Frank,
Also, don't forget the War Heroes. While Donald Trump delivered a
well modulated speech, it was brimming with barely veiled violence.
But like Eddie Haskell(Leave it to Beaver), Donald Trump came off like
the smug, sneaky bad boy he really is. He wrapped himself in the
Stars and Stripes, praised the War Heroes, and made declarations of
war on anyone who did not bow and kiss his royal red ring. Especially
persons seeking asylum from war torn nations devastated by our
American Empire's eternal war on Terror.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/31/18, Frank Ventura <frank.ventura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl, in Trump's address what went unnoticed by this blind boy and had to be
explained to me by of all folks a right ling message board was that in his
honored guests Trump had a few of what he called "heros". Nope they weren't
humanitarians, teachers, nurses, fire fighters, etc. They were a bunch of
white cops. All of whom have had multiple "officer involved" shootings. Not
my heros!
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 11:13 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: jamesjarvis98 <jamesjarvis98@xxxxxxxxx>; Matthew <mcblack@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump Officials Are Exploring Mass Arrests of
US Mayors
"Trump Officials Are Exploring Mass Arrests of US Mayors!"
Even idle chatter such as this is unnerving. If the Trump administration
attempted such action, in an effort to seat Emperor Donald Trump on the new
American Corporate Empire's Throne, either the American People would rise up
in Revolution, or the Empire would crush any efforts to resist. Either way,
the nation would be in total disarray. It's hard to conceive of anyone
being so arrogant as to give the finger to the Constitution and the Laws of
the Land. But Donald Trump is doing exactly that. And the cheering fools
who went crazy at Donald Trump's state of his union address, wildly cheering
and slapping their hands every time he suggested another violation of our
democratic institution, seem prepared to follow their "Leader"
into the bowels of Hell.
Carl Jarvis/Dad/Grandpa
On 1/30/18, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Trump Officials Are Exploring Mass Arrests of US Mayors Tuesday,
January 30, 2018 By Ron Fein, Truthout | Op-Ed
(Photo: filo / E+ / Getty Images)
It's 4 am in New York. Federal agents in tactical gear confront the
police department's mayoral security detail outside Manhattan's Gracie
Mansion.
After a tense standoff, the NYPD stands down and steps aside as the
bedraggled mayor is removed in handcuffs. Across the nation, carefully
coordinated pre-dawn raids sweep up the mayors of Boston, Chicago, San
Francisco and Seattle, and the governor of California. Two hours
later, President Trump tweets victory.
Paranoid conspiracy thriller? Feverish dystopian fantasy? Hardly. This
is a plan that the Trump administration is actively considering. On
January 16, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen told the
Senate Judiciary Committee that, at her department's request, federal
prosecutors are "reviewing what avenues might be available" to arrest
and prosecute mayors of sanctuary cities for harboring unauthorized
immigrants.
Nielsen's testimony wasn't even the first time in January that the
administration floated the idea of arresting mayors and governors. Two
weeks earlier, Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Thomas Homan told a Fox News host, "We gotta start charging some of
these politicians with crimes."
This is dangerous, dangerous talk.
It's important to understand what a sanctuary city (or state) status
means.
While local policies vary and there is no universal definition of the
term, in sanctuary cities, local police stick to enforcing local and
state law, not federal immigration law. That frustrates federal
authorities, but it's not obstruction, let alone nullification.
Federal officers can still enforce federal immigration law. They just
have to do it on their own.
The question here is not whether sanctuary policies are wise. The
question here is whether our constitutional democracy can survive mass
roundups of mayors and governors for refusing to use local resources
to help enforce federal immigration.
To be sure, elected officials are not immune from the law. Many have
spent time in the federal penitentiary for corruption. And elected
officials who deliberately violate court orders can be subject to
criminal contempt of court. For example, in the 1960s, Mississippi's
governor was charged with criminal contempt for defying a court order
to desegregate the University of Mississippi. And former Arizona
Sheriff Joe Arpaio was convicted for disobeying a court order to stop
unconstitutional policing practices.
(President Trump pardoned him, but that pardon is the subject of
ongoing and potential future litigation.)
It's possible that administration officials are performing elaborate
theater for an audience of one -- the president. Trump himself often
says "We're looking into it" as a way to dodge an awkward question.
Or perhaps the Department of Justice chuckled at the request for
criminal prosecution of mayors, but is considering narrower options to
punish sanctuary cities. There aren't many, partly because most
sanctuary policies don't even violate any federal statute. More
importantly, as the late Justice Antonin Scalia explained in 1997, the
Constitution prohibits the federal government from "commandeering"
local law enforcement to enforce federal law. Even Congress's power to
condition federal funds is limited; as Chief Justice John Roberts
explained in 2012, Congress cannot use its spending power to "coerce"
a state "to adopt a federal regulatory system as its own." That's
partly why a federal judge issued a permanent injunction against
Trump's earlier attempt to withhold federal funds from sanctuary
cities.
But let's not lose the forest for the trees: The United States
government is contemplating a mass arrest of US mayors and governors
for refusing to help the president's agenda.
We've seen this before in other countries. Mass purges of dissident
local officials are moves from Putin's Russia (if not Stalin's) or
Erdoğan's Turkey. But nothing in our own history has prepared us for this
moment.
Is this a red flag for autocracy? Some take comfort in Trump's
disorganization and distraction. On this theory, breaking the republic
is a full-time job, not something you squeeze in between golf and
live-tweeting morning television. But as longtime Putin critic Masha
Gessen notes, the first rule for survival in an autocracy is to
"believe the autocrat. He means what he says." And even if Trump
himself doesn't know how to achieve his goals, the people running the
president's immigration enforcement policy
-- Secretary Nielsen, Acting Director Homan and, of course, Attorney
General Jeff Sessions -- know what they are doing, and how to achieve
what they and the president want.
Maybe it won't happen. Maybe cooler heads will prevail. But we should
reflect on the chilling fact that President Trump's handpicked
appointees to run immigration enforcement openly discuss prosecuting
the mayors of US cities. We must prepare for the day when the
administration makes good on its threat.
We may not get a second chance.
Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.
Ron Fein
Ron Fein is the legal director of Free Speech For People, a national
nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that engages in legal advocacy to
confront the misuse of the US Constitution.
Related Stories
States and Local Advocates Lead the Way for Criminal Legal System
Reform By Jessicah Pierre, Inequality.org | News Analysis What Jeff
Sessions' Latest Attack Means for the Future of Legal Marijuana By
Mike Ludwig, Truthout | News Analysis Sessions Vows to Issue Subpoenas
in Immigrant-Demonizing Inquest Against "Sanctuary Cities"
By Sam Knight, The District Sentinel | Report
