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

[Ray From Cleveland]

When Republicans try to curb immigration be it illegal or fake asylum claims, the Democrats or their activist judges step in to stop Trump. So you want to blame Trump.

yup... Trump took a non-issue and turned it into a crisis, without addressing the root cause, which is the lax enforcement of workplace rules.

Trump had done more to put pressure on businesses than anybody else.

To those misunderstanding disgust at Trump wanting to dump immigrants in our cities. We’re fine with them.
It’s you we want gone.

Spoken like a true Commie. The DNC would be proud of your stance.

 

[Papageorgio]

They need to go where the people will support them. Wyoming has no infrastructure to support them. Sanctuary cities are wanting them, so they need to go where they are wanted. People move to Wyoming to get away from places like San Francisco, not sure why you would would not send them to where they are wanted.

Wow... so let's review, shall we.

A Trump minion throws out a completely crazy idea.

The people who know what they are doing shoot it down.

The fact that someone even suggested this is leaked.

PEople downplay that this was even discussed, and that it was sensibly rejected for a whole bunch of good reasons.

Then the Orange Shitgibbon says he thinks it's a wonderful idea,

and all the Trump Cultists pop out of the woodwork defending it.

People, this is what a Cult looks like.

You took me completely out of context. My response to a person that wanted to send them to Wyoming? My response was putting them in Sanctuary cites like where I live over sending them to Wyoming which would not work logistically.

People, joe is what a lying, dishonest dumbshit looks like.

 

[HenryBHough]

Each busload delivered to a sanctuary city represents one million new votes to re-elect President Trump. Votes in the rational, fly-over states you liberals so despise.

 

[Papageorgio]

THE CLEVERNESS OF TRUMP’S “SANCTUARY CITY” TROLLING:

The responses from The Sanctuary Cities to Trump are reinforcing what he’s saying, that it’s bad to have a sudden big influx of economically needy immigrants. Trump wins if he gets the sanctuary city proponents to show that they were just posing as immigrant friendly. He called their bluff.

Trump put himself in a no lose situation. If they bite their tongue, he wins because those vagrants will destroy an area in no time. If they fight it like they're doing, or otherwise bus those people out of there, it would demonstrate how they really feel about the asylum system we have.

Just suggesting it is a losing idea, but of course you fools think its super duper.

These refugees are PEOPLE, families. How about you treat them like people? Treat them the way YOU would want to be treated if you were forced to leave your homes.

Truly I say to you, Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these my brothers, you have done it to me: Matthew 25:40

Then why doesn’t Canada offer to help? You might want to practice what you preach, foreign troll.

 

[Pilot1]

Why should they go to Wyoming? They aren't openly violating Federal Law. The Sanctuary Cities are violating Federal Laws so if they want to create a welcoming environment for ILLEGAL aliens, that is where they belong.

If they don't want them, then give up your illegal sanctuary status, or is the just more empty Virtue Signaling to make people feel good about themselves?

 

[Zorro!]

They need to go where the people will support them. Wyoming has no infrastructure to support them. Sanctuary cities are wanting them, so they need to go where they are wanted. People move to Wyoming to get away from places like San Francisco, not sure why you would would not send them to where they are wanted.

Wow... so let's review, shall we.

A Trump minion throws out a completely crazy idea.

The people who know what they are doing shoot it down.

The fact that someone even suggested this is leaked.

PEople downplay that this was even discussed, and that it was sensibly rejected for a whole bunch of good reasons.

Then the Orange Shitgibbon says he thinks it's a wonderful idea,

and all the Trump Cultists pop out of the woodwork defending it.

People, this is what a Cult looks like.

The Sanctuary City folks love to virtue-signal about how compassionate they are and how we should welcome the invading illegal hordes, but, when it's suggested the hordes they are inviting in come to their neighborhood suddenly their tune changes? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

This is why we love Trump!

 

[Pilot1]

THE CLEVERNESS OF TRUMP’S “SANCTUARY CITY” TROLLING:

The responses from The Sanctuary Cities to Trump are reinforcing what he’s saying, that it’s bad to have a sudden big influx of economically needy immigrants. Trump wins if he gets the sanctuary city proponents to show that they were just posing as immigrant friendly. He called their bluff.

Trump put himself in a no lose situation. If they bite their tongue, he wins because those vagrants will destroy an area in no time. If they fight it like they're doing, or otherwise bus those people out of there, it would demonstrate how they really feel about the asylum system we have.

Just suggesting it is a losing idea, but of course you fools think its super duper.

These refugees are PEOPLE, families. How about you treat them like people? Treat them the way YOU would want to be treated if you were forced to leave your homes.

Truly I say to you, Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these my brothers, you have done it to me: Matthew 25:40

Then why doesn’t Canada offer to help? You might want to practice what you preach, foreign troll.

Because Canada has a SECURE border, and deals with the few Illegals harshly and effectively. They are very pragmatic that way.

 

[Slyhunter]

He's going to do it.

 

[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

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.

Source for that claim?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Well really they should go to the most unpopulated states first, like Wyoming. They perhaps can open a factory there. They need more people.

i bet the majority of those living in Wyoming think your idea sucks......

 

[Coyote]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idea and unbecoming of a president.

 

[Thinker101]

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.

Source for that claim?

Really!? Are you that far out of touch?
DHS Report: 84% of Illegal Alien Adults Not In Court For Final Case Hearing

Report: 90% of illegals skip immigration court appearances; 135,000 will go missing

 

[Zorro!]

THE CLEVERNESS OF TRUMP’S “SANCTUARY CITY” TROLLING:

The responses from The Sanctuary Cities to Trump are reinforcing what he’s saying, that it’s bad to have a sudden big influx of economically needy immigrants. Trump wins if he gets the sanctuary city proponents to show that they were just posing as immigrant friendly. He called their bluff.

Trump put himself in a no lose situation. If they bite their tongue, he wins because those vagrants will destroy an area in no time. If they fight it like they're doing, or otherwise bus those people out of there, it would demonstrate how they really feel about the asylum system we have.

Just suggesting it is a losing idea, but of course you fools think its super duper.

These refugees are PEOPLE, families. How about you treat them like people? Treat them the way YOU would want to be treated if you were forced to leave your homes.

Truly I say to you, Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these my brothers, you have done it to me: Matthew 25:40

So extend the charity to them that you so self-righteously say we should.

 

[Weatherman2020]

 

[Harry Dresden]

Seems like something Nixon would do

Even Nixon was not this slick. Trump just made a move to checkmate. If Democrats don't give him a problem, they will pollute their cities and states and drive them into bankruptcy. If they resist like they are doing now, it will show what hypocrites the Democrats are.

It's a win-win for Trump, so why shouldn't he do it?

More like Nixon was not that sick

Trump will fail in his petty retribution. Just like he did in his petty government shutdown

Petty? Both parties are being petty, I am sick of the pettiness on both sides. I hate the Democrats and Republicans, they are party over country, I don’t see me voting for either in the foreseeable future.

and you notice how neither party has done diddly squat about this problem over the last 30 years...but they have nice luncheons together...

 

[Weatherman2020]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idea and unbecoming of a president.

Extraordinary dumbass gymnastics of logic, even for you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idea and unbecoming of a president.

Sounds good to me. We'll exchange that money for what it costs red states to have those illegals living there.

 

[Coyote]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idea and unbecoming of a president.

Extraordinary dumbass gymnastics of logic, even for you.

You really dont think things through do you? Typical of Trumpets.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idea and unbecoming of a president.

Extraordinary dumbass gymnastics of logic, even for you.

You really dont think things through do you? Typical of Trumpets.

Says the open borders screecher.

 

[Coyote]

Clesrly then the Trump supporter states should pay for all the costs of detaining immigrants and border security since they support mass detention, right? That is usibg the same logic.

And why this vindictive display is a bad idabd ea and unbecoming of a president.

Sounds good to me. We'll exchange the money for what it costs red states to have those illegals living there.

Dont forget to subtract the revenue and benefits they bring.

In the meantime do you really thing a childishly vindictive president is a good thing. What if the next Dem president followed the trend?