Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
-
11-25-2016, 01:56 PM #1
Cut-off of federal funds to sanctuary cities is possible immediately
Cut-off of federal funds to sanctuary cities is possible immediately upon inauguration of President Trump
By Thomas Lifson
Thanks to a little-noticed action of Texas Congressman John Culberson taken last July, President-elect Trump will able to cut-off federal law enforcement funding to 9 sanctuary cities, plus the entire state of California, immediately upon taking the oath of office. Brenda Walker of Vdare explains:
Because of the foresight of a Texas Congressman, President Trump will be able to end certain funding to the largest sanctuary cities plus the entire state of California on his first day as President. Working quietly, Culberson convinced the existing Justice Department to certify those cities as non-compliant with federal law, thereby making them vulnerable to loss of money from Washington.With great foresight, the Congressman, as he explained to Eric Shawn of Fox News (video embedded below):
…using existing law and the power of the purse, I have seen to it that the top 10 sanctuary cities in America have already been certified as violating existing federal law and therefore everything is pre-positioned for these 10 cities — including Chicago, New York, the entire state of California — they will lose all their federal law enforcement money, if President Trump chooses to, the president can cut off their money at noon on January 20th of 2017. If they do not change their sanctuary policies and hand over criminal illegal aliens in their custody to be deported, their days of receiving federal law enforcement money are over.You might wonder how Congressman Culberson “persuaded” AG Lynch. Good old arm-twisting, based on the power of the purse:
SHAWN: Obviously this is something that the Obama administration has not agreed with.
CULBERSON: In fact I, as chairman of the subcommittee in charge of all the money for the Department of Justice, I quietly persuaded Attorney General Loretta Lynch to implement this new policy this past July seventh, so it’s already done. I did it as subcommittee chairman using existing law and the influence of the power of the purse that the founding fathers so wisely entrusted to Congress. I did it quietly and and thoughtfully, and I didn’t embarrass anybody so it’s already done, pre-positioned.
SHAWN: I’m sorry — pre-positioned but hasn’t gone into action?
CULBERSON: Attorney General Lynch has already notified every city and state in the country that unless they cooperate 100 percent of the time with requests for immigration information about criminal aliens in local custody, then those local jurisdictions lose all their federal law enforcement money. That’s already up on the Department of Justice website. It has been official policy since July seventh. I just didn’t make any noise about it because the purpose of this election — America wants us to get it done, to get the job done, so I’ve taken care of it the job is done and President Trump can now cut off their money at noon on January 20th because it’s been policy.
Citing his committee’s power over the DOJ’s budget, Culberson stated in February:Master showman Donald Trump thus has the opportunity for a lot drama upon taking his oath. Such a dramatic move as announcing the cut-off of law enforcement grants to the ten large jurisdictions would immediately place the Left on defense, for:
Any refusal by the Department to comply with these reasonable and timely requests will factor heavily in my consideration of their 2017 budget requests, and whether or not I will include language in the fiscal year 2017 CJS appropriations bill prohibiting the award of law enforcement grants to jurisdictions that harbor illegal aliens. I will include language in this year’s bill requiring the DOJ to amend the application process for Byrne JAG, COPS, and SCAAP grants so that grantees must certify under oath that they are in compliance with section 1373 of title 8 of the United States Code.
…a November Rasmussen poll found that large majority of voters favors deportation of illegal alien criminals:Stand by. There is going to be a very interesting four years ahead.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 81% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a plan that calls for mandatory deportation of illegal immigrants who have been convicted of a felony in this country. Just 13% are opposed. These findings are nearly identical to those measured in August of last year.
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. -Edmund Burke
-
11-25-2016, 07:35 PM #2
Oh my God, the man is a genius, an Angel, and one of my new HEROES!!!
Thank you, Representative Culberson, thank you very very very much!! I hope the AG doesn't reverse before January 20.A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn
Similar Threads
-
59% Favor Cutoff of Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cities
By AirborneSapper7 in forum Polls & Surveys About Illegal ImmigrationReplies: 3Last Post: 05-13-2011, 02:10 PM -
Support Federal Bill to Deny Funds to Sanctuary Cities
By cjbl2929 in forum News & Releases from Other GroupsReplies: 4Last Post: 04-10-2009, 04:02 PM -
Bush Should Strip Sanctuary Cities of Federal Funds
By WorriedAmerican in forum illegal immigration News Stories & ReportsReplies: 3Last Post: 07-25-2008, 07:11 PM -
Bush Should Strip Sanctuary Cities of Federal Funds
By zeezil in forum illegal immigration News Stories & ReportsReplies: 3Last Post: 07-25-2008, 11:59 AM -
CA Sanctuary Cities Squealing For Federal Anti-Gang Funds
By zeezil in forum illegal immigration News Stories & ReportsReplies: 5Last Post: 10-14-2007, 04:52 AM
If You Don’t Build It, They Will Come: The BorderLine
03-29-2024, 07:37 AM in illegal immigration News Stories & Reports