March 24-27, 2018
Mar 24 11:17 Tim Walz and the students' march Mar 24 18:56 Tim Walz's VA ineptitude Mar 25 07:31 The truth about the refugee resettlement program Mar 25 13:23 The generic ballot revisited Mar 26 00:58 Stupidity is bliss, Second Amendment edition Mar 26 08:39 Making the public safer vs, pretentious public preening Mar 27 00:38 Laffer exposes Hillary's pandering Mar 27 02:33 Refugee resettlement in their own words Mar 27 10:16 The 'sanctuary' backlash starts
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Tim Walz and the students' march
Whatever you say about Tim Walz, the first truth about him is that he isn't a principled politician. I'd argue that he's a spineless career politician. This was never more evident than on Friday morning, when he tweeted "I want to thank the MN students who met w/ my DC staff this morning. I'm proud to stand w/ you to push for commonsense gun safety measures like universal background checks, a military-style assault weapons ban & CDC research into gun violence. Your leadership inspires us all."
That's world-class pandering. It's impossible to tell that Walz had a lifetime A rating from the NRA. In that tweet, Walz sounded like a typical gun-grabbing DFL legislator. If I hadn't identified who said that, a person might've thought I was quoting Ron Latz. But I digress.
This morning, it's time to rip the mask off this march. Let's start by saying that the students from Parkland experienced something horrific. Next, let's stipulate that going through that experience doesn't make them experts on gun control. In fact, I'd argue that they've exhibited their ignorance multiple times. Ben Shapiro exposed these students' ignorance in this video:
[Video no longer available]
These students are just as ignorant as the liberal organizations sponsoring today's marches. I reject the need to put these students' opinions on a pedestal. They're worthy of no more consideration than any other liberal opinion.
The first question I'd ask young Mr. Kasky is straightforward. Why would students think that a man who's broken the law before suddenly obey a new law banning weapons? For that matter, why think that these new laws are constitutional?
For instance, requiring people to be at least 21 to buy an AR-15 is unconstitutional as long as 18-year-olds are considered adults. Fortunately, the people who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights had the wisdom to enshrine in the Bill of Rights the right of people to protect themselves. No amount of passionate activism will change that constitutional verdict.
Finally, it's time to teach these children the Constitution rather than teaching them the A-B-Cs of activism. We don't live in a democracy. Our Founding Fathers created a constitutional republic where rights were God-given, not granted by government. The difference between the 2 forms of government are dramatic. It's time that these children learned why constitutional republics are dramatically better.
Posted Saturday, March 24, 2018 11:17 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 24-Mar-18 04:26 PM
Erin Murphy is more likely the Democrat endorsee. What's your beef against her?
Tim Walz's VA ineptitude
When it comes to veterans, Tim Walz can't quite tell the truth. It's indisputable fact that the VA system is a failure. Veterans have died waiting months for urgent care. On his official issues page , Walz said "We must honor the sacred contract between a grateful nation and our veterans who made selfless sacrifices in defense of freedom and democracy. Our goal as a nation is to provide the men and women who return from service in the U.S. military with the opportunity to achieve the American Dream in civilian life. As the highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in Congress, I have been extremely honored and humbled to work directly on behalf of veterans and their families with a position on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. We owe it to our veterans to ensure that they are healthy, happy, and employed when they return home, and I am working hard to get results for veterans."
The truth is that Rep. Walz worked with Nancy Pelosi to throw additional money thrown towards the failed VA system while trying to weaken the VA reforms Congress passed months ago. That's the worst way to "ensure that they are healthy, happy, and employed when they return home."
Being anti-VA reform, which is what Rep. Walz is, is hurting veterans. Ten years ago, Rep. Walz complained about VA administrators receiving bonuses while veterans got neglected:
[Video no longer available]
Three years ago, Rep. Walz travelled around the state after the Phoenix VA scandal broke:
[Video no longer available]
Five months ago, Rep. Walz called for a federal investigation into why VA hospitals denied veterans access to health care and/or why they charged veterans for care they shouldn't have been required to pay:
[Video no longer available]
I hope I'm not the only Minnesotan noticing a pattern of failure on Walz's behalf. Minnesota doesn't need another failure after suffering through 8 years of Gov. Dayton's failures. We need someone who will fix things the first time, then keep things working properly thereafter. People thinking that that's Walz's habit aren't accustomed to reality.
Posted Saturday, March 24, 2018 6:56 PM
No comments.
The truth about the refugee resettlement program
This past Tuesday, St. Cloud City Councilman Jeff Johnson participated in a high-profile discussion of the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980 . Saying that it was a fascinating discussion is understatement. Each panelist made an opening presentation, which was followed by a Q & A period. These presentations were made by Don Barnett, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, Richard Thompson, the president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, and Councilman Johnson.
Follow this link to the transcript of the presentations.
During his presentation, Don Barnett quoted Ted Kennedy, the chief author of the bill, as saying "because the admission of refugees is a federal decision and lies outside of normal immigration procedures, the federal government has a clear responsibility to assist communities in resettling refugees and helping them to become self-supporting. The basic issues here were the length of time of federal responsibility and the method of its administration. State and local agencies were insistent that federal assistance must continue long enough to assure that local citizens will not be taxed for programs they did not initiate and for which they were not responsible. The program must assure full and adequate federal support for refugee resettlement programs by authorizing permanent funding for state, local, and volunteer projects."
That might be one of the most sensible things Sen. Kennedy ever said. Here's the video of Barnett's presentation:
[Video no longer available]
Based on what the bill's chief author said, the federal government isn't living up to its responsibilities. Certainly, there's no denying the fact that the bill's chief author knows what the legislative intent is. During his presentation, Councilman Johnson focused on the bill from the "perspective from the local city level." Councilman Johnson said "And I want to say on my watch this really started brewing in St. Cloud approximately three years ago, where my constituents - I represent Ward 4 - started asking questions about the Refugee Resettlement Program, about why am I spending money in a program that I have no representation. This is a classic case of taxation without representation. So this started to boil over time."
Johnson continued:
To summarize that meeting, what I saw, four things were occurring. One, we have a nonprofit religious organization, OK, taking federal dollars, and they were pocketing approximately $1,000 per refugee. The allocation's about 3,300 (dollars), but they got to keep about $1,000 per refugee, OK? They were not being transparent with the public, and it got to the point where they actually had a deputy at the door monitoring who was coming into the meetings . And I said you need to open up these meetings because you're using federal dollars, you're a nonprofit organization, and to me it was becoming apparent that they were acting like a for-profit corporation.
That's just the tip of the iceberg. Here's more of that 'iceberg':
So finally, what led up to kind of a culminating event in St. Cloud was a resolution that I had introduced into the City Council in November. And it's a simple one-page resolution. I call it legalized plagiarism: All I did is about two-thirds of this resolution was quoted right from the Refugee Act of 1980. And I'd like to read a couple parts. Mark mentioned it early on in the presentation; it's so important I want to mention it again just briefly. And this is the actual language in the resolution. It says "Whereas the Refugee Act of 1980 states that 8 U.S. Code 1522(b)," quote, "' The director'" - I'm talking about the Minnesota Office of Refugee Resettlement director - "'shall develop and implement in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and state and local governments'" - that's me, OK? - ~'policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States.' The next paragraph has even more teeth from the U.S. Code: "Whereas the Refugee Act of 1980 states in 8 U.S. Code 1522(c)(2) The director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement will" - "will" is a pretty strong word - quote, "'provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates of voluntary agencies regularly, not less than quarterly, meet with representatives of state and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of their arrival the appropriate placement of refugees amongst various states and localities.'"
LSS was doing its utmost to hide their actions:
What was going on here in St. Cloud is Lutheran Social Services - and after kind of pulling some teeth I finally got their abstract to kind of find out what was going on - is they were going ahead with this process. And then, because I was so persistent, it was like show and tell. I'd show up at the quarterly meetings and they'd tell me what they did. My argument is that is a violation of federal law. That is not in advance planning, all right? This is show and tell. I'm finding out after the fact. So what was going on, this was feeding into the frustration, again, to the taxpayers, the people of Ward 4 in St. Cloud that I represent.
This is how refugee resettlement rose to become the potent political issue it's become.
[Video no longer available]
The first truth about the Refugee Resettlement Program is that the federal government isn't living up to its obligation. The next truth about the Refugee Resettlement Program is that it's become more like an unfunded mandate with time. The third truth about the Refugee Resettlement Program is that the federal government is hostile to counties and municipalities. They don't care whether their program drives up local taxes. The federal government's attitude seems to be that 'that's their problem.'
The other thing that's important in all of this is that the City Council, the people on the front lines on this, are supposed to protect their citizens' interests. They aren't there to protect the state's interests. That's what we have legislators for. They aren't there to protect the federal government's interests. That's why we have congressmen and senators. If the city council won't push back against the federal government, then they're worthless. They should be replaced by people who insist on accountability and transparency.
The finger-pointing must stop immediately. While the program is administered by the federal government, it's indisputable that municipalities and counties have shouldered an increasing percentage of the burden for this program.
It isn't that St. Cloud is hostile to refugees. It's that we're upset with the federal government and with Lutheran Social Services.
Posted Sunday, March 25, 2018 7:31 AM
Comment 1 by Margaret at 25-Mar-18 09:46 AM
While Lutheran Social Services hosts an 'Advocacy Day at the Capitol' to 'train' their group how to lobby with Federal dollars for MORE Federal money, and UniteCloud says that they:
'travel(s)throughout Minnesota and neighboring states leading communities and organizations through cultural tensions that result from changing demographics. Utilizing our experience from the St. Cloud area, #UNITECLOUD speakers will travel to your location and facilitate an honest and useful discussion in a safe and familiar environment. We are there to talk with you, not at you.'
Meanwhile UniteCloud, a 501(c)3 with the goal to promote for more immigrants and refugees, causes chaos and unrest in the St Cloud area refusing to allow any opposing viewpoints hold meetings without calling for making 'Loud noises'and being disruptive and doing whatever they can to shut the event down. (Center for American Experience, Sharia 101, Shahram Hadian, Usama Dakdok with vandalism at the host church as just some examples).
... under Jewish law, someone with a potential 'profit motive' to favor a particular position is in no position to judge. Some refugee resettlement groups, such as HIAS, which have invoked 'morality' arguments to promote admitting poorly vetted refugees have been receiving millions of dollars of government grants to resettle refugees.
The generic ballot revisited
This month's Fox News poll shows a tightening of the generic ballot question . In this latest poll, Republicans trail Democrats 46%-41%. That's down from October, 2017, when Democrats led the generic ballot question 50%-35%.
Another poll question that should work in the Republicans' favor asks "Compared to this time last year, do you feel more optimistic or less optimistic for the coming year about each of the following?" On their personal happiness, 60% were more optimistic with only 22% saying less optimistic. On "Your family's financial situation", 51% said that they're more optimistic while 32% were less optimistic.
Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the poll with Democrat Chris Anderson, said "Just winning the popular national vote is not enough to flip the House. Given the GOP's districting advantages, data from 2012 and 2014 show the Democrats need an edge of at least five points to bring the majority into play."
Another thing working in Republicans' favor is President Trump's approval rating, which sits at 45%. By comparison, President Trump's approval rating in October was 38%. At that point, Republicans trailed in the generic ballot question by 15 points, 50%-35%.
One thing that will hurt Republicans a bit is their voting for the latest budget deal. The grass roots aren't happy with that. That being said, something is working in their favor, which is the quality of the parties' closing arguments. Republicans should highlight morning, noon and night the fact that every Democrat in the House and every Democrat in the Senate voted against the Trump/GOP tax cuts that got the economy soaring and that provided pay raises and bonuses. Reinforce the fact that people's paychecks are fatter, too. Reinforce the fact that families won't get penalized for not buying health insurance they couldn't afford because Republicans eliminated the Obamacare individual mandate, too.
This is positive news for Republicans. There's still many months to go but things are improving.
Posted Sunday, March 25, 2018 1:23 PM
No comments.
Stupidity is bliss, Second Amendment edition
It's painfully obvious that this LTE was written by a poorly-informed liberal. It's painfully obvious because he states up front that "I have no answers for our debate on the 2nd Amendment, but I do have some questions." The writer then writes "When our Constitution was drafted the deadliest weapon was a single shot musket. In 1934 machine guns were banned. How do they differ in purpose from assault-style rifles? With a handgun in your possession, would you confront an armed attacked with an AR-15? In the past year, what is the comparison of number of people killed or injured when a handgun is used or an assault-style rifle?"
Mr. Erickson's ignorance is highly visible because he continues with the question, writing "Have you ever seen and experienced a responsible game hunter in the woods with an AR-15 in pursuit of big game? Have you ever seen a big game animal harvested with an assault-style rifle? How safe would our woods be if we had hunters shooting with them? Do you know any experienced big game hunters who usually requires more than two shots to bring down his or her quarry? Have you heard of any respectable or responsible organization advocate repeal of the 2nd Amendment?"
First, the Second Amendment wasn't written to protect hunters. It was written right after we'd defeated an oppressive government who didn't want to admit that a scrappy bunch of poorly-armed colonists had defeated the world's military superpower in a war. Next, the answer to how "safe would our woods be if we had hunters shooting with" AR-15s is simple. While AR-15s wouldn't be a practical choice for deer-hunting, they wouldn't be any different than any other semi-automatic rifle. That's assuming, of course, that Mr. Erickson didn't pick an AR-15 handgun. Based on Mr. Erickson's questions, it isn't a stretch to think that he didn't know AR-15s came in handguns.
The answer to Mr. Erickson's final question is yes, though gun-grabbers cleverly phrase their question so it doesn't sound like they're advocating for the repeal of the Second Amendment. The truth is that many so-called 'mainstream' gun control organizations want to gut the Second Amendment.
As for the answer to "what is the comparison of number of people killed or injured when a handgun is used or an assault-style rifle?", this should give him his answer:
According to my trusted calculator, the number of murders committed by rifles in all of 2009 was less than 3 weeks of murders by handguns. For all the complaining about AR-15s, they're a proverbial drop in the bucket compared with handguns.
Posted Monday, March 26, 2018 12:58 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 26-Mar-18 10:25 AM
My understanding is that an AR-15 style rifle is the most common hunting rifle in the US. And the ignorance really shows when they talk about an AR-15 STYLE weapon, admitting that it is "ugly guns" they want to ban, and not something inherent to the function of the weapon. And an "ugly gun"
is the BEST weapon for repelling a home intruder without firing a shot. Of course, facts don't matter to these fools.
Making the public safer vs, pretentious public preening
This past Saturday, a bunch of liberal organizations sponsored the March for Our Lives in an attempt to start gutting the Second Amendment. That wasn't the students' intent. That's the AstroTurf organizations' intent. Organizations like "Everytown, Giffords, Move On, and Women's March LA - told BuzzFeed News they are helping with logistics, strategy, and planning for next month's March for Our Lives rally and beyond."
While those organizations rally people to ban scary-looking weapons that won't make the public safer, President Trump and the Republican Congress are taking concrete steps to make schools safer. One step they've taken is they've passed Sen. John Cornyn's Fix NICS legislation "a provision aimed at improving the national background check system in order to prevent felons and domestic abusers from purchasing firearms. Cornyn has been pushing for that measure since two days after the mass shooting at a church in Sutherland Springs, when he went to the Senate floor to proclaim the need for the "Fix NICS Act." NICS, the acronym for National Instant Criminal Background Check System, is where many believe part of the system failed in the Sutherland Springs incident. The shooter was an Air Force veteran with a record of domestic abuse convictions, meaning he should not have been allowed to purchase firearms."
This is an important step in keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't be allowed to buy guns. In Attorney General Jeff Sessions' op-ed , we learn that "We are also taking steps to ensure that the information accessible during a background check is both complete and up to date." Also, "we have already increased federal gun prosecutions to a 10-year high and violent crime prosecutions to a 25-year high - the highest level since records have been kept. But we are just getting started. With this new policy in place, and with our continued emphasis on federal prosecution of the most dangerous gun offenders, we intend to break these records again."
These aren't feel-good measures like the marchers want. These are things that will make a significant difference fairly quickly or that are already making a difference.
These are the adults taking action. They can't be confused with the student activists who demand that we "do something." These men shouldn't be confused with children like David Hogg :
Hogg, who became the de facto spokesman for the youth gun control movement after surviving the Valentine's Day mass shooting in Parkland, Fla., accused Rubio of prioritizing campaign contributions over the lives of students. "I'm going to start off by putting this price tag right here as a reminder for you guys to know how much Marco Rubio took for every student's life in Florida," Hogg said before a crowd of tens of thousands gathered in front of the Capitol building. If you listen real close, you can hear the people in power shaking. They've gotten used to being protective of their position, choosing the safety of inaction. Inaction is no longer safe, and to that we say no more," he said.
If there's going to be finger-pointing, it should be in Sheriff Scott Israel's direction. That coward did nothing to protect the students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas HS. Then he started pointing fingers at the NRA to take the spotlight off of his failures.
Posted Monday, March 26, 2018 8:39 AM
No comments.
Laffer exposes Hillary's pandering
It isn't surprising that Hillary isn't honest. She's pandered most of her life, saying outrageous things. After losing to Donald Trump, though, she's taken things to a higher level. Art Laffer and Stephen Moore wrote this op-ed to highlight how little she knows.
They wrote "Hillary Clinton is being universally panned by Republicans and Democrats for her rant last week in India against Trump voters. She boasted, 'I won the places that represent two-thirds of America's gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward.'" Then they showed her how wrong she is, saying "Here's the evidence. Of the 12 blue states that Hillary Clinton won by the largest percentage margins, Hawaii, California, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Washington, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Delaware, all but three of them lost residents through domestic migration (excluding immigration) over the last 10 years. In fact combined, all 12 Hillary Clinton states lost an average of 6 percent of their populations to net out-migration over the past decade. California and New York alone lost 3 million people in the past 10 years."
Then they wrote this:
Now let's contrast the Hillary Clinton states with the 12 states that had the largest percentage margin vote for Donald Trump. Every one of them, save Wyoming, was a net population gainer - West Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Idaho, South Dakota, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Nebraska and Kansas.
It isn't just that the states gained population, either:
IRS tax return data confirm that from 2006-2016 Hillary Clinton's states lost $113.6 billion in combined wealth, whereas Donald Trump's states gained $116.0 billion. The Hillary Clinton states are in a slow bleed. That is in no small part because the deep blue states that she carried have adopted the entire progressive playbook: High taxes rates. High welfare benefits. Heavy hand of regulation. Excessive minimum wages. War on fossil fuels. These states dutifully check all the progressive boxes.
And the U-Haul company can barely keep up with the demand for trucks and moving vans to get out of these worker paradises. A recent Gallup Poll asked Americans if they would want to move out of their current state of residency. Five states had more than 40 percent of its respondents answer yes: They were: Connecticut, New Jersey, Illinois, Rhode Island and Maryland. Hillary Clinton country.
Maryland is the only state with an economy that isn't tanking. That's because it's supported by the federal government.
[Video no longer available]
Connecticut has raised income and other taxes three times in the last four years and still has one of the most debilitating budget deficits in the nation. The pension systems are so many billions of dollars in the red, they are technically bankrupt.
Even when it comes to income inequality, the left's favorite measure of progressive success, blue states carried by Mrs. Clinton fare worse than red states. According to a 2016 report by the Economic Policy institute, three of the states with the largest gaps between rich and poor are those progressive icons New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts. Sure, Boston, Manhattan and Silicon Valley are booming as the rich prosper. But outside these areas are deep pockets of poverty and wage stagnation.
Socialism and crony capitalism don't work. They should be scrapped immediately.
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2018 12:38 AM
Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 27-Mar-18 12:43 AM
Hillary is a sore loser. She just can't get over the fact that she lost to President Trump. Even the Democrats are largely unimpressed with her.
Refugee resettlement in their own words
This evening, a pair of loyal readers of LFR sent me an email chain with a list of questions from an area resident who is worried about some things in his community. The question that caught my attention asked "What individuals have made determinations on what, when and how many refugees would be resettled to the greater St. Cloud area? What organizations do these individuals represent?" Karin Blythe replied "These two questions both strike at the federal role and responsibility in administering the Refugee Reception & Placement (Resettlement) Program. The State Department overseas the program through the Bureau of Population, Refugees & Migration, and they determine the location in which refugees are resettled. The State Department develops a Cooperative Agreement with affiliates, such as Lutheran Social Service of MN, that stipulates the services we must provide in order to maintain our contract with them. In that Cooperative Agreement, we are instructed to develop relationships with seven designated stakeholders in the community and provide information from our meetings with those stakeholders back to the State Department. They clearly detail the agenda for that meeting and then require that we provide notes and quarterly reports of the meeting. They use that information in their assessments for resettlement placement. The stakeholders required in that Cooperative Agreement are 1. State Refugee Coordinator, 2. State Refugee Health Coordinator, 3. Rep from Local Governance, 4. Rep from Local Public Health, 5. Rep from Social Services, 6. Rep from Public Safety, and 7. Rep from Education. You attended our most recent convening of that gathering."
I'm betting that Ms. Blythe doesn't realize that she just admitted that the State Department didn't obey the Refugee Act of 1980. I'm betting that Ms. Blythe doesn't know that 8 U.S. Code 1522(b) states that 'The director shall develop and implement in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and state and local governments policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States."
8 U.S. Code 1522(c)(2) states "The director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement will provide for a mechanism whereby representatives of local affiliates of voluntary agencies regularly, not less than quarterly, meet with representatives of state and local governments to plan and coordinate in advance of their arrival the appropriate placement of refugees amongst various states and localities."
First, the director being talked about in 8 U.S. Code 1522(b) is the director of the office of "the Minnesota Office of Refugee Resettlement." Next, it's worth noting that Ms. Blythe states unambiguously that the State Department "develops a Cooperative Agreement with affiliates, such as Lutheran Social Service of MN" and that this Cooperative Agreement "stipulates the services" Volags like LSS of Minnesota "must provide" to maintain their contract with the State Department.
In other words, Ms. Blythe thinks that the State Department dictates to the Volag what they must do and that the local government is just to be informed. She clearly isn't informed. Other things that can be learned from Ms. Blythe's reply are that she anticipates refugees needing to use lots of health care and that they'll use lots of things from Social Services.
In Councilman Jeff Goerger's resolution, Goerger insinuated that there wasn't much of a cost to city taxpayers. Based on the stakeholders list, I'm betting that there's a substantial cost to taxpayers.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2018 2:33 AM
Comment 1 by liz at 27-Mar-18 02:13 PM
Thank you Gary for another amazing update.
I have not shared this before, but the video in your post made me think about this: I went to a meeting, in St Cloud, that was supposed to be about stopping our area from being infiltrated by Nazis. It turned out to be a cover for an Antifa meeting and at one point Justin (see video) with GRIP/ISAIAH made the statement that they might as well just rip off the band aid and hold a communist rally.
I am deeply troubled that none of these people will have the greater conversation with us; we need a public debate. They have no understanding of what the Welcoming resolution actually is, nor do they understand that it came from the UN, nor do they understand settlement as defined by the Muslim Brotherhood.
This meeting in the video was a set up. At no point has the conversation that should have happened, due to Councilman Johnson's resolution, been allowed to take place. It is in no one's best interest to continue down this dangerous path.
The 'sanctuary' backlash starts
I love it when uppity peasants tell a rogue government to obey the laws of the land. That's what's happening in California with regards to their unconstitutional sanctuary state law. The people are telling Gov. Moonbeam, aka Jerry Brown, and Xavier Becerra, his smug little State Attorney General, that they won't obey the dictates of SB 54 .
Orange County Supervisor Shawn Nelson said "These state laws are preempted by federal law. Our officers actually face penalties under state law if they so much as talk to federal agents for the wrong thing. That's just unacceptable and it's contrary to federal law."
Nelson jumped onboard of a resolution initially brought on by Orange County Supervisor Michelle Steel that would condemn the state's sanctuary laws. She later added wording that would direct the county's public counsel to take legal action. "We cannot allow this to happen in Orange County and we need to protect our families and our homes here in Orange County," she said. "And that means bolstering our cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and stopping our county from becoming a sanctuary for criminal illegal immigrants."
That's just the start. Here's more insurrection:
Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens, along with other California sheriffs, spoke out in opposition to the law, SB 54. On Monday, Hutchens made inmate release dates - including for those in the country illegally - public in response to the state law.
"We have an obligation to safeguard our community and we will use every tool available to help hold criminals accountable," said Orange County Undersheriff Don Barnes. "Our inability to relinquish these individuals to the custody of ICE causes them to be returned to the communities which they prey upon."
Saying that things are getting tense is understatement:
[Video no longer available]
I'm not on the ground in California but, if I had to guess, I'd guess that things will get more heated. Brown and Becerra overplayed their hands. Soon, they'll pay the price for their arrogance.
Posted Tuesday, March 27, 2018 10:16 AM
No comments.
