Why would it be wrong for the U.S to re-locate illegal immigrants to Sanctuary Cities?

[Coyote]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

Your dear leader flew people all over the country, many were housed at military bases in MA, OK and CA.

.

Yes, in fact that is what is normally done. Unlike your Dear Leader who is talking about singling our specific places for retribution.

How is giving them what they asked for retribution? Theys loves themselves some illegals.

.

You know it is. That is why you support it.

We don’t need this sort of governance.

 

[OKTexas]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

Your dear leader flew people all over the country, many were housed at military bases in MA, OK and CA.

.

Yes, in fact that is what is normally done. Unlike your Dear Leader who is talking about singling our specific places for retribution.

How is giving them what they asked for retribution? Theys loves themselves some illegals.

.

You know it is. That is why you support it.

We don’t need this sort of governance.

We don't need city and State governments harboring illegals either.


.

 

[danielpalos]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

All foreign nationals in the US should have a federal id. for civil purposes.

Blue States need merely consider new cities in more optimal locations.

 

[HenryBHough]

If government can't do it then perhaps we conservatives could crowd-fund a few thousand bus tickets.

Put me down for enough for two families of up to seven children each.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

How is it retribution?

The left support these people coming here anyway they can get them. They tell us these are wonderful family people only looking to support themselves. But now that Trump wants to give the left what they want, it's considered punishment by the liberals?

Well if you consider this punishment, then what you are saying is that Democrats want to punish the entire country by letting these people in.

 

[pismoe]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

------------------------------------- i have changed my mind [maybe] . It almost like this has been the setup since Sanctuary cities were setup in the 80s or thereabouts and now is the time to fill them up with illegal aliens . Will they get to vote and collect welfare ?? Will they get to set up a government or vote for a government inside the USA in Sanctuary cities ?? Will they get to move to nicer areas in the USA ?? Yeah might be a TRUMP Engineered way for the 'illegals' to set up LEGAL camps in the USA for illegal aliens . Mighta been the plan since Sanctuary Cities were set up in the 80s or thereabouts . [and yeah , i like the TRUMP but i don't know if i like this idea or plan]

 

[Coyote]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

How is it retribution?

The left support these people coming here anyway they can get them. They tell us these are wonderful family people only looking to support themselves. But now that Trump wants to give the left what they want, it's considered punishment by the liberals?

Well if you consider this punishment, then what you are saying is that Democrats want to punish the entire country by letting these people in.

It is clearly political retribution. Even you recognize that. Do really think an action like that by the POTUS is appropriate?

“Those people” are amnesty seekers. That is a legal, not illegal status. Do you and Trump have a problem with legal immigrants?

 

[pismoe]

can these illegal aliens in Sanc. cities ever be rounded up and deported ?? Sending them to Sanc. cities to populate would just make that harder . The plan sounds like ONE Poster on the boards idea [that i am thinking of] to let illegals into American cities to buy property , pay taxes and fit into society .

 

[pismoe]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

How is it retribution?

The left support these people coming here anyway they can get them. They tell us these are wonderful family people only looking to support themselves. But now that Trump wants to give the left what they want, it's considered punishment by the liberals?

Well if you consider this punishment, then what you are saying is that Democrats want to punish the entire country by letting these people in.

It is clearly political retribution. Even you recognize that. Do really think an action like that by the POTUS is appropriate?

“Those people” are amnesty seekers. That is a legal, not illegal status. Do you and Trump have a problem with legal immigrants?

----------------------------------- yes , i do Coyote !!

 

[Zorro!]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Trump's threat worked

Friday 12:38 PM:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump Apr 12
Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only....

Friday 4:45 PM:

AP: "The Latest: Court allows return of asylum seekers to Mexico."

The background is simple. On Monday, Judge Richard Seeborg ruled that we must take in anyone who claims asylum and let them stay in the USA until their hearing. Illegal aliens often skip the hearings and the deportation that goes with them.

In other words, Seeborg single-handedly erased our border.

Seeborg is the same obstructionist judge who earlier blocked the Trump administration from restoring the citizenship question on the census that Obama had unilaterally removed in the 2010 Census. That unconstitutional decision is on appeal.

Seeborg is one of the hundreds of political operatives Obama embedded in the judiciary for the rest of their lives. They are part of the resistance.

The president just told them: sanctuary this.

A three-member panel of the Ninth backed down.

The Recorder reported, "the panel — made up of Circuit Judges Diarmuid O’Scannlain, William Fletcher and Paul Watford — has stayed Seeborg’s nationwide injunction until it can hear the government’s emergency motion. It set a Tuesday morning deadline for plaintiffs in the case to file an opposition to the government’s request."

How does a district judge get the power to issue a nationwide injunction? Congress needs to limit rulings by judges like Seeborg to their district.

Or better yet, the Supreme Court should.

But that battle is for a future day.

For now, President Trump succeeded in keeping illegal aliens out of the country until they can prove they really are refugees.

And we all had fun watching Donald J Trump checkmate the opposition.

 

[Coyote]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Trump's threat worked

Friday 12:38 PM:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump Apr 12
Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only....

Friday 4:45 PM:

AP: "The Latest: Court allows return of asylum seekers to Mexico."

The background is simple. On Monday, Judge Richard Seeborg ruled that we must take in anyone who claims asylum and let them stay in the USA until their hearing. Illegal aliens often skip the hearings and the deportation that goes with them.

In other words, Seeborg single-handedly erased our border.

Seeborg is the same obstructionist judge who earlier blocked the Trump administration from restoring the citizenship question on the census that Obama had unilaterally removed in the 2010 Census. That unconstitutional decision is on appeal.

Seeborg is one of the hundreds of political operatives Obama embedded in the judiciary for the rest of their lives. They are part of the resistance.

The president just told them: sanctuary this.

A three-member panel of the Ninth backed down.

The Recorder reported, "the panel — made up of Circuit Judges Diarmuid O’Scannlain, William Fletcher and Paul Watford — has stayed Seeborg’s nationwide injunction until it can hear the government’s emergency motion. It set a Tuesday morning deadline for plaintiffs in the case to file an opposition to the government’s request."

How does a district judge get the power to issue a nationwide injunction? Congress needs to limit rulings by judges like Seeborg to their district.

Or better yet, the Supreme Court should.

But that battle is for a future day.

For now, President Trump succeeded in keeping illegal aliens out of the country until they can prove they really are refugees.

And we all had fun watching Donald J Trump checkmate the opposition.

More Trump lies....

Majority of undocumented immigrants show up for court

 

[BrokeLoser]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Trump's threat worked

Friday 12:38 PM:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump Apr 12
Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only....

Friday 4:45 PM:

AP: "The Latest: Court allows return of asylum seekers to Mexico."

The background is simple. On Monday, Judge Richard Seeborg ruled that we must take in anyone who claims asylum and let them stay in the USA until their hearing. Illegal aliens often skip the hearings and the deportation that goes with them.

In other words, Seeborg single-handedly erased our border.

Seeborg is the same obstructionist judge who earlier blocked the Trump administration from restoring the citizenship question on the census that Obama had unilaterally removed in the 2010 Census. That unconstitutional decision is on appeal.

Seeborg is one of the hundreds of political operatives Obama embedded in the judiciary for the rest of their lives. They are part of the resistance.

The president just told them: sanctuary this.

A three-member panel of the Ninth backed down.

The Recorder reported, "the panel — made up of Circuit Judges Diarmuid O’Scannlain, William Fletcher and Paul Watford — has stayed Seeborg’s nationwide injunction until it can hear the government’s emergency motion. It set a Tuesday morning deadline for plaintiffs in the case to file an opposition to the government’s request."

How does a district judge get the power to issue a nationwide injunction? Congress needs to limit rulings by judges like Seeborg to their district.

Or better yet, the Supreme Court should.

But that battle is for a future day.

For now, President Trump succeeded in keeping illegal aliens out of the country until they can prove they really are refugees.

And we all had fun watching Donald J Trump checkmate the opposition.

Donny T continues to bitchslap the living fuck out of LefTarded pukes daily.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Trump is simply calling progs on their felony stupidity. Prog-speak is a fraud, they just say things to sound cool. Can't expect them to back it up.

By some measure its a mistake calling a bluff (progs) with another bluff (Trump). Thing is, what if a city took him up on it?............................Ooooops, I forgot, Trump's smarter than I am. What would happen is chaos in the cities. Citizens would be very displeased, and they wouldn't blame Trump would they? Prog-speak might, but they tarded.

Fucking south of us better figure out what birth control is. This is NOT the result of "oppression", asylum or anything like. They simply live in a shit-hole, so why populate a shit hole? While not PC, it's a logical and historical fact they'd bring a lot of that with them too. That and progs are welcoming their asses. After all, illegals are more important than U.S. citizens.

 

[Rustic]

Seems like something Nixon would do

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Trump's threat worked

Friday 12:38 PM:

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump Apr 12
Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only....

Friday 4:45 PM:

AP: "The Latest: Court allows return of asylum seekers to Mexico."

The background is simple. On Monday, Judge Richard Seeborg ruled that we must take in anyone who claims asylum and let them stay in the USA until their hearing. Illegal aliens often skip the hearings and the deportation that goes with them.

In other words, Seeborg single-handedly erased our border.

Seeborg is the same obstructionist judge who earlier blocked the Trump administration from restoring the citizenship question on the census that Obama had unilaterally removed in the 2010 Census. That unconstitutional decision is on appeal.

Seeborg is one of the hundreds of political operatives Obama embedded in the judiciary for the rest of their lives. They are part of the resistance.

The president just told them: sanctuary this.

A three-member panel of the Ninth backed down.

The Recorder reported, "the panel — made up of Circuit Judges Diarmuid O’Scannlain, William Fletcher and Paul Watford — has stayed Seeborg’s nationwide injunction until it can hear the government’s emergency motion. It set a Tuesday morning deadline for plaintiffs in the case to file an opposition to the government’s request."

How does a district judge get the power to issue a nationwide injunction? Congress needs to limit rulings by judges like Seeborg to their district.

Or better yet, the Supreme Court should.

But that battle is for a future day.

For now, President Trump succeeded in keeping illegal aliens out of the country until they can prove they really are refugees.

And we all had fun watching Donald J Trump checkmate the opposition.

More Trump lies....

Majority of undocumented immigrants show up for court

They show up for their first appearances to make a plea. They don't show up for their final appearance when the court decides their fate.

 

[MaryL]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Well, I live in a sanctuary city and although I relish the irony, I want Trump to fix the problem, NOT MAKE IT WORSE. Punish sanctuary cities by taking away government funding in other ways...anything that would stick it to liberals we don't want legitimizing illegals. I don't know, make it mandatory to hire people that have a real actual birth certificate, identity . Births certificates, ( Have one) DNA fingerprints ....a national identity card. Why do people have a problem with that?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply. Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Because it is an abuse of power to single out particular cities for partisan retribution.

How is it retribution?

The left support these people coming here anyway they can get them. They tell us these are wonderful family people only looking to support themselves. But now that Trump wants to give the left what they want, it's considered punishment by the liberals?

Well if you consider this punishment, then what you are saying is that Democrats want to punish the entire country by letting these people in.

It is clearly political retribution. Even you recognize that. Do really think an action like that by the POTUS is appropriate?

“Those people” are amnesty seekers. That is a legal, not illegal status. Do you and Trump have a problem with legal immigrants?

No, why do you?

Please explain to me how it's retribution when Trump puts these people in liberal cities and it's not retribution when Democrats put them everywhere else. If these people being in our country is a negative, then they should not be in our country period. If they are not a negative as Democrats claim, they should have no problem welcoming in all those asylum seekers.

If Hillary were President, and she got disgusted with the Republicans demand for lower corporate taxes, and she allowed lower corporate taxes in red and purple states, how would that be retribution to Republicans? We would welcome such a move by the President.

 

[MaryL]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply of poor cheap laborers . Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Well, I live in a sanctuary city and although I relish the irony, I want Trump to fix the problem, NOT MAKE IT WORSE. Punish sanctuary cities by taking away government funding in other ways...anything that would stick it to liberals, we don't want to legitimizing illegals. I don't know, make it mandatory to hire people that have a real actual birth certificate, identity . Births certificates, ( Have one) tied to DNA fingerprints ....a national identity card. Why do people have a problem with that?

 

[Zorro!]

I don't understand the counter argument. How is this political when the same politicians are welcoming such illegal immigration, giving them free stuff they don't even give Americans and refuse to fix the problem?

It's honestly mind boggling that anyone who openly supports Sanctuary Cities would be against this idea. It makes perfect sense. The places that want illegal immigration and defend them can now have an unlimited supply of poor cheap laborers . Other communities that don't want lawlessness and breaching of their sovereignty will be void of it.

Well, I live in a sanctuary city and although I relish the irony, I want Trump to fix the problem, NOT MAKE IT WORSE. Punish sanctuary cities by taking away government funding in other ways...anything that would stick it to liberals, we don't want to legitimizing illegals. I don't know, make it mandatory to hire people that have a real actual birth certificate, identity . Births certificates, ( Have one) tied to DNA fingerprints ....a national identity card. Why do people have a problem with that?

The Courts have blocked his attempts to curb Federal funding to Sanctuary Cities.

 

[WEATHER53]

These people are tired from their long travel and they need safety security and sanctuary. While a pleasant name and place to be.