Miami Dade revokes Sanctuary status . . .

[MaggieD]

By a vote of 9 to 3, the board decided to revoke their Sanctuary status and enforce the law. Is the beginning of capitulation?

 

[Van Basten]

Let some time pass before we see this as anything more than theatrics.

 

[MaggieD]

Let some time pass before we see this as anything more than theatrics.

THEATRICS. In what way?

 

[ocean515]

By a vote of 9 to 3, the board decided to revoke their Sanctuary status and enforce the law. Is the beginning of capitulation?

It's fascinating that upholding the law is seen as a extraordinary development.

Regardless, it's a development I hope becomes common place across the country.

It's good to see a government shed the threats and appeals to emotion and apply the letter of the law equally to all people.

 

[code1211]

By a vote of 9 to 3, the board decided to revoke their Sanctuary status and enforce the law. Is the beginning of capitulation?

The other sanctuary entities are waiting to see if Trump is serious.

Kind of makes you wonder what it is they need to see to believe he's serious, but there you are.

Not much is being risked, though, by these cities. In New York City, as an example, the total annual budget was a whopping $77.7 billion for 2016. The tiny fraction of that donated by the Feds is only $10.4 Billion.

Mayor Bill de Blasio will probably not even notice that it's gone.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-yo...with-increases-for-law-enforcement-1423514815

Sanctuary cities risk billions in federal funding in defiance of Trump - Nov. 19, 2016

 

[MaggieD]

The other sanctuary entities are waiting to see if Trump is serious.

Kind of makes you wonder what it is they need to see to believe he's serious, but there you are.

Not much is being risked, though, by these cities. In New York City, as an example, the total annual budget was a whopping $77.7 billion for 2016. The tiny fraction of that donated by the Feds is only $10.4 Billion.

Mayor Bill de Blasio will probably not even notice that it's gone.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-yo...with-increases-for-law-enforcement-1423514815

Sanctuary cities risk billions in federal funding in defiance of Trump - Nov. 19, 2016

I sure don't agree with you that 14.7% is hardly noticeable. I doubt that taxpayers would agree with you. I think that's where the push is going to come from actually. If I lived within the city limits of Chicago for example, I would be furious that the mayor was going to allow felons here illegally to remain here illegally… And actually help defend them with my tax dollars! I'd say that's political suicide. But that's just me.

 

[code1211]

It's fascinating that upholding the law is seen as a extraordinary development.

Regardless, it's a development I hope becomes common place across the country.

It's good to see a government shed the threats and appeals to emotion and apply the letter of the law equally to all people.

It's refreshing that we have a President who places some value on the rule of law rather than the feudal system of reward, bribes and federal power exerted for political party benefit employed under Holder and Lynch.

Of course, this is another instance in which the "poor and minorities are hardest hit" so we will hear nothing about the "rule of law" from the media.

The "rule of law" as opposed to the favoritism for certain classes was presented during my educational years as a superior feature of our legal system. Not much good has been said about this feature of our system in recent years.

 

[Thoreau72]

It's refreshing that we have a President who places some value on the rule of law rather than the feudal system of reward, bribes and federal power exerted for political party benefit employed under Holder and Lynch.

Of course, this is another instance in which the "poor and minorities are hardest hit" so we will hear nothing about the "rule of law" from the media.

The "rule of law" as opposed to the favoritism for certain classes was presented during my educational years as a superior feature of our legal system. Not much good has been said about this feature of our system in recent years.

That's because there is no rule of law in this country. At least not the supreme Law of the Land, the US Constitution. Immigration laws are trivial pursuit compared to Habeas Corpus and the Fourth Amendment, both of which have been neutralized by our elected officials.

 

[code1211]

I sure don't agree with you that 14.7% is hardly noticeable. I doubt that taxpayers would agree with you. I think that's where the push is going to come from actually. If I lived within the city limits of Chicago for example, I would be furious that the mayor was going to allow felons here illegally to remain here illegally… And actually help defend them with my tax dollars! I'd say that's political suicide. But that's just me.

So you think that Mayor de Blasio will notice this? Hmmm... Go figure.

Well, if it really is a large part of the budget, then I guess we'll see the strength of his conviction.

The moral underpinning of all politicians, especially Democrats, has a rock solid foundation of an immutable and unerring sense of what is morally right.

Taking money away from any politician, this one in particular, could not possibly impact the accurate reading of his moral compass.

Here's an image of a politician's moral compass:

 

[notquiteright]

It's refreshing that we have a President who places some value on the rule of law rather than the feudal system of reward, bribes and federal power exerted for political party benefit.

I don't think you know what the word feudal means... Trump has installed close family as his entourage, loyal vassals in key positions in his royal court. Pretty damn feudal to me... :roll:

He rants against companies moving jobs out of the country and then rewards SOME of those companies for 'staying' with rewards, bribes. Pretty damn feudal to me.

The only part I agree with is he isn't doing this for the Republican Party, he is doing this just for himself... eace

 

[code1211]

That's because there is no rule of law in this country. At least not the supreme Law of the Land, the US Constitution. Immigration laws are trivial pursuit compared to Habeas Corpus and the Fourth Amendment, both of which have been neutralized by our elected officials.

The Supreme Court has a long and checkered history of handing down rulings that have much more to do with maintaining peace than with upholding the law.

The Shrieking Liberal Elites engage, once every four years, in lamenting the sad state of affairs in which Blacks are arrested for a DWB. Obama referenced this while in office. Instead of trying to affect the situation, he, again, used it only as a political bludgeon.

However, the other side of the same coin, is favorable treatment for the elites of the political establishment. Hillary goes free while an unconnected swabbie does a year in jail for far less.

How many times did we hear from our government or from the media elites that these three incidents/actions are an indication of the same cancer in our legal system?

How many times do we hear that when the Supremes make rulings that depart from law they thereby injure the population, the government and the integrity of our law?

It's high time that the rule of law be debated. Trump will make this happen whether the media wants it or not.

Imagine that... The Ted Baxters who prance around pretending to know something might actually have to know something. I wonder if their heads will literally blow up while on the air.

 

[Port & Starboard]

The liberals refuse to provide a logical answer for the illegals, refugees, and other immigrants who replace black Americans in the job market, who also happen to be the hardest hit demographic as a result of these nonsensical immigration policies.

 

[Thoreau72]

The Supreme Court has a long and checkered history of handing down rulings that have much more to do with maintaining peace than with upholding the law.

The Shrieking Liberal Elites engage, once every four years, in lamenting the sad state of affairs in which Blacks are arrested for a DWB. Obama referenced this while in office. Instead of trying to affect the situation, he, again, used it only as a political bludgeon.

However, the other side of the same coin, is favorable treatment for the elites of the political establishment. Hillary goes free while an unconnected swabbie does a year in jail for far less.

How many times did we hear from our government or from the media elites that these three incidents/actions are an indication of the same cancer in our legal system?

How many times do we hear that when the Supremes make rulings that depart from law they thereby injure the population, the government and the integrity of our law?

It's high time that the rule of law be debated. Trump will make this happen whether the media wants it or not.

Imagine that... The Ted Baxters who prance around pretending to know something might actually have to know something. I wonder if their heads will literally blow up while on the air.

If he had wanted to debate, better yet ENFORCE, the rule of law, he might have kept Flynn in his administration, for Flynn broke no law.

Otherwise, Trump has already shown typical POTUS disregard for the rule of law, Nixon style, with his "travel ban". That ban would not have made this country any more safe than groping Granny at the airline terminal does.

 

[Henrin]

If he had wanted to debate, better yet ENFORCE, the rule of law, he might have kept Flynn in his administration, for Flynn broke no law.

Otherwise, Trump has already shown typical POTUS disregard for the rule of law, Nixon style, with his "travel ban". That ban would not have made this country any more safe than groping Granny at the airline terminal does.

And for that matter, why in the **** is the Logan act still around? It's pretty obvious that stopping private citizens from talking to foreign nations about policy decision has no real reason to exist since private citizens don't even have authority to do anything in that regard. It's also quite apparent that punishing people for speaking policy with other nations is against the first amendment.

So what, if I talk to Putin about foreign policy I'm going to harm the nation? Ummmmm....how? I don't even have the authority to do anything from our talks, so wtf am I going to do to affect anything? Is Putin going to walk away thinking, **** me, that **** was awesome, I'm going to try that same idea against people from the US that actually HAS authority? The US government is so paranoid.

 

[code1211]

I don't think you know what the word feudal means... Trump has installed close family as his entourage, loyal vassals in key positions in his royal court. Pretty damn feudal to me... :roll:

He rants against companies moving jobs out of the country and then rewards SOME of those companies for 'staying' with rewards, bribes. Pretty damn feudal to me.

The only part I agree with is he isn't doing this for the Republican Party, he is doing this just for himself... eace

The most recent revocation of a regulation flies in the face of what you are saying. That revocation saved the jobs of 70,000 miners in the country.

How is placing talented professionals into top positions to execute the policies of the country for the benefit of the people doing something for "himself"?

I graduated from college in the Carter years and was one of the mind numbed robots who voted for Carter in his first term. After that debacle, I voted for Reagan. Trump is the closest thing to Reagan we've had since.

Regarding his appointees, he seems to be choosing people that are eminently qualified to head the Federal Agencies and is surrounding himself with people he trusts and who have given him advice and executed programs that have made him successful in the past.

Out of curiosity, what process would YOU use to populate the positions most important to your success if you had attained a similar position? The one used by Kennedy? Roosevelt? Spoiler alert: They used EXACTLY THE SAME PROCESS.

 

[code1211]

If he had wanted to debate, better yet ENFORCE, the rule of law, he might have kept Flynn in his administration, for Flynn broke no law.

Otherwise, Trump has already shown typical POTUS disregard for the rule of law, Nixon style, with his "travel ban". That ban would not have made this country any more safe than groping Granny at the airline terminal does.

I disagree.

This raises the awareness of the issue. The issue has a by-product of refugees, but refugees is not the issue. The real issue is dysfunctional countries that have no effective process or ability to properly regulate emigration.

What rule did Nixon implement that is a parallel to this?

 

[Thoreau72]

And for that matter, why in the **** is the Logan act still around? It's pretty obvious that stopping private citizens from talking to foreign nations about policy decision has no real reason to exist since private citizens don't even have authority to do anything in that regard. It's also quite apparent that punishing people for speaking policy with other nations is against the first amendment.

So what, if I talk to Putin about foreign policy I'm going to harm the nation? Ummmmm....how? I don't even have the authority to do anything from our talks, so wtf am I going to do to affect anything? Is Putin going to walk away thinking, **** me, that **** was awesome, I'm going to try that same idea against people from the US that actually HAS authority? The US government is so paranoid.

Probably greater than its paranoia is the desire to have military conflicts cooking so that the military industrial complex can make lotsa $, and advance US hegemony.

 

[code1211]

And for that matter, why in the **** is the Logan act still around? It's pretty obvious that stopping private citizens from talking to foreign nations about policy decision has no real reason to exist since private citizens don't even have authority to do anything in that regard. It's also quite apparent that punishing people for speaking policy with other nations is against the first amendment.

So what, if I talk to Putin about foreign policy I'm going to harm the nation? Ummmmm....how? I don't even have the authority to do anything from our talks, so wtf am I going to do to affect anything? Is Putin going to walk away thinking, **** me, that **** was awesome, I'm going to try that same idea against people from the US that actually HAS authority? The US government is so paranoid.

As with almost anything in Washington DC, this has nothing to do with anything that is logical, legal, moral or helpful.

It is political, pure and simple.

 

[holbritter]

I sure don't agree with you that 14.7% is hardly noticeable. I doubt that taxpayers would agree with you. I think that's where the push is going to come from actually. If I lived within the city limits of Chicago for example, I would be furious that the mayor was going to allow felons here illegally to remain here illegally… And actually help defend them with my tax dollars! I'd say that's political suicide. But that's just me.

NYC will probably not notice only because Cuomo will just take from upstate to fill any gap.

 

[Thoreau72]

I disagree.

This raises the awareness of the issue. The issue has a by-product of refugees, but refugees is not the issue. The real issue is dysfunctional countries that have no effective process or ability to properly regulate emigration.

What rule did Nixon implement that is a parallel to this?

I was comparing Nixon's philosophy that "if the POTUS does it, it's not illegal" or words to that effect. With his travel ban, Donald is communicating the same message.

Not sure exactly which refugees you refer to, but the vast majority of the refugees burdening Europe right now are Syrian refugees created by US bombs and rockets in the military aggression we practice against that country.

 

[notquiteright]

By a vote of 9 to 3, the board decided to revoke their Sanctuary status and enforce the law. Is the beginning of capitulation?

Not all Hispanics are seen as equal under the law (perhaps by some Anglos but not the Feds)

Miami Dade is home for just under 50% of all Cuban Americans, they are almost half of Miami Dade's population.

Cubans are not subject to the same immigration laws the rest of the Hispanic World faces. Once a Cuban's feet hit dry land they are 99% certain they will be American citizens and never will know the worry of a knock on the door decades later arresting them.

Cubans are roughly 4% of the estimated Hispanic population. 57% of the Cuban population is foreign born and they are US Citizens as mentioned above in a microwave fast process compared to ALL other immigrants attempting to gain Citizenship. Cubans are the most concentrated Hispanic group- 68% of all Cubans live in Florida. 63% of Cubans call themselves Cuban most often, 19% American.

Mexicans are the largest Non Cuban Hispanic group. 33% of them are foreign born. 57% call themselves Mexican, 23% American.

As many Hispanics would be happy to tell you (look at me) Cubans ain't like us- they have little, if any, understanding of what most immigrants from ALL other nations on this planet have to go through to be here. Rubio ain't like us- he has little, if any, empathy for those who live in the shadow world, who wait decades for citizenship (but gladly uses it to bash any pathway to citizenship for his 'fellow' Hispanics)

Jul 2015 he was for a Pathway, Sep 2015 he was 'firmly' against it. He ain't like us. Cubans ain't like us.

Until a non Cuban Hispanic city 'capitulates' I wouldn't get to 'concerned'.... eace

Forgot pew poll 2013 for Cubans and Mexicans

 

[MaggieD]

Not all Hispanics are seen as equal under the law (perhaps by some Anglos but not the Feds)

Miami Dade is home for just under 50% of all Cuban Americans, they are almost half of Miami Dade's population.

Cubans are not subject to the same immigration laws the rest of the Hispanic World faces. Once a Cuban's feet hit dry land they are 99% certain they will be American citizens and never will know the worry of a knock on the door decades later arresting them.

Cubans are roughly 4% of the estimated Hispanic population. 57% of the Cuban population is foreign born and they are US Citizens as mentioned above in a microwave fast process compared to ALL other immigrants attempting to gain Citizenship. Cubans are the most concentrated Hispanic group- 68% of all Cubans live in Florida. 63% of Cubans call themselves Cuban most often, 19% American.

Mexicans are the largest Non Cuban Hispanic group. 33% of them are foreign born. 57% call themselves Mexican, 23% American.

As many Hispanics would be happy to tell you (look at me) Cubans ain't like us- they have little, if any, understanding of what most immigrants from ALL other nations on this planet have to go through to be here. Rubio ain't like us- he has little, if any, empathy for those who live in the shadow world, who wait decades for citizenship (but gladly uses it to bash any pathway to citizenship for his 'fellow' Hispanics)

Jul 2015 he was for a Pathway, Sep 2015 he was 'firmly' against it. He ain't like us. Cubans ain't like us.

Until a non Cuban Hispanic city 'capitulates' I wouldn't get to 'concerned'.... eace

Forgot pew poll 2013 for Cubans and Mexicans

Very informative. Thank you.

Edit... was interested in reading about Wet Foot Dry Foot. Obama ended that on January 8th. I wonder if that has something to do with Miami's decision.

 

[code1211]

I was comparing Nixon's philosophy that "if the POTUS does it, it's not illegal" or words to that effect. With his travel ban, Donald is communicating the same message.

Not sure exactly which refugees you refer to, but the vast majority of the refugees burdening Europe right now are Syrian refugees created by US bombs and rockets in the military aggression we practice against that country.

There are, I think, US munitions being used there.

However, the Russians are there and the Syrian Regime (a Russian ally) and the rebels and ISIS. They all seem to be working pretty hard to do damage. It's a really bad, complicated situation.

Are they all using exclusively the arms of the US?

The immigration order did not mention a religion as I understand it, but I have not read the thing. The courts issued a stay because they thought that it must mean what they conjured it to mean. I don't understand or agree with the Courts creating meanings where those meanings don't exist. It is done, though.

A new EO will issued shortly, as I understand it, and we'll see what the courts do with this.

Despite the best efforts of the best law enforcement agencies of the entire world, the acts of Islamic terror continue. In the link below, it looks like 2016 may have shown a reduction from 2015, but still quite a bit. Some acts that have witnesses who report the perpetrator yelling, "Allah Ak-bar", but who cannot be specifically linked to a particular radical group are therefore not listed in all cases.

There is a problem, but the refugees are only a by-product of the problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

 

[notquiteright]

The most recent revocation of a regulation flies in the face of what you are saying. That revocation saved the jobs of 70,000 miners in the country. How is placing talented professionals into top positions to execute the policies of the country for the benefit of the people doing something for "himself"? I graduated from college in the Carter years and was one of the mind numbed robots who voted for Carter in his first term. After that debacle, I voted for Reagan. Trump is the closest thing to Reagan we've had since. Regarding his appointees, he seems to be choosing people that are eminently qualified to head the Federal Agencies and is surrounding himself with people he trusts and who have given him advice and executed programs that have made him successful in the past. Out of curiosity, what process would YOU use to populate the positions most important to your success if you had attained a similar position? The one used by Kennedy? Roosevelt? Spoiler alert: They used EXACTLY THE SAME PROCESS.

Nice dodge but you claimed the end of a feudal system and yet there it is... the feudal system alive and well... :doh

Being 'closest' the Reagan is no high praise to me. Reagan turned the largest CREDITOR nation into the largest DEBTOR nation....

His cabal of family and friends are clumsy at best, his spokes people stumbling, mumbling and just plain confused, he could use some good advice on how to roll out big shifts in Federal policy as his EO was quickly shut down (and is staying down vindicating the 'so-called' judge). Trump is in over his head and living in a alternate world where everything is going smoothly and 'the people' are behind him.

His campaign stunt to Florida was to stroke his ego and give him the impression 'the people' still love him. Town halls across the nation say otherwise, some GOP politicians are holding 'electronic' town halls to avoid people they don't want to hear, give the rest of us a view of the opposition.

The 'saving' of coal miner jobs is like 'saving' the jobs for buggy whip makers... time are a'changing. Soft dirty coal so deep underground the only way to profitably mine it is to sacrifice a few miners each year. Power plants are replacing decaying coal plants with modern, cheaper and far more flexible NG plants, mine the coal but the market has moved on- like whalers bringing in the oil that no one uses anymore.

Nice try though... eace

 

[code1211]

Nice dodge but you claimed the end of a feudal system and yet there it is... the feudal system alive and well... :doh

Being 'closest' the Reagan is no high praise to me. Reagan turned the largest CREDITOR nation into the largest DEBTOR nation....

His cabal of family and friends are clumsy at best, his spokes people stumbling, mumbling and just plain confused, he could use some good advice on how to roll out big shifts in Federal policy as his EO was quickly shut down (and is staying down vindicating the 'so-called' judge). Trump is in over his head and living in a alternate world where everything is going smoothly and 'the people' are behind him.

His campaign stunt to Florida was to stroke his ego and give him the impression 'the people' still love him. Town halls across the nation say otherwise, some GOP politicians are holding 'electronic' town halls to avoid people they don't want to hear, give the rest of us a view of the opposition.

The 'saving' of coal miner jobs is like 'saving' the jobs for buggy whip makers... time are a'changing. Soft dirty coal so deep underground the only way to profitably mine it is to sacrifice a few miners each year. Power plants are replacing decaying coal plants with modern, cheaper and far more flexible NG plants, mine the coal but the market has moved on- like whalers bringing in the oil that no one uses anymore.

Nice try though... eace

You seemed to be upset with the process employed by Trump to people his administration's posts. As a contrast in the process, Obama chose Hillary and we suffered the results. Trump chose Tillerson. One is a political reward and the other is an appointee with a ridiculously overqualified resume and a record of astounding international achievement.

I asked only one question of you in my post and you seem to have missed it. I'll try again:

"what process would YOU use to populate the positions most important to your success if you had attained a similar position?"