjames1_53]

When my son started babbling, I understood him better than what was posted.

That's because the rest of us have moved past baby talk................

[Scrounger]

Let us also expose the disingenuous rabble for what it is.....and take a look at exactly what Jeff Sessions is doing, exactly what he's saying.

"Some states and cities have adopted policies designed to frustrate the enforcement of our immigration laws. This includes refusing to detain known felons under federal detainer requests, or otherwise failing to comply with these laws. For example, the Department of Homeland Security recently issued a report showing that in a single week, there were more than 200 instances of jurisdictions refusing to honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests with respect to individuals charged or convicted of a serious crime. The charges and convictions against these aliens include drug trafficking, hit and run, rape, sex offenses against a child and even murder," Sessions said. "Such policies cannot continue. They make our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets."

This is nothing more than the President....as promised...taking to the f'n woodshed those harboring dangerous criminal illegal aliens and detailing coming consequences from the Feds for doing so.

He details, he gives examples.....the day of liberals hiding illegal dangerous criminals and opposing federal laws are over, there is a new f'n Sheriff in town.
You sound like a chicken clucking. EVERYBODY can access the thread wherein your lies have been debunked:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime

Play big boy here, but the proof is in the pudding.

[Scrounger]

It's deception, according to you. Is it not true, are there not cities and states, offering sanctuary to ILLEGAL CRIMINALS!?

So, doesn't it then stand to reason, if cities are being withheld federal money for doing such, for those cities to STOP doing it? If they expect to get federal funding?

They're selling out their own people, to harbor criminals.

Maybe, it wasn't the CONTENT of your "immigration" thread......ever think of that?

You tapped out in that thread when you couldn't prove that the foreigners were criminals. You just like repeating a lie over and over as if that will make it true. And, you guys do more harm to yourselves than the left can do to you. I just wasn't amused when your precedents were used against those fighting FOR constitutional Liberties.

You guys jump from thread to thread, but anybody with an IQ above their shoe size ought to read my thread and see you getting exposed once and for all.

[MMC]

You sound like a chicken clucking. EVERYBODY can access the thread wherein your lies have been debunked:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime

Play big boy here, but the proof is in the pudding.

Well you were given the chance to back your play. What happened. Still can't find a way around what Law I showed you?

Of course you know damn well your play with what SCOTUS ruled on. Has no play here and what Sessions is talking about.


When playing the lamb.....remember to not lie down on Broadway.

[Scrounger]

Well you were given the chance to back your play. What happened. Still can't find a way around what Law I showed you?

Of course you know damn well your play with what SCOTUS ruled on. Has no play here and what Sessions is talking about.


When playing the lamb.....remember to not lie down on Broadway.
WTF are you talking about? Sessions railed against "criminal illegal aliens" - correct? So, what makes them a criminal? Entering the U.S. without papers? NO. Being present without papers? NO. Check out my thread. The answer is in the FIRST posting.

We can allow the system run around and call people anything they like. When they begin fabricating laws to pursue people by and killing them without Due Process, it gets a bit dicey. Again, I invite those who have inquiring minds and want the facts, check my thread.

[MMC]

WTF are you talking about? Sessions railed against "criminal illegal aliens" - correct? So, what makes them a criminal? Entering the U.S. without papers? NO. Being present without papers? NO. Check out my thread. The answer is in the FIRST posting.

We can allow the system run around and call people anything they like. When they begin fabricating laws to pursue people by and killing them without Due Process, it gets a bit dicey. Again, I invite those who have inquiring minds and want the facts, check my thread.

Yes he does bring up criminal illegal aliens. But WTF he is talking about is the law amongst Federal, State, municipal, forms of government over communications and that they cannot bar, obstruct, those communication processes with the Federal Government. In this case.....the Fed and ICE.

[stjames1_53]

Yes he does bring up criminal illegal aliens. But WTF he is talking about is the law amongst Federal, State, municipal, forms of government over communications and that they cannot bar, obstruct, those communication processes with the Federal Government. In this case.....the Fed and ICE.

he's obviously ignoring illegal aliens, the rapests, murders, and kidnappers,conveniently.
or the fraud they commit to stay here.......
Why, those aren't serious crimes. He frickin' welcomes those with open arms

[Scrounger]

Yes he does bring up criminal illegal aliens. But WTF he is talking about is the law amongst Federal, State, municipal, forms of government over communications and that they cannot bar, obstruct, those communication processes with the Federal Government. In this case.....the Fed and ICE.

Irrelevant to the points we were arguing over, counselor. Your boys on this thread tapped out on the Immigration not a crime thread. No need to reinvent the wheel.

[Scrounger]

he's obviously ignoring illegal aliens, the rapests, murders, and kidnappers,conveniently.
or the fraud they commit to stay here.......
Why, those aren't serious crimes. He frickin' welcomes those with open arms

You are disgusting, dishonest and a cancer on the face of humanity. I've told you a thousand times, if you want to know my motives, ask. You don't.

By contrast, I refer to a group of people with an identifiable agenda and a history of leadership. You jump up and begin screaming the mantra every time I allude to them. You self identify - I've not accused you, YOU DO IT TO YOURSELF !!!!

And, here you are, wanting to start a pissing match with me by accusing me of sh!+ you can't back up. I'm not ignoring undocumented foreigners; I'm concentrating on people who don't use their damn brains and end up supporting legislation that negatively impacts Americans. You got your ass kicked on my thread and now, you're here, wanting people equally deluded as you to slap your back and tell you how great you are.

While you're supporting an agenda that is more costly to Americans than the people you treat as subhumans, one wonders who you really work for or is your IQ really that low? The fact that you come here and say absolutely stupid sh!+ about me erases all doubt.

[MMC]

Irrelevant to the points we were arguing over, counselor. Your boys on this thread tapped out on the Immigration not a crime thread. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Wrong.....its exactly whats relevant to what Sessions is talking about and why he can take their Federal monies. Your immigration issue with SCOTUS doesn't have anything to do with that.

[stjames1_53]

Wrong.....its exactly whats relevant to what Sessions is talking about and why he can take their Federal monies. Your immigration issue with SCOTUS doesn't have anything to do with that.

your opponent has demanded you ask his motives. I've asked and received the same as you're getting. a Big fat zero.......... of course he's blamed the conservatives, so he's a liberal. That's all he needs to attack US law.

[Scrounger]

Wrong.....its exactly whats relevant to what Sessions is talking about and why he can take their Federal monies. Your immigration issue with SCOTUS doesn't have anything to do with that.

Win the Hell are you babbling about? Did it dawn on you that in my thread the critics didn't bother to read my posts? They just posted cow dung and criticized me without reading the posts. Did it dawn on you that I supported the federal government holding money from the states if they didn't comply?

Yeah, I sure did. If California can have a sanctuary city and not use federal money, by all means do so. Then, if they can't run their state without the feds help, they have to come back, with hat in hand, begging Uncle Scam and promising to be good little subjects. You really ought to try shedding your prejudice and bigotry and READ what I write before casting aspersions.

[Scrounger]

your opponent has demanded you ask his motives. I've asked and received the same as you're getting. a Big fat zero.......... of course he's blamed the conservatives, so he's a liberal. That's all he needs to attack US law.

There you go again, making assumptions and telling lies. I didn't demand a damn thing of anyone. If you choose to make an idiot of yourself, then don't ask people what they think. Simply make assumptions. For instance, you accused me of blaming conservatives. That is an outrageous, idiotic LIE. It's not that you made a mistake on that one, but you knowingly told a lie. I blame that group of people who, on one hand make this pretentious argument of saying they are "for" immigration provided it's legal when they know, for a fact, the current immigration laws were forced into law by Ted Kennedy (a liberal Democrat) are racist / anti-white.

I blame those people who fully endorsed warrant less searches. I blame those who have gutted the Constitution in order to wage a silly war against people they themselves invited into the United States via their wallets and their purses. OMG, did I inadvertently just mention you? Certainly not by name.

You're the one attacking U.S. law. Did you realize that in the more than 15 years I've been on the net arguing this subject with the anti-immigrant lobby, NOT ONE OF YOU ASKED WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT THE LAW? Just because I quote the law and tell people what it says has no bearing on my personal thoughts. And the anti-immigrants were so busy criticizing me, they never bothered to ASK what I thought at a personal level.

Pal, you are a failure. You're not amusing and you are deceiving all those who will encourage such cowardice.

[texan]

If they want to take away funding, fine. The cities should respond by witholding the taxes their residents send to the feds.
What taxes do they collect from their residents that go to the feds?

[Ransom]

Hypocrisy alert.

Go figure

[Ravens Fan]

You are disgusting, dishonest and a cancer on the face of humanity. I've told you a thousand times, if you want to know my motives, ask. You don't.

By contrast, I refer to a group of people with an identifiable agenda and a history of leadership. You jump up and begin screaming the mantra every time I allude to them. You self identify - I've not accused you, YOU DO IT TO YOURSELF !!!!

And, here you are, wanting to start a pissing match with me by accusing me of sh!+ you can't back up. I'm not ignoring undocumented foreigners; I'm concentrating on people who don't use their damn brains and end up supporting legislation that negatively impacts Americans. You got your ass kicked on my thread and now, you're here, wanting people equally deluded as you to slap your back and tell you how great you are.

While you're supporting an agenda that is more costly to Americans than the people you treat as subhumans, one wonders who you really work for or is your IQ really that low? The fact that you come here and say absolutely stupid sh!+ about me erases all doubt.
@Scrounger Please stop with the insults towards other members.

[MMC]

Win the Hell are you babbling about? Did it dawn on you that in my thread the critics didn't bother to read my posts? They just posted cow dung and criticized me without reading the posts. Did it dawn on you that I supported the federal government holding money from the states if they didn't comply?

Yeah, I sure did. If California can have a sanctuary city and not use federal money, by all means do so. Then, if they can't run their state without the feds help, they have to come back, with hat in hand, begging Uncle Scam and promising to be good little subjects. You really ought to try shedding your prejudice and bigotry and READ what I write before casting aspersions.

Try again.....there is no bigotry when it comes to the laws that State, City, and municipality governments have to follow with respects to communications amongst themselves.

[Ransom]

You sound like a chicken clucking. EVERYBODY can access the thread wherein your lies have been debunked:

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/80841-Immigration-not-a-crime

Play big boy here, but the proof is in the pudding.

I'm merely exposing your argument for what it actually is, allowing the forum to see how ridiculous this has become. There are states harboring criminals much like nations would harbor terror groups, there is a new Sheriff in town....and we've had it with your whining and groaning with our fellow citizens at risk. This isn't going to work for you, your argument has been exposed.

[OGIS]

Promises Promises. :grin:

I did say that the leftists governing could still do what they do. They would just have less of other people monies.

That would be great, here in California. Of course, that would work both ways, right? You would allow all us libtard Californians to keep all that tax money we send Washington?

Conservatards need liberal state tax receipts more than liberal states need conservatards.

[MMC]

That would be great, here in California. Of course, that would work both ways, right? You would allow all us libtard Californians to keep all that tax money we send Washington?

Conservatards need liberal state tax receipts more than liberal states need conservatards.

Sure.....and then when those Natural disasters strike. You would handle that all on your own, Right?. As you wouldn't mind all Federal monies not making a showing Right.

I would take all of it away.....give you your secession and tell yous to stand by yourself in the big bad and cruel world. Then watch how the libtards would run it into the ground. Turn it into Venezuela and not do one damn thing to lift a hand to save your asses.

To top it off.....I would make you build a wall all around the State and pay for it. Before you go.

Then when you go. I would tell you don't go away mad. Just go away. C-yas wouldnt wanna be yas.

[Cletus]

If you want us to play then you need to treat liberals with respect.


Earn it and you'll get it. You don't get it just for existing.

[Cletus]

Apparently the citizens of those cities are okay with being a sanctuary city. If they decide otherwise they can vote in new leaders.

Cities don't have "citizens". They have residents. Cities are not sovereign entities.

[Cletus]

You tapped out in that thread when you couldn't prove that the foreigners were criminals. You just like repeating a lie over and over as if that will make it true. And, you guys do more harm to yourselves than the left can do to you. I just wasn't amused when your precedents were used against those fighting FOR constitutional Liberties.

You guys jump from thread to thread, but anybody with an IQ above their shoe size ought to read my thread and see you getting exposed once and for all.

I didn't participate in your thread. However, I am certain you spewed the same bullshit you have so many times on other threads. You are wrong, pure and simple. Crossing the border without permission is a crime. Those who do so are criminals. They should be treated as such.

[DGUtley]

If contributions can't be withheld then neither can funding. Nobody has a right to tell the citizens of a city or state that they can't get back the money they pay in taxes.

Actually, they do. Thanks to our friends in Washington, the Federal Government has the power to tax and the states do not have the power to mandate return. Obama signed a law mandating (or permitting, I honestly forget) withholding of said funds if immigration cooperation isn't there. That's on him. It's the law.

[Scrounger]

I'm merely exposing your argument for what it actually is, allowing the forum to see how ridiculous this has become. There are states harboring criminals much like nations would harbor terror groups, there is a new Sheriff in town....and we've had it with your whining and groaning with our fellow citizens at risk. This isn't going to work for you, your argument has been exposed.

No sir, you got spanked. Nobody is exposing me for anything, Ransom. You are living in a world of delusional events. I'm on the offensive on this one, not you. YOUR side got exposed.

I'm not putting any fellow citizens at risk. OTOH, YOUR lobbying efforts have not only put citizens at risk, but I can name specific instances where Americans were KILLED by your policies.

[Scrounger]

I didn't participate in your thread. However, I am certain you spewed the same bull$#@! you have so many times on other threads. You are wrong, pure and simple. Crossing the border without permission is a crime. Those who do so are criminals. They should be treated as such.

No, people who cross the border are NOT criminals and you didn't participate on that thread for an obvious reason: You don't have sh!+ to back you up. A popularity contest is NOT going to change the law.

[Common]

First of all no matter what the left says, the LAWYERS on this site explained on its a crime to come here illegally.

Sanctuary cities, should not get a dime of federal money. If the cities citizens that work want to pay for illegal immigrants, I have no problem with that.

[Common]

First of all no matter what the left says, the LAWYERS on this site explained its a crime to come here illegally.

Sanctuary cities, should not get a dime of federal money. If the cities citizens that work want to pay for illegal immigrants, I have no problem with that.

[OGIS]

Cities don't have "citizens". They have residents. Cities are not sovereign entities.

By the exact same criteria, neither are states.

[OGIS]

First of all no matter what the left says, the LAWYERS on this site explained its a crime to come here illegally.

Sanctuary cities, should not get a dime of federal money. If the cities citizens that work want to pay for illegal immigrants, I have no problem with that.

Fine, just don't punish innocent people who have no say in the matter.

[Bo-4]

Good luck to Jiffy on that one. CA is lawyered up and ready to rumble!

https://i0.wp.com/www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Sessions-Pepe.png?resize=623%2C262

[Ransom]

We'll go to political war with the courts or the Democrats/Media. I think this a winning issue for Republicans, citizens do not want illegal criminals harbored aka Rockville Maryland.

Stand up on this one. Shine a flashlight on those here who are supporting the harboring of illegal criminals thus jeopardizing our own citizenry, this a winning issue for us.

Demand Trump be obeyed, kudos to Sessions for his detailing consequences should these states resist.

[Cletus]

No, people who cross the border are NOT criminals and you didn't participate on that thread for an obvious reason: You don't have sh!+ to back you up. A popularity contest is NOT going to change the law.

I didn't participate because trying to educate you is like trying to educate a turnip. You have repeatedly been shown the actual law are posted in the US Code of Laws and you either ignore it or claim it doesn't mean what it says.

You are wrong. It is a criminal act to enter the United States without legal authorization. It is no more complicated than that. It doesn't matter how much you hold your breath and stomp your feet and call other posters names, it will still be legal unless Congress changes the law.

[Green Arrow]

First of all no matter what the left says, the LAWYERS on this site explained its a crime to come here illegally.

Sanctuary cities, should not get a dime of federal money. If the cities citizens that work want to pay for illegal immigrants, I have no problem with that.

If you're going to withhold funds, give them back what they paid in taxes and stop collecting their future taxes.

[Green Arrow]

Cities don't have "citizens". They have residents. Cities are not sovereign entities.
I believe you are fully aware of what I meant.

[Cletus]

Fine, just don't punish innocent people who have no say in the matter.

They DO have a say in the matter. They can remove the people in office who are forcing them to become sanctuary cities.

If they don't do that, they are complicit and deserve whatever they get.

[Ransom]

If you're going to withhold funds, give them back what they paid in taxes and stop collecting their future taxes.

Not a f'n chance, their sanctuary city policies have endangered our own citizenry, they'll pay taxes for added security.

[OGIS]

We'll go to political war with the courts or the Democrats/Media. I think this a winning issue for Republicans, citizens do not want illegal criminals harbored aka Rockville Maryland.

Stand up on this one. Shine a flashlight on those here who are supporting the harboring of illegal criminals thus jeopardizing our own citizenry, this a winning issue for us.

Demand Trump be obeyed, kudos to Sessions for his detailing consequences should these states resist.


Blood for the Blood God!
Skulls for the Skull Throne!

[OGIS]

They DO have a say in the matter. They can remove the people in office who are forcing them to become sanctuary cities.

If they don't do that, they are complicit and deserve whatever they get.

Remove them how?

Riot, and murder them in their beds?

Or vote them out in the next election?

...Which might be next week, but also might be four years away (clue: we just had national elections, and more than a few cities included their own candidates for local offices on the ballots).

So.... punish the voters... who have not yet had a chance to vote out the miscreants... now? Really?

My, how... Stalinesque. or, if you prefer, Hitleresque.
You are quite the little totalitarian weenie, aren't you?

"Totalitarian Weenie Removal" would be an excellent name for a band.

[MMC]

Good luck to Jiffy on that one. CA is lawyered up and ready to rumble!

https://i0.wp.com/www.occidentaldissent.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Sessions-Pepe.png?resize=623%2C262

Good.....let them spend more money they don't have.

http://lowres.cartoonstock.com/none-jerry_brown-bullet_trains-high_speed_railways-high_speed_railways-californian_governor-sgen740_low.jpg

[Green Arrow]

Actually, they do. Thanks to our friends in Washington, the Federal Government has the power to tax and the states do not have the power to mandate return. Obama signed a law mandating (or permitting, I honestly forget) withholding of said funds if immigration cooperation isn't there. That's on him. It's the law.
Legality =/= moral right

[Cletus]

Remove them how?

Riot, and murder them in their beds?

Or vote them out in the next election?

...Which might be next week, but also might be four years away (clue: we just had national elections, and more than a few cities included their own candidates for local offices on the ballots).

So.... punish the voters... who have not yet had a chance to vote out the miscreants... now? Really?

My, how... Stalinesque. or, if you prefer, Hitleresque.
You are quite the little totalitarian weenie, aren't you?

"Totalitarian Weenie Removal" would be an excellent name for a band.

You have quite the penchant for posting hysterical, nonsensical bullshit.

Is it deliberate or some uncontrollable compulsion?

[OGIS]

Remove them how?

Riot, and murder them in their beds?

Or vote them out in the next election?

...Which might be next week, but also might be four years away (clue: we just had national elections, and more than a few cities included their own candidates for local offices on the ballots).

So.... punish the voters... who have not yet had a chance to vote out the miscreants... now? Really?

My, how... Stalinesque. or, if you prefer, Hitleresque.

You are quite the little totalitarian weenie, aren't you?

"Totalitarian Weenie Removal" would be an excellent name for a band.


You have quite the penchant for posting hysterical, nonsensical bull$#@!.

Is it deliberate or some uncontrollable compulsion?

Why don't you answer the farking question instead of slinking into ad hom deflection?

We've just had elections. Most if not virtually all cities won't have elections for another two or four years.

So how do you expect the residents of those cities to remove their leaders?

Be specific.

[Cletus]

There are a number of ways it could be done.

Vote them out in the next election.

Start a recall petition.

Make them sit in a room and read page after page of your posts until they turn into drooling idiots...

[Scrounger]

First of all no matter what the left says, the LAWYERS on this site explained on its a crime to come here illegally.

Sanctuary cities, should not get a dime of federal money. If the cities citizens that work want to pay for illegal immigrants, I have no problem with that.
If you had an immigration lawyer on this site, they would verify what I've told you. BTW, you should see the update on my thread regarding this very point.

[Scrounger]

I didn't participate because trying to educate you is like trying to educate a turnip. You have repeatedly been shown the actual law are posted in the US Code of Laws and you either ignore it or claim it doesn't mean what it says.

You are wrong. It is a criminal act to enter the United States without legal authorization. It is no more complicated than that. It doesn't matter how much you hold your breath and stomp your feet and call other posters names, it will still be legal unless Congress changes the law.

You got to be kidding. You can't "educate" me because you are not qualified. If you had any serious intentions of sharing some hidden knowledge, you would have participated in that thread and answered my questions.

It's not nice to be dishonest with me and dishonor yourself by claiming to do something you did not do. Nor sir. The people on your side misquote Title 8 USC 1325 and ignore every ruling, holding and interpretation by those who enforce and prosecute immigration violations. How in the Hell are you going to educate anyone by ignoring the highest ranking immigration officials in the United States? How can you claim to educate anyone when you've been unable to answer a single question based upon the law?

You've not done what you claim and anyone that accesses my thread about Immigration not being a crime can see that what you're saying is hot air. Nothing less, nothing more.

[Bo-4]

Good.....let them spend more money they don't have.
Don't F with Gov Moonbeam! :cool2:

California Gov. Jerry Brown has launched a blistering attack on President-elect Donald Trump's stance on climate change, telling a gathering of scientists that he will do everything in his power to protect laboratories and advanced research.

In an address Wednesday to a conference of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco, Brown abandoned all niceties in going after Trump, who has called climate change a hoax (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/265895292191248385) orchestrated by China.

Brown — whose defiant environmental advocacy during an earlier term as governor won him the nickname "Governor Moonbeam" — said reports that the Trump administration could end NASA's role in climate research were unacceptable.

"If Trump turns off the satellites, California will launch its own damn satellites," he said.

[Bo-4]

Demand Trump be obeyed, kudos to Sessions for his detailing consequences should these states resist.

Obey Trumpf!! ^

Did i actually just read that?

:grin:

[Ransom]

Obey Trumpf!! ^

Did i actually just read that?

:grin:
Correct. The Executive Branch needs to obey the President's orders. If he's calling for the states to follow federal law, he's to be obeyed. He is the President.

[del]

there is nothing in immigration law that requires state and local law enforcement to cooperate with the feds to round up people for deportation.

ice detainers have been ruled unconstitutional numerous times in numerous districts.

it's funny how you guys are all gung ho for the 10th amendment except when it keeps you from getting what you want.

[OGIS]

Vote them out in the next election.

Probably in two or four years. What do you do in the meantime? Remind them every day that if they don't vote "the right way" when the election eventually comes around that they will be punished if they don't vote "the right way"?

Start a recall petition.

Takes money. What if the people can't afford it? And in several states "specific grounds are required for a recall. Some form of malfeasance or misconduct while in office must be identified by the petitioners. The target may choose to dispute the validity of the grounds in court, and a court then judges whether the allegations in the petition rise to a level where a recall is necessary."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_election#United_States

So, basically, operate as a terrorist organization and browbeat the local residents until they cough up the time and money to organize and fight an uphill battle to recall politician they may not even have voted for in the first place?

Sweet.

If I help you, do I get jackboots?


Make them sit in a room and read page after page of your posts until they turn into drooling idiots...

So you publicly admit you got nuthin' by degenerating to public name calling. Wow.

Lurkers, please take note.

I assume the @mods don't care.

[Cletus]

Probably in two or four years. What do you do in the meantime? Remind them every day that if they don't vote "the right way" when the election eventually comes around that they will be punished if they don't vote "the right way"?


Takes money. What if the people can't afford it? And in several states "specific grounds are required for a recall. Some form of malfeasance or misconduct while in office must be identified by the petitioners. The target may choose to dispute the validity of the grounds in court, and a court then judges whether the allegations in the petition rise to a level where a recall is necessary."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_election#United_States

So, basically, operate as a terrorist organization and browbeat the local residents until they cough up the time and money to organize and fight an uphill battle to recall politician they may not even have voted for in the first place?

Sweet.

If I help you, do I get jackboots?



So you publicly admit you got nuthin' by degenerating to public name calling. Wow.

Lurkers, please take note.

I assume the @mods don't care.

What name did I call you?

If you can't provide it, will you agree not to post for 6 months? Of course, you won't. You won't because you know I did no such thing. You however, did make a false accusation.

Unfortunately, forum rules don't say you can't falsely accuse another poster, so you are safe.

[OGIS]

What name did I call you?

You said:
Make them sit in a room and read page after page of your posts until they turn into drooling idiots...

Why would reading a post turn a person into a drooling idiot? Implication: reading caused confusion because there was something unintelligible about the post. Implication: the poster is an idiot. IOW, name calling.

Incredibly transparent to anyone with even high school English skills. You are not being clever. You just think you are.

If you can't provide it, will you agree not to post for 6 months? Of course, you won't. You won't because you know I did no such thing. You however, did make a false accusation.

Unfortunately, forum rules don't say you can't falsely accuse another poster, so you are safe.
Blah blah blah blah....

[Bethere]

Correct. The Executive Branch needs to obey the President's orders. If he's calling for the states to follow federal law, he's to be obeyed. He is the President.

I guess it's different from when the Republican governors were suing obama over immigration, healthcare, and gay bakers.

I see.

[Cletus]

You said:

Why would reading a post turn a person into a drooling idiot? Implication: reading caused confusion because there was something unintelligible about the post. Implication: the poster is an idiot. IOW, name calling.

Reading your posts is like listening to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glcg95L4JK4

on an endless loop. They should actually be picked up and used by SERE committee in the RTL.

I didn't call you anything. If you couldn't comprehend what I said... well, I guess it wouldn't be all that big a surprise. It is certainly not the first time you have read things into the posts of others that simply were not there.

[Ethereal]

Cities don't have "citizens". They have residents. Cities are not sovereign entities.
Sovereignty ultimately resides in the individual. It has no meaning otherwise.

[Ethereal]

...there is a new f'n Sheriff in town.
You misspelled tyrant.

[AeonPax]

`
`
Related; "Maryland governor vows to fight sanctuary movement amid rape case (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/24/no-assurance-childrens-safety-in-school-maryland-governor-warns.html)". I don't blame him.

[Peter1469]

`
`
Related; "Maryland governor vows to fight sanctuary movement amid rape case (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/24/no-assurance-childrens-safety-in-school-maryland-governor-warns.html)". I don't blame him.
Even without the rape charges this legislation should be opposed.

[del]

Even without the rape charges this legislation should be opposed.
all of a sudden federalism has lost its appeal, huh?

didn't see that coming

[Ravens Fan]

Even without the rape charges this legislation should be opposed.
I have been contacting my representatives, but we don't have a good history here when it comes to upholding Federal immigration laws. Will the case change enough minds in the hard left parts of the state? Probably not.

[OGIS]

Reading your posts is like listening to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glcg95L4JK4

on an endless loop. They should actually be picked up and used by SERE committee in the RTL.

I didn't call you anything. If you couldn't comprehend what I said... well, I guess it wouldn't be all that big a surprise. It is certainly not the first time you have read things into the posts of others that simply were not there.

You certainly did. You just did so in a "safe" way.

I understand.

[OGIS]

Sovereignty ultimately resides in the individual. It has no meaning otherwise.


You misspelled tyrant.

You are on a roll.

[OGIS]

I guess it's different from when the Republican governors were suing obama over immigration, healthcare, and gay bakers.

I see.



Oh, you....

[MMC]

You are on a roll.

You're not. Break out your Pom poms.....then try the cartwheels.

[Subdermal]

all of a sudden federalism has lost its appeal, huh?

didn't see that coming

Protip: Federalism doesn't require federal money.

[OGIS]

You're not. Break out your Pom poms.....then try the cartwheels.


Do you need a hug?

[MMC]

Do you need a hug?

Nope.....but I will accept money. :grin: