Here is a great over view of just how bad the entire sanctuary city philosophy is to our civil society. The question that remains though is how and why did officials arrive at their decision to protect criminals at the expense of Amerian citizens?
It is federal law for cites to cooperate and comply with federal law. It's not a matter of choice, right?
And maybe even worse is why did Barack and the progressive liberal democrat find it prudent to support the sanctuary city agenda when the facts show it has caused chaos and conflict in so many communities around the country?
What was the intent of the progressive democrats given what has transpired across the country where large numbers of illegal immigrants congregated, and have been allowed to do as they please without fear of the law?
Why would progressive liberal democrats find such chaos purposeful? How will allowing illegal immigrants to bring chaos to our cities and towns be beneficial to the reelection of those that support such criminal activity?
And really if the truth be known, it is about the votes, legal and illegal voters. Nothing more.
In the 1940s, Jan Ting’s parents faced a difficult path to American citizenship following a U.S. immigration ban on Chinese workers that lasted 61 years.
Today, Ting is a law professor at Temple University—after serving as a top immigration official under President George H.W. Bush. Ting is also a strong opponent of sanctuary cities that shield illegal immigrants from deportation. That includes Philadelphia, where Temple University is located.
“I think that it is wrong, I think it endangers public safety, I think it endangers our law enforcement officers, and it’s just short-sighted,” he says.
This week on “Full Measure,” we examine the debate over sanctuary cities, which face a loss of federal funding following President Donald Trump’s directive Wednesday. Watch the story to learn more about what’s at stake.
Watch the Video - Sanctuary Cites - Full Measure - https://youtu.be/6lJGKgH9eKI
It is federal law for cites to cooperate and comply with federal law. It's not a matter of choice, right?
And maybe even worse is why did Barack and the progressive liberal democrat find it prudent to support the sanctuary city agenda when the facts show it has caused chaos and conflict in so many communities around the country?
What was the intent of the progressive democrats given what has transpired across the country where large numbers of illegal immigrants congregated, and have been allowed to do as they please without fear of the law?
Why would progressive liberal democrats find such chaos purposeful? How will allowing illegal immigrants to bring chaos to our cities and towns be beneficial to the reelection of those that support such criminal activity?
And really if the truth be known, it is about the votes, legal and illegal voters. Nothing more.
The Showdown Over Sanctuary Cities
In the 1940s, Jan Ting’s parents faced a difficult path to American citizenship following a U.S. immigration ban on Chinese workers that lasted 61 years.
Today, Ting is a law professor at Temple University—after serving as a top immigration official under President George H.W. Bush. Ting is also a strong opponent of sanctuary cities that shield illegal immigrants from deportation. That includes Philadelphia, where Temple University is located.
“I think that it is wrong, I think it endangers public safety, I think it endangers our law enforcement officers, and it’s just short-sighted,” he says.
This week on “Full Measure,” we examine the debate over sanctuary cities, which face a loss of federal funding following President Donald Trump’s directive Wednesday. Watch the story to learn more about what’s at stake.
Watch the Video - Sanctuary Cites - Full Measure - https://youtu.be/6lJGKgH9eKI
No comments:
Post a Comment