Gee, with a reduction in home values maybe now Menlo Park housing will be 'affordable' for illegal aliens.
'Welcome' ...
What a bunch of 'arms length' hypocrites.

Menlo Park Home Prices & Values
Zillow Home Value Index
$1,923,900

-6.2% 1-year change
-1.3% 1-year forecast

Feb 2016Mar 2017Feb 2018

The median home value in Menlo Park is $1,923,900. Menlo Park home values have declined -6.2% over the past year and Zillow predicts they will fall -1.3% within the next year. The median list price per square foot in Menlo Park is $1,130, which is higher than the San Francisco Metro average of $481. The median rent price in Menlo Park is $5,100, which is higher than the San Francisco Metro median of $3,300.

Pretty disgusting by the menlo park council. we agree-=-what a bunch of hypocrites. get real council-- do you really think your citizens want a bunch of criminals running rampant in our city. don't go taxing us to make up for your stupid blunder. this has nothing to do with race---it has to do with what is right and wrong. council-- you are WRONG.

I hope the City Council knows what they are doing because if this action results in the loss of federal funds or additional cost to the legal residents of Menlo Park I expect people will not be happy and may even decide to file suit. Immigration is wonderful, when it is done legally and the people coming into the country have been checked. Illegal immigrants have already proven that they are willing to break the law just by entering. If they commit a crime while here (DUI, drug sales, assault, theft of more than $1000, etc.) essentially any felony, they should be deported.

To the Menlo Park City Council --
What part of the word 'illegal' do you NOT understand. If, in fact, we are a 'nation of laws', you have compromised that position on behalf of all Menlo Park resident citizens; many of whom disagree with your stance. Twenty people at a meeting does NOT make a majority! And to use children to 'plead your case' is inhumane and senseless. Get real ... and get ready for a challenge.

At the very least the City Council should let the people decide and this should be added to the next city wide election.

Just another example of "limousine Liberals' run amok knowing what is best for the 'Great Unwashed' (i.e., their fellow citizens). Despicable. And, I too, agree that the electorate should decide and not simply accept a unilateral de rigueur pontification/justification by the 'Royal Chosen Class'.

I don't think this has anything to do with "Liberals" just like it should not have anything to do with race. I frankly don't care what color or religion a person is. You can have illegal immigrants who are white catholic as well as yellow, black, brown, purple or pink polka dot for all that matters just like they can be christian, Buddhist, muslin, Jewish, atheist, followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or something else, who cares. This has nothing to do with race or religion, it has everything to do with a person following the law and being checked before coming into this country. I think the law should apply to everyone equally. I am 100% for increasing legal immigration of all people, it is what America was founded on and what makes us such a great country. If this was a matter of rejecting racial profiling I am all for it, but that is not what we are talking about here. It boils down to protecting people that have broken the law by entering the country illegally and then breaking the law again and getting arrested (arrested, not cited for a traffic violation).

How much in federal funds are we talking about?

I support sanctuary status.

The staff and council should be spending their time and our money on city matters that matter. If you break the law there are consequences. I can't stand the guy who was elected president but we have laws and if you break them there are legitimate consequences. You enter illegally you pay the piper.

Brook,

It is in the article above:

"When all of Menlo Park's federal funding for the 2016-17 fiscal year was tallied up, she said, the city received about $1.1 million: about $413,000 went to community services, $700,000 to public works, and $70,000 to the police department. On average, the city gets about $665,000 in federal funds each year, a staff report said.

There is still ambiguity as to exactly how much federal funding is at stake. She and Mayor Kirsten Keith attended the oral arguments at the Santa Clara County v. Trump hearing held last week, she said, and noted that while San Francisco and Santa Clara counties interpreted the threat to mean that all federal funding could be at stake, President Trump's attorney claimed only federal grants from the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice would be withheld from sanctuary cities."

Twenty people????? The Menlo Park council is acting out of line. How dare they determine through twenty voices what is best for our community? They are not immune from following the law and it is not their job to MAKE law. That is the job of the United States congress, not the job of bureaucrats. I, for one, suggest another meeting where more than 20 people have a voice. The council is behaving like a bunch of dictatorial tyrants. This is so incredibly anti-American. And for those who claim to find these views that I express here 'scary,' believe me, if we continue down the path of liberalism, things will get a lot scarier. We can't let the left bully us or silence us by accusing us of being anti-immigration. That is simply not true. We, who believe that Menlo Park should not be a sanctuary city, want to see immigrants come to this country legally, in accordance with the law of the land. And tell me. What is a country without laws? Without borders?

States rights.

Feds won't withhold anyway. If they do they will lose in court.

Also - Trump changes positions every 3 months anyway. Chinese currency manipulation? Syrian intervention? Turkish conflict of interest? Yeah sure Okey-dokie.... just wait a minute, he'll flip. Worse than Romney's flip flops.

Mt Belle,

First off we are not discussing States rights, this is a city not a state. Immigration law is Federal and not up to the cities, I think this was settled with Arizona when they attempted to implement S.B 1070. If you support a states right to ignore Federal immigration law in favor of sanctuary status then you must also support a states right to go the opposite way and require proof of citizenship upon request by any law enforcement.

As for your assumption that Trump is going to change his position I would like to hear why you think that and if you are sure enough to bet losing federal funds because I am not. I don't know what he will do but I see no reason for him to change his position on this topic.

The visceral, ugly and nasty comments in this thread can never kill the spirit in the room last night as the community members and council looked for "how to do the right thing" for those who are at risk for such drastic measures that make no sense for the majority of people who are just "undocumented" - they love this country - they pay taxes, they volunteer, they do their part....they are just undocumented. I truly believe the Menlo Park I know, knows this.

It is certainly noble that the Council took this action but, in a democracy, does the Council have the right the jeopardize the financial welfare of the community without the consent of the people?

Sorry but you certainly do not speak for me and neither do the tiny fraction of people who showed up at the City Council on Tuesday evening. I believe 20 people constitutes about 1/1600th of the population of Menlo Park, hardly a good indicator of the general feeling of the population, wouldn't you agree?

They are "undocumented" because they chose to violate the law and enter the United States illegally. That was a choice they made that has nothing to do with their race or their religion. No one has suggested going around and requiring proof of legal citizenship from everyone walking around the city or getting pulled over for speeding What does need to happen is people who break the law for any form of felony and are here illegally need to be returned to their country of origin. Pretty simple. The other thing about this Sanctuary City status is that of the "Sanctuary City" wording has no bearing on Menlo Park it is just empty words, we don't have a jail so we will not receive requests to hold individuals for ICE, that is the Sheriff who is not affected by anything Menlo Park does in regards to Sanctuary City status. No one, including the police are targeting illegal aliens nor is anyone actively working with ICE.

If this is so important why not put it on a ballot and have every registered voter have the opportunity of supporting it or not? I do not support it for reasons I have stated above. You are going to have to live with the fact that there are rational people who do not agree with your point of view and have valid reasons for their positions. you should not resort to insulting them or making them out to be bad people, they are not. Doing so denigrates the respect people have for your opinion and erodes your own arguments.

how do you know they pay taxes? did you see their tax returns or are you just taking some liberal rhetoric for certainty because someone said so? how do you know they volunteer? how do you know they do their part? (part of what? breaking laws) try going to Canada without documentation. try going to china without documentation. try going to any other country in the world without documentation. and, if you are able to sneak in-- see what havoc is playing out in those countries. do you really want to fear every moment of the rest of your life because some thug snuck in that shouldn't be here? are all illegals (undocumented) thugs-- not by a long shot. but, how many thugs are you ok with living nextdoor to you in menlo park?-- just curious.

Oh my, this thread has certainly brought out a level of fear, ugliness, and xenophobia that makes me sick. How do we know that the undocumented immigrants among us volunteer and contribute to the community? Because we know them, or at least some of them. They are our neighbors, our friends, and our children's friends. They are not so different from you and me, and the thing that makes them "illegal" is very often laws and policies that are unjust in the first place. Many of them were brought here as small children, and their parents are working their tails off to give them a good life. "Thugs?" Really? Maybe you should get out and meet a few. At a minimum, you will be less afraid. There is NO good evidence that taking these steps to protect the vulnerable among us will hurt our community in any way; in fact, not doing so encourages people to keep their kids home from school, to shy away from reporting violent crime to police, and undermines the benefits of good community policing. Menlo Park is better than the ugly tone of so many of these comments.

""illegal" is very often laws and policies that are unjust in the first place" then work to get the laws and policies changed, don't support people ignoring and violating them.

Kapi, I think you have missed the point of many of the comments on this board. Not one person has said that Menlo Park should support checking for immigration status with every encounter. There is no proposed witch hunt for illegal residents. The point is that "Sanctuary City" status makes no sense for Menlo Park as it puts federal funds at risk and changes nothing from how things are today. There is no Jail and no requests from ICE to hold people, that would go to the sheriff who is not affected by anything Menlo Park passes. Menlo Park is not working with ICE or raiding businesses. So what is gained by saying we are a sanctuary city? I can tell you what we stand to lose, that is easy.

If you and others feel so strongly about Menlo Park being a sanctuary city then put it on the ballot and try to get a mandate from the people instead of going to the City Council and having them make a decision that will impact all residents of the city without their direct input

One point being made is that if someone in the country illegally commits a crime (felony) then they need to be reported and deported. What argument would you make to keep felons who entered illegally in this City/State/Country?

As for people who entered illegally as children brought by their parents there is a program for them called DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). They should have applied for that and be legally documented and eligible for some benefits.

I'm alarmed at the amount of vitriol and misinformation here. First of all, "sanctuary city" is a misnomer. In the 1980s, there was a sanctuary movement among churches in which the churches would shelter refugees, even barring ICE agents. This is not the case with sanctuary cities. ICE still has jurisdiction over undocumented immigrants in sanctuary cities. People are still deported in "sanctuary" cities. Undocumented immigrants who commit crimes are still arrested and deported in sanctuary cities. The difference is that the police officers in these cities are not required to be de facto ICE agents. This means that undocumented immigrants in these cities are free to cooperate with police if a crime occurs. ICE can compel local police to release information about undocumented immigrants. This helps keep the cities safe. If people have to worry about getting deported anytime they call the police, they won't call to report crimes, and they won't come forward as witnesses when criminals are prosecuted. This makes these cities a haven for drug and violent offenses, because they know many people would not dare bring the police into a situation. The reason? Fear of deportation is greater than fear of the criminal. This is why the Major Cities Chiefs Association (representing 63 large police departments) supports sanctuary cities.

In answer to the queries by Serious, I would say this: Read the proposed ordinance. It can be found in draft form here: Web Link When you read it you will see that it specifically makes exceptions for serious or violent felony offenders. As to your question about "what is to be gained?" What is gained is the ability of undocumented persons, who already live in fear of deportation, to send their kids to school without fear of being permanently separated, parents from children. To grocery shop and work without fear. To call the police about the domestic abuser next door without fear. The FEAR is the primary problem here. In fact, I have met many DREAMers and DACA youth who nevertheless live in fear in spite of their status, and I think that is a rational response to our current administration's demonstrated immigration policies. Moreover, not every young person who was brought here is eligible for DACA; what about them? Finally, the financial risks to the city are likely much lower than was originally thought to be the case, according to the Almanac itself and to the City Attorney. So: please read the ordinance, which is aimed at making Menlo Park a better, more humane city, in this era of inhumanity and injustice.

I have read the ordinance and I listened to the council meeting and yes the term "Serious or Violent Felony" was used quite a bit, the problem is that many people, myself included, believe that ANY felony should be cause for deportation. I would assume that you are familiar with subsection (c), Section 1192.7 of the California penal code: Web Link The listing of serious felonies does not include things like Driving Under the Influence, burglary, larceny,Selling drugs like heroin (unless to a minor) and a myriad of other crimes that are felonies but not in that subsection as "Serious Felonies". Change the wording to include all felonies and that is a good start.

As for the amount Menlo Park stands to lose, you really can't say. It could range from a low of $70,000 up to over a million. Even the draft indicates that:

"Sanctuary city status would also put funding for the following future
projects in jeopardy: (1) Ravenswood Avenue/Caltrain Railroad Crossing Grade Separation; (2) Dumbarton Corridor Improvements; (3) Middle Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Crossing; (4) US 101 Managed Lanes; (5) Caltrain Modernization and Electrification ($674 Million); Resurfacing Santa Cruz, Middle (pending grant
request of $619,000); and (6) San Franciscquito Creek Upstream of 101 Project ($11.7 Million). "

That is a lot of money and a lot of projects that people have been trying to get done for a long time. Are you ready to risk those on behalf of every resident of Menlo Park?

You talk about the benefits of this ordinance as kids can go to school without fear of being reported and separated from families, people can shop, call the police for abuse, etc. Can you tell me one case where a Menlo Park School reported a student as an illegal alien? Where someone was shopping and a Menlo Park police officer questioned their residence status or a police call where an office questioned the person about their residence status (unless they were arrested for a violent felony)?. I am really interested to hear if this has ever happened. If it has not then I ask again what problem are you trying to solve?

Again, I ask because no one has answered the yet. If this is so important and has such wide spread support why not put it on the ballot for a city side vote?

Seriously,
Some of your points somewhat make sense until you start pushing dow in to the documented demographics of undocumented in the US.
* Almost 70% of them have lived in the US more than 10 years. 10% have been in the US less than 5 years. The vast majority are already long term members of our community.
* 40% of the undocumented families have US citizen children.
* Trump has flip-flopped on every issue when it has proved harder to execute on his promise, or been more complex than his tiny minds had allowed during the campaign.

Seriously, you ask, "Can you tell me one case where a Menlo Park School reported a student as an illegal alien?" I am so glad that I cannot; thankfully, our schools and teachers have a far more caring and supportive posture on this issue. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why many undocumented parents and children are terrified of public locales, especially in the wake of the immigration fiascos that Trump initiated shortly after his inauguration. I have spoken to people absolutely terrified of what will happen to their kids if they are deported. II wish it were true that these families have nothing to fear. But to believe that really does reveal a high degree of social privilege that they simply don't (and can't) share. *That's* the problem that this ordinance is trying to solve.

Stats,

I don't see how any of your points are relevant to what I said, did you bother to read my post and what I have been saying? I am talking about people who commit felonies, who cares if they have been here 10 years or 10 days, if they commit a felony, of any type, they have made a decision to be a danger to the community and should be deported. We are not talking about anyone else. I personally don't count on him flip flopping, this plays too well to his core constituency and would not cost him money, in fact if he can get away with it, it would put more money back in the hands of the Federal Government. Keep reading...

Kapi,

I didn't think so because the DEEDS show that Menlo Park is already behaving like a sanctuary city. That is fine, it is what I expect. But what you are arguing is that the deeds and the proof that Menlo Park has a history of respecing all people, even undocumented/illegal is not enough to allay their fears but saying it will? That makes no sense to me and it really is not form or protection to them at all. A teacher/Parent/Volunteer can still call ICE and report a person as being illegal, noting in this sanctuary city ordinance prevents that. A neighbor could do the same and could anyone. There is nothing to prevent that, so there is still plenty to fear if you are in the county illegally. There is no way you can possible remove completely the risk of an undocumented worker from getting deported. Have you considered that by Menlo Park declaring itself a sanctuary city that in addition to the loss of federal funds the Trump Administration/Homeland Security and ICE may specifically target Menlo Park and other declared Sanctuary Cities? It is after all painting a target on our back for the current presidential administration. It wuld also play well to many parts of the country and the people who voted for him. Nothing Menlo Park could do to prevent it, it would happen and the city would be powerless. Of course the police wouldn't cooperate but that didn't seem to have much affect in Santa Cruz when ICE launched a raid there without telling the local police. They complained but were powerless to do anything.

If our elected officials want to declare our city a Sanctuary City, We as citizens are by proxy responsible for their decision.
I too would like to know who will be responsible for the money lost from grants not given, A public meeting should be had as to which projects will not be done based on possible lost funds. Do not ask us to pay more taxes.

The City attorney should give a legal opinion as to wether the council has the legal authority to do this in violation of Federal Law and what the risks are.

Please be specific.

This is really scary.[Portion removed; tone down the inflammatory, factually insupportable rhetoric if you want to comment in this forum.] Even CONSIDERING changing the status of Menlo Park to a sanctuary city makes me sick. I hope the people of Menlo Park can come together to prevent this ordinance from passing. [Portion removed]

keep pv safe:

perhaps you should take your own advice and not comment on things that are not in your town.

DOJ Sends a Letter to Nine Sanctuary Cities: Comply With Federal Immigration Laws or Lose Your Grant Money

Web Link

Doesn't our city council have better things to do than welcome people who break the law into our community? Maybe we should become a "Sanctuary City" for those who don't follow traffic laws or better yet, those who don't pay city taxes. Which laws will the council decide they don't agree with next.

Peter - what do you think of the letter? Conflating Chicago with national levels of violence?

Violent crime is WAY DOWN, though you would never know it from Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III.

"Peter - what do you think of the letter? "

I am involved with enough Town Forum controversies without taking this one on!

Where are all the other local elected officials?

Why am I the only local elected official who is willing to address issues on this forum?

St Louis has a higher per capita murder rate than Chicago. Why does Trump have a Jones for Chicago?

And American citizens have higher criminal rates than immigrants.

Ever hear that on Fox?

nahhhh....

Djk-
1. Who cares about Chicago or St Louis. We are talking about a local, Bay Area problem (specifically Menlo Park)
2. I'd love to see the evidence for your claim that Americans have higher crime rates than illegal criminals. Very amusing claim!!

Citizens of Menlo Park must come together to put an end to this buffoonery. If your safety and town funds are threatened, fight back!

pv safe:

"But several studies, over many years, have concluded that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than people born in the United States. And experts say the available evidence does not support the idea that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate share of crime.

“There’s no way I can mess with the numbers to get a different conclusion,” said Alex Nowrasteh, immigration policy analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute..."

And Chicago is relevant to Jefferson Beauregard Sessions' letter, as linked.

Seriously - read a newspaper. Turn off fox.

Aren't you the one who told a MP poster not to comment on a pv topic?

Please post the link to the quoted article, as I am interested in reading the full length of its contents.

PV,

A couple things. First off djk said:
"And American citizens have higher criminal rates than immigrants"

nothing about illegal immigrants. There was a study done and it concluded that first generation immigrants were less likely to commit crimes but their children.

Web Link

Here is another report on two studies that indicate immigrants have a lower crime rate:
Web Link

Since you keep posting here I am sure you won't mind the posts from residents of other towns when it comes to policies in Portola Valley.

The perjury-committing Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, who lied under oath about his Russian contacts during the Putin stained Trump campaign and transition, wrote a disgusting and shameful attempt at intimidation.

pvsafe - there are these things called "search engines"....

U.S. Crime Rate Rises Slightly, Remains Near 20-Year Low Web Link

-----------

Contrary to Trump’s Claims, Immigrants Are Less Likely to Commit Crimes.

"
Analyses of census data from 1980 through 2010 show that among men ages 18 to 49, immigrants were one-half to one-fifth as likely to be incarcerated as those born in the United States. Across all ages and sexes, about 7 percent of the nation’s population are noncitizens, while figures from the Justice Department show that about 5 percent of inmates in state and federal prisons are noncitizens"
Web Link


Are you the one who said "stay out of pv discussions"?

"Are you the one who said "stay out of pv discussions"?"

Yes, she is.

Big fan of sanctuary city status.

Who will mow your lawns, clean your house, cook your food (at every restaurant), take care of your kids, care for your elderly. clean your car, basically pamper your hypocritical selves. if you deport these "criminals"? NO ONE. No one will work for your low wages and the poor conditions you offer with no benefits.
You are the criminal employing people you disdain but will not protect. and it is criminal to hire so again you are hypocrites x's 2.

And you criticize low income housing in this area? Low income is below 120K. Sorry your home drops a few dollars. I guess 1.2 million plus is not enough for a shabby house that was built in the 1940's for 5K. Not making enough on that equity. I feel so sad for you.

Take stock of your "values". They seem very one-sided.

"Who will mow your lawns, clean your house, cook your food (at every restaurant), take care of your kids, care for your elderly. clean your car, basically pamper your hypocritical selves. if you deport these "criminals"? NO ONE. No one will work for your low wages and the poor conditions you offer with no benefits. "

Yep, and then everyone will figure out that if they have to actually hire LEGAL immigrants they'll have to pay a living wage. What's so difficult with that concept?

I don't know if you realize this or not but it sounds like some of you are arguing for Sanctuary City status so you can underpay people and get your house cleaned and you lawn moved for a cheap price with no benefits. Hardly a noble argument.

"Who will mow your lawns, clean your house, cook your food (at every restaurant), take care of your kids, care for your elderly. clean your car, basically pamper your hypocritical selves. if you deport these "criminals"? NO ONE. No one will work for your low wages and the poor conditions you offer with no benefits.
You are the criminal employing people you disdain but will not protect."

If your reasons for "protecting" people who are here illegally is to preserve your cheap labor source, how are you any better than employers who pay substandard wages? You rail about them and income inequality, why doesn't this apply when you're doing the hiring?

Nice to know I am not the only one who got that impression.

While I am opposed to Menlo Park taking on the Sanctuary City title and painting a target on us for the current administration, I do not believe the immigrants, legal or illegal should be taken advantage of. They should be treated well and not taken advantage of. My issue is that there is nothing to be gained by becoming a sanctuary city. Menlo Park already treats people with respect, they are not going around seeking out illegal immigrants and as was states earlier there are no cases of the School reporting on families or anyone being reported to ICE by the city so why do this. If the actions (or lack of actions) don't prove to people that Menlo Park is a community that respects everyone then just saying it won't reassure anyone. I'll also add that I don't think they should get the same benefits that as people who are here legally and they certain need to be deported for committing any felony.

Of the 61,529 criminal cases initiated by federal prosecutors last fiscal year, more than 40%—or 24,746—were filed in court districts neighboring the Mexican border. This includes Arizona, New Mexico, Southern California, Western Texas and Southern Texas. The two Texas districts each had more than double the convictions of all four federal court districts in the state of New York combined, according to the DOJ report. The Western Texas District had the nation’s heaviest crime flow, with 6,341 cases filed by the feds. In Southern Texas 6,130 cases were filed, 4,848 in Southern California, 3,889 in New Mexico and 3,538 in Arizona.

Not surprisingly, most of the offenses were immigration related. In fact, 38.6% of all federal cases (23,744) filed last year involved immigration, the DOJ report confirms. Nearly 22% (13,383) were drug related, 19.7% (12,123) were violent crimes and 10.2% (6,300) involved white-collar offenses that include a full range of frauds committed by business and government professionals. This is hardly earth-shattering news in fact, the nation’s southern border region has for years been known for its high crime rate compared to the rest of the country.

@GS 13: Please cite your source. A link would be helpful.

It's a gross misreading of a 2013 report, and it's been spread all over the alt-right websites. Also was promoted by the far right JW, so there's that.

Oddly, with the GS13 moniker, does our poster know GS13 is a domestically founded gang?

The 2013 USA report is 120 pages long, with the last 70 being page after full page of numbers, numbers, numbers. Ripe for misinterpretation - a little selective math and one may support any number of claims.

Good stuff though: solve immigration and the drug "war" and the Feds can reduce their staff by 2/3rds!

How's that for playing with numbers?

(see also: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics)

"But several studies, over many years, have concluded that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than people born in the United States. And experts say the available evidence does not support the idea that undocumented immigrants commit a disproportionate share of crime."

Rebuttal? Go find 70 pages of data, massage and cherrypick, and claim some ridiculous thing about federal courts.

Well played, sir. Mark Twain would be proud!

@human being, "Who will mow your lawns, clean your house, cook your food (at every restaurant), take care of your kids, care for your elderly. clean your car, basically pamper your hypocritical selves. if you deport these "criminals"? NO ONE. No one will work for your low wages and the poor conditions you offer with no benefits."

Simple -- post an ad. If no one responds, increase your payment by a $1. Repeat until you find a qualified, legal person for the position. They will do the job.

And now, a judge says the unconstitutional one in this fracas is...

Donald J. Trump.

welp, there ya go...

Time for Mr. Trump to get his next constitutional "whipping". The best part is that his own hubris and bluster has pretty much sunk his case out the gates. Maybe he'll understand the Constitution by the end of his term, instead of claiming to dictatorial trod on it.

"When a long list of comments from President Trump, his surrogates and his spokesmen shows up in a federal court ruling, it’s fair to say it can only mean one thing: a constitutionally questionable executive order is about to get a judicial smackdown."

Web Link

The moral of the story, watch what you put twitter and running your big mouth, it could bite you in the ass.

"watch what you put twitter and running your big mouth,"

Trump is incapable of doing that.

A constitutional conservative on why Trump has a solidly LOSING case. He's actually quite a sucker for losing, between his bombastic claims and weak subject knowledge for being president.

"This week a federal judge in San Francisco halted nationwide enforcement of President Trump’s executive order that threatened to withhold federal funds to sanctuary cities. As a conservative who teaches and practices constitutional law, I applaud the decision as a victory for the Constitution’s separation of powers."

Web Link

"Seriously" and others might find interesting an article in the New York Times this morning on the decline in reporting domestic abuse by immigrants fearing deportation--and the way that PERCEPTION of fear drives that troubling reality: Web Link In case you can't access the article, some choice lines: "Since the presidential election, there has been a sharp downturn in reports of sexual assault and domestic violence among Latinos throughout the country, and many experts attribute the decline to fears of deportation.... 'When you’re talking about immigrant communities, you’re talking about perceptions and whether those perceptions are accurate or not... If the perception is that there is a greater risk if you go to the police, you are going to be less likely to do so, and you are more likely to stay in an abusive relationship until you need to seek treatment at a hospital.'" When cities like MP declare themselves as sanctuary cities, it sends a message of support to counteract this fear. The teeth of the message is partially in the public nature of the statement. Rather than letting ourselves be driven by fear, it is a matter of changing the message.

Trump folds like a cheap suit on his sanctuary city threats. Also folded on his Wall in the spending bill he will sign this week.

On top of those signature fails, Trump lost out on a host of other 'Trump promises' in the spending bill. Looks like a series of victories for Pelosi.

Sorry, I know, about the phrase "Trump Promises".

What a disaster in terms of legislating and governing. One would think he would at least hire experienced professionals to get what he 'promised'.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?