Posted on 11/28/2016 8:51:42 AM PST by Texas Eagle
There are 300 Sanctuary Cities and counties around the United States that have policies in place blocking local law enforcement from complying with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests for immigration holds.
An ICE detainer is a written request for a local jail or other law enforcement agency to detain an individual for an additional 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) after his or her release date, in order to provide ICE agents extra time to decide whether to take the individual into federal custody for removal purposes.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Defund the USDA.... Those social programs are over-loaded with graft and mis-management.
2015 study:
Looks like CA is a giver and not a getter.
I don’t know precisely how this is calculated...it looks like some of the states that get the most (New Mexico, Montana, South Dakota) may have large Indian populations that skew this.
If they really need food, give them a block of government cheese.
Yep. Who goes to live in a country not of their own birth and contribution, and yells “La Raza”, and degrades the flag of the host country? Not anyone who intended to become a contributing patriotic citizen of that country. And to add injury to insult, they expect taxpaying Americans to foot the bill for them. And our “own” government opposes the citizens and our own laws in support of the law-breaking parasites.
I am coming to the end of my road. I’d LOVE to move home for the remainder of my time.
I REFUSE to live as some sort of parolee/serf, a vassal of the state.
The magic of national debt. States can’t print money. The feds can. That means a state CAN get more money from the feds than it could raise itself.
This is why California won’t leakage: they can’t afford too.
Not only will funds for sanctuary cities be cut, the cities will have to send a refund to the federal govt.
Check out the video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tm1_fORglnI
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3498282/posts
Thanks to a little-noticed action of Texas Congressman John Culberson taken last July, President-elect Trump will able to cut-off federal law enforcement funding to 9 sanctuary cities, plus the entire state of California, immediately upon taking the oath of office. Brenda Walker of Vdare explains:
Because of the foresight of a Texas Congressman, President Trump will be able to end certain funding to the largest sanctuary cities plus the entire state of California on his first day as President. Working quietly, Culberson convinced the existing Justice Department to certify those cities as non-compliant with federal law, thereby making them vulnerable to loss of money from Washington.
Use it for those, who knew how to read and used official Mexican/South American pamphlets to come to America illegally and start getting the freebies.:
A Mexican Manual for Illegal Migrants Upsets Some in U.S. - The New ...
www.nytimes.com/.../americas/a-mexican-manual-for-illegal-migrants-upsets-some-in...
Jan 6, 2005 - Mexican government publishes pamphlet that instructs migrants how to safely enter United States illegally and live there ... by the police and to stay out of domestic disputes, which might lead to an arrest. ... to go. About 1.5 million copies of the guide were printed and distributed ... Site Information Navigation.
“Whoever controls the Federal apparatus (President, Congress, and various courts) will have huge leverage over Illinois, California, and other states as they come, hat in hand, begging for help. Bond holders are likely to end up as bag holders.”
We have avoided State and local city/county bonds for about a decade due to this potential issue.
Trump can undo a lot of things that Obamy did to help these blue states. Hammering their large cities is a good start.
I believe CA receives back $.73 for every dollar sent to Washington DC
Tough Shiite, California.
Withhold all federal funding from the entire state until state laws are changed and enforced to support legal citizenship as residency requirements.
But they’re going to secede. Really. The sixth largest econom. . . Sick of being governed. Going to . . .
Do it. All that money is being used to subsidize the illegal alien takeover of California anyway.
Show me your principles !
California would lose around 14 billion dollars in federal funds. Roughly the same amount as California's government payroll."
I have read the Constitution and commentaries on it many, many times and I understand that States were granted the power to both define citizenship, and how when and where elections will be held. States do not have to get permission from the Federal apparatus to have any elections at all.
Once Federal funds to the states cease, the practice should NEVER again be restored.
Not
Ever!
Distributing graft and corruption among the states simply expands the numbers of conspirators of graft beyond belief and ability to see it all.
Now there is a beautiful image of criminal Mexicans and their supporters.
I have never felt like punching someone on the nose as when I see Mexican female illegals; they seem to be more foul-mouthed, entitled and arrogant than the males; not to mention violent.
This image also depict the egregious behavior of these violent animals, and the practice of hiding their faces during "peaceful" protests.
I hope that, that practice comes to a permanent halt real soon, once the definition of "peaceful protests" are clarified to define concealing their faces making the participants subject to immediate arrest, identification, photograph and fingerprinting and some minimum time in jail, say a week. .
I have yet to see a "peaceful" demonstration where many participants hide their faces, that did not degenerate into a mindless mob of destructive animals. That must stop ASAP.
During incarceration their residence status would be determined, followed by deportation where warranted, or a note placed in their ICE file to allow monitoring for any criminal behavior, including DUI, driving without license and insurance and vehicular manslaughter.
The cost of the damage they cause is either indirectly paid for by the taxpayer, or by private businesses which have lost millions$ in the last year alone.
Why must addressing this clearly perceived degeneration of peaceful dissent be so controversial to even discuss? That is beyond me.
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.