Posted on 03/28/2017 11:13:21 AM PDT by Sean_Anthony
No. It's putting the gun to the head of illegal aliens. Big difference, dumb ass.
Gun to the head, yes. OF ILLEGAL ALIENS.
DIMS put a gun to the head of many US citizens with Obamacare.
True story: The rat sisters of Pacific Palisades.
If cities are in such dire need of Federal funding then the Federal government is funding things that it has no business funding.
Stop threatening. Do it and stop talking about it.
Illegal aliens are not Citizens. Just not sure how dumb Democrats can get....
We need to just start laughing at them
They are putting guns to the heads of taxpayers (literally) when they force us to pay for illegals.
He is stating the obvious. EVERYTHING the FedGov requires you to do, they do via the power of the gun.
So what’s his point?
Don’t threaten to defund — DO IT!!
We keep on getting lectured how much taxes illegals pay, so let them make up the difference in those places.
Expect a wave of lawsuits against this defunding.
No, it’s the Democrats who are putting the gun to the head of Americans. Democrats are demanding we hand over our tax dollars as a ransom for all the illegals in this country. Democrat’s only real love for the illegals is rooted in their political lust that one day the illegals will get the vote and put them back into power forever.
That’s what this is all really about.
Jeff Don’t threaten.. Just Do It!!!
Yesterday, newly minted Attorney General Jeff Sessions re-iterated his threat to yank federal funding from so-called “sanctuary cities.”
From the AP:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday warned so-called sanctuary cities they could lose federal money for refusing to cooperate with immigration authorities and suggested the government would come after grants that have already been awarded if they don’t comply.
Sessions said the Justice Department would require cities seeking some of $4.1 billion available in grant money to verify that they are in compliance with a section of federal law that allows information sharing with immigration officials.
His statements in the White House briefing room brought to mind tough talk from President Donald Trump’s campaign and came just three days after the administration’s crushing health care defeat. But Sessions also acknowledged he was reiterating a similar policy adopted by the Obama administration last year.
“I urge the nation’s states and cities to carefully consider the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to enforce our immigration laws,” Sessions said.
In other words, if your city is openly defying federal immigration law, it’s risking the elimination of all the sweet, sweet, taxpayer cash that floods into its social program food trough. This, to most people, sounds perfectly sane. It was front and center during the 2016 campaign, and it enjoys widespread support outside of Hillary strongholds like New York and Los Angeles.
Unfortunately, sanity is not a hallmark of the Democrat party these days. The hyperbole was launched immediately and perhaps no one served as a better example than Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D, NY).
He’s outraged that someone might attempt to force Democrats to obey the law. He claims defunding sanctuary cities would be like “putting a gun to the head of Americans” and (because Russia all the things) playing Russian roulette.
“Well, This is a serious threat to the security of Americans throughout the country and particularly New York City, which is the largest, safest city in America.
...By yanking funding away and clawing back funding away from law enforcement, we’re putting average Americans at risk. In fact, it’s almost like putting a gun in the head of Americans and playing Russian roulette.
This is egregious, and this is something that shouldn’t happen.”
The problem, obviously, is that by harboring and often even releasing dangerous illegals, sanctuary cities are themselves playing Russian roullette with the lives of law-abiding citizens. Why should taxpayers around the country be funding your city’s law enforcement if it’s not actually going to enforce the law?
More importantly, states don’t get to pick and choose which statutes to which the “feel like” adhereing.
If you refuse to abide by federal law, you suffer the consequences. End of story. The fact that they’re in meltdown mode indicates that they know they’re on the wrong side of an effective pressure point.
Threatened?!! ENUFF hearsay...DO IT!! Find a freakin backbone and do it!!!
*** “Dem: ‘putting a gun to the head’ of Americans” ***
NO ... That was Obamacare
How ‘bout we quit sending “grants” of taxpayer money from Washington to ANY cities. WTF are we doing that for in the first place? Where does the Constitution authorize it?
Where was this Democrat complaining about Obama “putting a gun to the head of all Americans” when this was happening?:
“President Obama’s Justice Department on Wednesday threatened to pull federal education dollars from North Carolina if the state does not repeal a law prohibiting people from using public restrooms of the opposite sex.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/4/north-carolina-transgender-bathroom-bill-feds-thre/
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.