Posted on 07/09/2015 7:09:35 AM PDT by Kaslin
Democrats now will say anything to distance themselves from sanctuary city policies, even though they have supported these policies for years. In an exclusive CNN interview Tuesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton was asked about San Francisco's refusal to hand over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement seven-time convicted felon and five-time deportee Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez. He stands accused in the fatal shooting of Kathryn Steinle as she took an evening stroll on Pier 14 last week. (After telling a local TV station he shot Steinle by accident, Lopez-Sanchez has pleaded not guilty to murder.) Clinton answered, "The city made a mistake not to deport someone that the federal government strongly felt should be deported. So I have absolutely no support for a city that ignores the strong evidence that should be acted on."
In a 2007 Democratic presidential debate, the late Tim Russert asked Clinton if she would allow sanctuary cities to disobey federal law. "Well, I don't think there is any choice," she answered. Immigrants may not talk to police if "they think you're also going to be enforcing the immigration laws." She did not add a caveat that she wanted local law enforcement to work with immigration officials if the federal government had strong feelings that an individual should be deported.
In 2008, Clinton voted against an amendment to yank some federal funds from sanctuary cities. California Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer voted likewise -- but it didn't stop them from criticizing San Francisco for releasing a repeat offender.
"The 2008 budget amendment was a choice between sending a political message or funding California law enforcement, and I chose to fund the police," Feinstein explained in an email. "I continue to believe we can deport criminals who are undocumented and still support law enforcement."
Perhaps Feinstein and Clinton are living back in 1985, when Feinstein was mayor and signed San Francisco's sanctuary city law. It was supposed to help immigrants seeking asylum from war-torn El Salvador and Guatemala. Four years later, the law was expanded to cover all immigrants. Then, in 2013, the Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance, signed by Mayor Ed Lee, that prohibits city law enforcement from releasing undocumented immigrants to ICE based on a detainer request alone. (There's an exception for recent violent felons, but Lopez-Sanchez did not qualify.)
Sanctuary City supporters cannot say they were not warned. Recently, ICE Director Sarah Saldana told a House committee that reduced cooperation from state and local governments "may increase the risk that dangerous criminals are returned to the streets, putting the public and our officers at greater risk."
Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., asked Saldana if it would help if Congress made it mandatory for local governments to cooperate with ICE -- the sort of bill already rejected by Clinton, Feinstein and Boxer. "Thank you. Amen. Yes," Saldana answered.
Then came blowback from the anti-enforcement community. Saldana released a statement that said such a law would be counterproductive and "lead to more resistance." You have to figure her reversal was on orders from the White House. Asked about Steinle's killing at a press conference this week, White House spokesman Josh Earnest blamed Republicans in Congress for blocking "common-sense immigration reform."
Where is the common sense in shielding repeat felons and border jumpers from the consequences of their crimes? There is no need to look outside the city: San Francisco screwed up. Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, the Board of Supervisors and the mayor were so busy crowing about their pro-immigrant credentials, and refusing to differentiate between legal and undocumented, that they forgot voters elect them to keep their city safe.
The list of sanctuary cities, in the US, is lengthy.
Here is a link with the list of the cities, and great background info....
http://www.ojjpac.org/sanctuary.asp
Where is the national outrage?
Ping.
This woman did not have to be murdered. This won’t go away.
Ride the emotion train !
Now is the time to pass a bill punishing mayors who choose to have illegals tproaming free in their cities.
Could call it the Prevent Illegals front killing innocents bill.
Play their game.
Feinstein and Hillary are both liars and always have been.
For years there has been a growing problem with illegal immigration. From the loss of jobs, to the increased criminal behavior, to lack of insurance as drivers, to the plain old unfairness to those who go through the proper channels to legally come to this country. But politicians have been as afraid to point out the problems with illegal immigration as they have been to point out the insolvency of Social Security; it’s one of the third rails of politics.
And why? Because they are afraid of the media.
I am not a “Donald Trump supporter”. There are a good ten to twelve candidates running for President that I would support before Donald Trump, but I will give a very big
THANK YOU
to Donald Trump for not only bringing to the front the problems with illegal immigration, but for also showing that you can fight back against the media and win.
“Feinsten and Hillary are both liars and always have been.”
That’s not the problem.
The problem is that the liars in the electorate love the way they lie.
IMHO
#CitizensLivesMatter
It’s time to punish these rat holes. Stop all money to “sanctuary cities”. They are hideouts for criminals and lawbreakers. America isn’t Mexico. It is a country of laws.
Excellent point
This is a tempest in a teacup.
The media will let the issue die. Republicans will ignore the issue lest they be called racist. Democrats can spin this any way they like, including blaming the GOP and the drooling, stupefied American public will buy it, lock, stock and barrel.
Chameleon like aren’t they?
They all remind me of the Governor in “Best Little Whorehouse In Texas”. Doing a little “slidestep”.
Gol-dang that G.W.Bush! worst president ever!
No Federal funds of any kind for sanctuary cities.
They'll probably mess it up.
Why is that a good idea? Five years of prison in the US for returning here after being deported? That’s free room and board at our expense. How about permanent deportation, never allowed in the US again?
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.