Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Immigration

Civil War About To Erupt In 261 Sanctuary Cities After Trump Just Dropped A Weekend Bomb On Them

Published

on

If you’ve ever spent any time around kids you know that human nature in it’s pure unadulterated form pretty much does whatever it wants until pain stops it. Meaning, a kid might keep grabbing for a hot pan no matter how many times you tell him no, but unless you enforce your words, or he gets burned, that kid will just keep going back. It’s kind of the same with liberals.

The stunted concept of consequences that has become so prevalent in the liberal Democrat and Green parties in the United States today means that they’re totally disconnected from the results of their choices. If they’re not willing to back down when the federal government tells them not to touch the hot stove, they’re going to have to suffer some consequences.

There are a lot of examples of this sad chain of events, but I’m talking today specifically about sanctuary cities. The Government could wait until they pull a pot off and burn themselves head to toe, or they could add pressure and make them comply with the rules that will keep them safe. The Trump White House has made the executive decision that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and they’re trying to fix this problem before the cities are completely lost.

The Daily Signal reported the Justice Department’s plan to deal with the problem of rogue cities who consider theselves above the law:

“The Department of Justice announced last week that sanctuary jurisdictions will lose access to certain federal law enforcement grants in 2017 if they prohibit officials from communicating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, if they block ICE from interviewing jail inmates, or if they fail to notify ICE of the pending release of criminal aliens ICE is seeking to deport.

These particular grants, known as the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, are the largest source of federal criminal justice funds for state, local, and tribal authorities.

This move is helping fulfill one early promise of the Trump administration: to impose consequences on the most egregious of the more than 300 sanctuary jurisdictions.

Under the new rules announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, these four top grant-getters (New York City; Cook County, Illinois; Los Angeles; and Philadelphia) are likely to be disqualified from these grants in the future if they maintain their current policies toward ICE.

These cities received more than $10 million in grants in 2016.

See the table below for a list of sanctuary jurisdictions that received Byrne/JAG grants in 2016. Sanctuary jurisdictions received $32.7 million in 2016.

Ten sanctuaries are already at risk of debarment based on an initiative launched last year by Rep. John Culberson, R-Texas, chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that controls the Justice Department’s budget.”

Basically the only thing that’s more important to these folks than their love of breaking the law and letting the illegals feel nice and comfy, is their money. The cities in question get a certian amount of federal funding for various projects, and the Justice Department thinks they can starve them into compliance.

(DS) Last year, the department notified 10 of the worst sanctuaries that their Justice Department law enforcement grants could be pulled if they did not come into compliance with the federal law prohibiting sanctuary policies.

The jurisdictions are California; Connecticut; Cook County, Illinois; Chicago; Milwaukee County; New York City; New Orleans; Philadelphia; Miami-Dade County, Florida; and Las Vegas.

A few months later, Miami-Dade County reversed its sanctuary policy and began cooperating fully with ICE.

In April 2017, the Justice Department sent letters to nine of the jurisdictions (all but Connecticut) reminding them that by a deadline of June 30, they had to send documentation of compliance with the law or lose certain funding (and potentially face clawbacks of previously awarded funding).

The documentation of “alleged compliance” is currently under review and the results are expected soon. Sessions has said their statements will be reviewed carefully: “It is not enough to assert compliance, the jurisdictions must actually be in compliance.”

Last Tuesday’s announcement makes clear that the Justice Department is not looking merely at bare minimal compliance with the letter of Section 1373, the federal law that prohibits policies that block communication between local officials and federal immigration agencies, which many sanctuaries dubiously claim to meet.

It also signals that if a jurisdiction feels constrained by the legal controversies surrounding detainers (see discussion here), they can still demonstrate satisfactory cooperation by giving ICE 48 hours advance notice of criminal alien releases.

The Byrne/JAG grants are one of three programs now off limits to sanctuaries. Last year, Culberson imposed requirements for basic compliance on the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which offers partial reimbursement for the costs of incarcerating illegal aliens, and the Community Oriented Policing grant program.

How much money is at stake in the Byrne/JAG program? The Trump administration reportedly is seeking $380 million for the program in 2018.”

That’s a whole lot of money, no matter who’s getting or not getting it. These programs are ones that the city is going to have to answer for if they no longer have the funding for, or they’ll have to make up the difference out of their already burdened budgets. 

Here are the top 10 offenders and an estimate of the amount they receive annually from the federal government:

(Source:Daily Signal)

Share if you’re ready for sanctuary cities to end their illegal harboring of fugitives.

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Crime

Trump Was RIGHT! Look Who Was Just BUSTED For Starting DEADLY Cali Fire That Killed 41 So Far – Here’s Why

This is Sick & they Have to pay!

Published

on

The California wildfires have been raging for quite some time which has caused unprecedented damage in the region.

Now, it is important to note that fires in the California area are not unheard of, but they typically occur in December and January, and not October.

These fires have forced thousands of residents to leave their homes in terror not knowing what they will return to when they are able.

Law enforcement officials have been working tirelessly to figure out who started these horrific wildfires and it appears they may have the culprits that prove President Trump was right yet again. 

On Monday, firefighters have been able to gain control of the raging wildfires in the northern California area.

However, even though these brave firefighters have been able to make headway in containing the fire the death toll has risen to 41.

Over the last week, these raging fires have scorched more than 200,000 acres, destroyed or damaged more than 5,500 homes, and displaced 100,000 people. Though by some miracle on Sunday, the winds changed and the firefighters were able to take advantage of that situation and contain some of the fires.

Now that the firefighters have been able to make some headway in these deadly fires, law enforcement has been focusing on what caused them, and what they found is shocking. As officials were studying the fires, they noticed a pattern of where the majority of them occurred. It seems that areas hardest hit by these fires were in areas within the legal marijuana business, and they are now suspecting foul play.

As it turns out the areas that are being hit the hardest happens to be pot farms.

CNN Money reported:

Deadly wildfires in Northern California are burning up marijuana farms in the so-called Emerald Triangle.

Blazes have destroyed a number of farms in Mendocino County right before legal recreational sales begin in California.

Cannabis business owners who lose their crops have little reprieve.

“Nobody right now has insurance,” said Nikki Lastreto, secretary of the Mendocino Cannabis Industry Association. “They might have insurance on their house, but not on their crop.”

Here is more from Got News:

The suspicious timing and sheer destruction of the fires have led them to believe the Mexican drug cartels – infamous for their ruthless tactics – had a hand in starting them. These cartels, which run a large share of the world’s multi-billion dollar illegal drug trade, certainly have the means to pull of an attack like this.

They also have an enormous incentive to drive up prices and hurt their competitors, and these fires are already accomplishing that. If Mexican drug lord involvement is confirmed, it will likely spark an international crisis between the United States and Mexico over the latter’s failure to rein in its criminal cartels.

Facebook photos provided to GotNews show the wildfires have caused staggering damage, with several before-and-after pictures revealing the extent of the devastation:

Before the fire. (Photo Credit Facebook)

After the devastating California fires. (Photo Credit Facebook)

The New York Times reported yesterday that tens of thousands of marijuana growers live in this area, the vast majority of whom have no insurance. Furthermore, since marijuana remains an illegal drug under the Controlled Substances Act, the industry still uses cash.

GotNews can confirm that millions of dollars in cash has already been lost to the fires, in addition to tens of millions more in property damage.

According to NBC News, thousands of acres of marijuana have already been burned, and the fires have also wiped out “recent investments in infrastructure to comply with licensing regulations in preparation for recreational marijuana legalization next year.”

The total damage caused by these fires will be unclear for a while, as many of them are still burning.

So, what does this all mean and how does this prove that President Trump was right?

As stated previously law enforcement officials are suspecting that Mexican cartels started these devastating fires. The cartel does not like competition especially when it comes to making drug money and if California is now legalizing marijuana you can bet that the drug lords are not happy.

These ruthless individuals will continue on their path of destruction unless there is something to stop them. What that something is would be a wall between the Mexican border and the United States to prevent these people from entering our country. There is no reason that these criminals should be allowed to sneak into America and create havoc on innocent people.

These fires appear to be a message sent from the cartels to scare the legal marijuana farmers from continuing to grow their crop. Now, whether you agree with marijuana or not is not the issue considering that these farmers have the right to grow it, and no illegals should be able to prevent it from happening.

SHARE IF YOU WANT PRESIDENT TRUMP’S WALL BUILT TO PREVENT ILLEGALS FROM ENTERING AMERICA!

H/T [The Gateway Pundit]

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Featured

BREAKING: 15 Dead, 400 Hospitalized in San Diego After Illegals’ Disturbing Surprise

Published

on

Officials in the liberal southern California city of San Diego, have declared a state of emergency during the popular vacation weekend for the tourist town. Prior to admitting the problem believed to have been caused by illegal aliens in the area, fifteen people died and a whopping 400 are hospitalized.

California is one state which has led the charge against President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigration, by deliberately giving illegals a “sanctuary” to escape to after crossing the southern border into the United States.

With that as their priority, they inadvertently invited in much more than a flood of new residents, which Trump had warned about. San Diego did things their way and now are suffering the horrific cost of that detrimental decision.

As many Americans were packing up for the long weekend to celebrate the final holiday of the summer, officials in SanDiegoo were dealing with a devastating issue. Rather than heading to the beach or other relaxing location, residents were flooding hospitals in droves, suffering from what quickly became a complete health crisis in the area.

A public health emergency was declared Friday over an outbreak of ‘hepatitis A’ that has been linked to at least 15 deaths and 400 hospitalizations, America’s Freedom Fighters reported.

According to Fox News, “The liver disease outbreak started last November, with the homeless population affected most. The emergency declaration will help the city access state funds and provide legal protection for new sanitation measures, the Union-Tribune reported.”

“Areas with high concentrations of homeless people will receive roughly 40 portable hand-washing stations to help combat the disease, which can spread through fecal matter when people fail to thoroughly clean their hands after using the restroom.”

“Crews also plan to use bleach-spiked water for high-pressure washing to remove “all feces, blood, bodily fluids or contaminated surfaces,” according to a sanitation plan outlined in a letter Thursday.”

The massive sanitization efforts could soon be imposed in surrounding areas to control the situation that’s spreading out of control.

“After previous vaccination and educational programs failed to significantly reduce the infection rate, and with death reports spiking in recent weeks, San Diego decided to mimic a campaign used in Los Angeles, which is home to tens of thousands of homeless, in an attempt to curb the outbreak,” Fox News explained.

While they are stating specifically who or which group of people started this, outbreaks of this kind are par for the course when unvaccinated people from other countries come in and bring diseases with them. It’s not a matter of being racist or bigoted to want to control immigration, it’s a health concern which could be prevented if people go about this process the correct way.

The backup efforts to the curb the problem as previously explained was too little and too late. The outbreak was already in San Diego and trying to stop it is far more difficult that preventing it in the first place.

Today, it’s Hep A, but next, it could be something worse which is what President Trump is trying to be proactive about with all of his anti-illegal immigration efforts. We’ve already seen the introduction of ancient disease brought into America with the influx of the Muslim refugee program that former President Barack Obama was adamant about.

Prodcons reported:

Seven refugees with active tuberculosis (TB) were diagnosed shortly after their resettlement in Idaho between 2011 and 2015, according to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare.

This makes Idaho the seventh state to confirm to Breitbart News that recently arrived refugees have been diagnosed with active TB.

The other states in which recently arrived refugees have been diagnosed with active TB include: Louisiana (twenty-one), Florida (eleven), Colorado, (ten), Indiana (four), Kentucky (where nine were diagnosed in one county), and North Dakota (where four refugees who resided in the United States for less than five years were diagnosed in one county).

Idaho is one of fourteen states that have withdrawn from the federal refugee resettlement program where the federal government has hired a voluntary agency (VOLAG) to resettle refugees under the statutorily questionable Wilson Fish alternative program.

In Idaho, the federal government has contracted the Idaho Office for Refugees (IOR), a division of the large non-profit known as Janus, to run the program. Janus is one of the largest organizations within the lucrative and politically connected refugee resettlement industry, which is paid more than $1 billion per year by the federal government.

There is no valid argument for allowing contagious disease such as these to run rampant in the name of political correctness. Immigration laws were never about being racist or insensitive, they were created for a reason and the control of a potential outbreak is just part of it. What San Diego is experiencing this holiday weekend could have potentially been avoided if laws were followed and immigrants were stropped from crossing into America at will.

Continue Reading

Immigration

Libs Sweating Bullets After Supreme Court Just Handed Trump The Best News Of His Entire Presidency

This will make you cheer!

Published

on

Winning, Winning and more Winning! Late last night President Trump won yet another legal battle against the American left wing and their bought and paid for activist judges and lackeys.

As expected, the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday night dismissed one of two cases over the President’s ban on visitors from majority Muslim nations. The court dismissed the case that originated in Maryland and involved a ban that has now expired and been replaced by a new version. But sadly the justices failed to take action on a separate case from Hawaii which was originated by Obama friend and lackey, Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin, who has been battling President Donald Trump over travel bans since February.

The one-page order states that the justices were unanimous in deciding against ruling in the Maryland case, although of course one of the liberal “Barry Soetoro” justices, Sonia Sotomayor, did note that she would not have wiped out the appeals court ruling in its entirety. The expired travel ban had included people from terrorist hotbeds such as Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Sudan.

The new “open-ended” ban, scheduled to take effect on Oct. 18, removed Sudan from the list while blocking people from Chad and North Korea and certain government officials from Venezuela from entering the United States. Because we are all aware how dangerous starving people from North Korea and Venezuela are, but that’s what you have to do to satisfy the liberal mindset. Wonder why they didn’t add Ireland to the mix, I hear those Irish are really dangerous to our nation’s security.

The New American Reports:

Trump Travel Ban Unconstitutional? But Obama, Bush, Carter Travel Bans Constitutional?

Other presidents have suspended immigration without having their orders derailed by the courts. Why is Trump’s executive order being treated differently?

On Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals kept to its activist ways by refusing to allow President Trump’s executive order suspending the controversial U.S. refugee program to be in effect as it continues to wind its way through the courts. The three-judge panel that denied the administration’s request to lift the temporary restraining order on the executive order was unanimous in its decision.

The judges — William Canby Jr., a Jimmy Carter appointee; Richard Clifton, a George W. Bush appointee; and Michelle Friedland, a Barack Obama appointee — wrote in their decision that the executive order likely violates “what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel.” The decision also says the “it is the Government’s burden to make ‘a strong showing that [it] is likely to’ prevail against the States’ procedural due process claims” and that the court is “not persuaded that the Government has carried its burden for a staying appeal.”

In plain English, that means that the three-judge panel decided that the restraining order against Trump’s executive order is unlikely to be overturned by a higher court, so it sees no reason to lift the restraining order as this case works its way through the labyrinth of legal red tape it faces.

Of course, the point that is largely overlooked in all of this is that each of these judges was appointed by presidents who also had policies “restricting an individual’s ability to travel.” Let’s just spend a few minutes unpacking that as we work our way backward through the timeline.

As The New American reported in a previous article:

In 2015, Obama signed H.R. 158, the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015. That bill clarified “the grounds for ineligibility for travel to the United States regarding terrorism risk, to expand the criteria by which a country may be removed from the Visa Waiver Program, to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on strengthening the Electronic System for Travel Authorization to better secure the international borders of the United States and prevent terrorists and instruments of terrorism from entering the United States, and for other purposes.”

The Huffington Post reported at the time of that bill’s passage:

In what could be a sign the administration is moving away from a policy seen as discriminatory, the Obama administration announced Thursday that it is restricting visa-free travel to the U.S. for recent visitors to three additional countries — but not for dual nationals with those passports.

Under the new restrictions, citizens of the 38 countries that are part of the reciprocal visa-waiver program will lose their visa-free travel status if they have traveled to Libya, Somalia or Yemen within the past five years. Thursday’s announcement is an expansion of a law passed late last year, which revoked the visa-waiver status of people who had recently traveled to Iraq, Syria, Iran or Sudan, and who hold dual citizenship with any of those four countries.

Interestingly, not only did the liberal mainstream media celebrate those restrictions (as the example from the Huffington Post shows), but there were no legal challenges brought against H.R. 158, either. Also, to put in the for-what-its-worth-column, that bill — signed into law by Obama and allowed to stand without being issued a restraining order — is one part of the legal framework on which President Trump’s executive order rests.

Before that, though, in 2011, Obama’s State Department quietly halted all refugees from Iraq for a period of six months after it was discovered (to the surprise of no one paying attention) that terrorists who had actually fought against U.S. soldiers in Iraq had gained entry in the United States as “refugees” and were planning attacks here. It seemed that reason dictated a more stringent vetting process. Now where has this writer heard that recently?

Going a little further back, in 2002 — in the wake of 9/11 — both houses of Congress unamimously passed, and President Bush signed — H.R. 3525, the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act. This legislation restricted travel to the United States “from countries that are state sponsors of international terrorism” and created a vetting process so extreme that any vetting process Trump comes up with would have difficulty appearing anything but moderate by comparison. Of course, it was reasonable then and it is reasonable now. But to those looking to attack Trump’s policy on this issue so critical to national security, reason is a stranger. Evidence of that can be seen in the fact that 73 Democrats who voted to pass that law in 2002 are still sitting in office and are among those decrying the suppposed evils of Trump’s executive order which rests as much on the legal framework of H.R. 3525 as it does on Obama’s H.R. 158.

H.R.3525 is still on the books and in effect, granting the president the authority to stop the issuance of non-immigrant visas from the very countries Trump’s executive order names. And as Conservative Review noted, Trump merely applied that law in conjunction with his authority under The Immigration and Nationality Act (§ 212(f)) which grants the president plenary power to “by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants.”

The next stop on our trip in the Wayback Machine is to April 7, 1980. America was in the midst of the Iranian hostage crisis. Five months into the 444-day-long ordeal, President Carter responded by issuing a series of proclamations under his executive authority. Here, in his own words, is the one that is germane to this issue:

Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.

Now, here — in the present — three judges (appointed by presidents who not only did essentially the same thing Trump is doing, but laid the legal foundation and set the precedent for his actions) have the nerve to pretend that while it was fine and dandy when their presidents did it, it is somehow unconstitutional when Trump does it.

And there’s the rub. Constitutionality is not a matter of who (or which party) holds the office and issues the directives; it is a matter of what the Constitution allows and requires. In this case, Article IV, Sec. 4 of that Constitution seems apropos:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

President Trump’s executive order is a balanced attempt to secure the borders of this nation against a terrorist invasion under the guise of a refugee program. The alternative is an open-door policy that allowed Iraqi terrorists to enter this country in the wake of 9/11. President Obama blocked those “refugees” then and if his actions lacked prudence it was that they did not go far enough. The salient point, though, is that no one accused him of overstepping his Constitutional boundaries in taking the action he did. Or Bush before him. Or Carter before him. Why is this any different?

It’s really starting to look like no matter how hard the left tries they just can’t seem to get a leg up on President Trump. This particular case makes it even harder for them to win when you see how former President Barack Hussein Obama did the exact same thing. But with him it was OK because he’s black and has an Islamic name, let’s not kid ourselves here.

Share if you want a travel ban from all Islamic nations!

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Culture7 hours ago

Michelle LOSES IT After What Barack Gave ‘White Woman’ He Slept With Suddenly Surfaces

Nobody likes to hear about their spouse’s former love affairs. However, even if you’ve successfully put it behind you, when...

Politics8 hours ago

Americans SICK After Finding Out What Costco Has Been Sneaking Into Every Purchase For Months

Every day across the country, millions of Americans shop for groceries to feed their families. There are hundreds of stores...

Featured9 hours ago

BREAKING: Prepare To PUKE When You See Who Is Already Leading The Race For 2020 In Polls Right Now

A new poll just came out showing who is leading the Democrat field for president in 2020. And the results...

Culture9 hours ago

Anti-American NFL Commissioner Obliterated For Alarming Message He Hid In Plain Sight During Presser

No matter your political leanings, it’s safe to say that most wouldn’t want to trade places with the National Football...

Featured11 hours ago

24Hrs After NFL Commish Tells Fans To Stop Talking About Protest, Shocking Veteran’s Day Plan Gets Out

When word got out that NFL officials were going to be holding an emergency meeting over the protests that have plagued...

Featured12 hours ago

Gold Star Families FURIOUS At What Libs Did Behind Their Backs After They Got Them To Trash Trump’s Remarks

Over the last several days, the left has upped their attacks on President Trump by using Gold Star families as...

Politics14 hours ago

Look Where Trump Just Suddenly Showed Up And Shocked Everyone With What He Brought With Him!

Although the liberal mainstream American media has been constantly going after our President Donald J. Trump, last night showed each...

Trending