Denver mayor to use cops and citizens to oppose Fed deportations of invaders

Sounds good in theory in order to bait and hook more supporters of these "local efforts".

Just wait until Trump is sworn in and he starts handing out "free" federal money to these local departments - they are not going to turn it down.

Even the local LEO will need to "papers please" everybody and violate peoples rights. The only solution is to shut the money spigot off, plain and simple.


A Free-Market Guide to Trump’s Immigration Crackdown
 
Good for him.

Some years back, the FDA was harassing some dairy farmers in Elkhart County, Indiana, about selling raw milk to people. The county Sheriff, Brad Rogers, wrote a letter to the DOJ saying that if federal agents came to that farm again without a warrant, he would arrest them. After that, the feds left the dairy farmers alone.
 
Imagine a world where someone in a local position actually knows the 10th Amendment exists and does this for a principled reason.

'Cause, that's all you can do, imagine it.
 
Good for him.

Some years back, the FDA was harassing some dairy farmers in Elkhart County, Indiana, about selling raw milk to people. The county Sheriff, Brad Rogers, wrote a letter to the DOJ saying that if federal agents came to that farm again without a warrant, he would arrest them. After that, the feds left the dairy farmers alone.

That was my first thought as well.
 
Did those apartment buildings ever get reclaimed for the owners?
Seems like a ballsy move for someone who is pretty much the poster boy for immigration gone wrong.
 
I dont really care what they do in new california a long as none of those unwashed liberals come to my state
 
That's exactly Trump's plan to deal with recalcitrant local governing bodies.

And to the sponsoring bodies facilitating the invasion.


It has been repeated time and time and time again, but conveniently ignored; Trump stated in his Agenda47 that he wants to provide federal funding to militarize local law enforcement and provide complete immunity.

Is that an acceptable trade-off? Or is it; "well, we really prefer to close our ears and eyes and don't want it mentioned publicly, so just keep your mouth shut about that".
 
It has been repeated time and time and time again, but conveniently ignored; Trump stated in his Agenda47 that he wants to provide federal funding to militarize local law enforcement and provide complete immunity.

Is that an acceptable trade-off? Or is it; "well, we really prefer to close our ears and eyes and don't want it mentioned publicly, so just keep your mouth shut about that".

The local and state cops already have federal funding are already militarized and have complete immunity.
 
The local and state cops already have federal funding are already militarized and have complete immunity.


Perfect :up:

Then Trump giving more federal dollars won't bother you in the least. Let's give him all the support that we can muster :up:


I'll keep my mouth shut about it from this point forward :rolleyes:
 
Did those apartment buildings ever get reclaimed for the owners?
Seems like a ballsy move for someone who is pretty much the poster boy for immigration gone wrong.

From what I gather, they never actually seized anything, they were inserting themselves into the middle between the legitimate property owners, who by all accounts are simply absentee slumlords and the mostly illegal invaders living in the buildings.

It was/is an extortion racket, that is still going on, as far as I can tell.

There has been no new news posted other than this 3 Nov piece.

Inside Aurora apartments made infamous by gang takeover claims, residents wonder what’s next
 
Perfect :up:

Then Trump giving more federal dollars won't bother you in the least. Let's give him all the support that we can muster :up:

First, there's a huge delta between what Trump says and what he does. Secondly, he doesn't need any more dollars - he can just reallocate what was planned to go to the immigrants to ship them around the country and care for them.

I'll keep my mouth shut about it from this point forward :rolleyes:

I bet there will be a similar delta between what you say and what you do.
 
From what I gather, they never actually seized anything, they were inserting themselves into the middle between the legitimate property owners, who by all accounts are simply absentee slumlords and the mostly illegal invaders living in the buildings.
This is confusing the issue. Apartment owners are all absentee slumlords. That's not the question.
The only questions should be
1) Is the state suppressing property right
2) Is the state interfering with other people creating nicer housing situations

We all know the answer to both is yes, but nobody is going to ask those questions. In the most gun-friendly states in the US you're still going to get a visit from the authorities if you're non-threateningly carrying rifles around, and they didn't. Everyone on the anti-immigration side knows rot when they smell it and there's plenty in this situation. So my point stands - I don't for a second believe the mayor of Denver is righteous.

Yeah I saw that article but I refuse to read articles that make me turn off my ad blocker. From the first couple sentences I could tell it was a puff piece anyway.
I think the accurate TL;DR on this is likely 'someone discovered something unflattering about this story and it's been buried'.
 
First, there's a huge delta between what Trump says and what he does.

It's nice to hear someone else say this.
The standing police army thing isn't something Trump's really been harping on and it's not something that has grasroots support and it's something that some of the people in his cabinet are going to have a problem with.
As I also point out regularly, Trump is impressionable, too. If Tulsi gets into position I can't imagine with the kind of access she'll have that she won't make a pretty big deal about how fucked everything is and I can't imagine the role of local police won't be a feature in her arguments.


I bet there will be a similar delta between what you say and what you do.
Yeah but he's not necessarily talking to you. I too get weary of hearing it every time but as long as there are people here who haven't heard, it needs to be pointed out.
 
Last edited:
Would be great to see more State level resistance of federal tyranny.

Except, we never see it.

THIS is the line in the sand???
 
Would be great to see more State level resistance of federal tyranny.

Except, we never see it.

THIS is the line in the sand???

Well, if you adopt the stance that illegal immigration actually helps TPTB, could you really call this 'resistance of federal tyranny?'

That vaguely reminds me of Scotland wanting to break free of Great Britain so they can stay in the EU.
----------------------------------------
I would suggest another approach:

It is not necessary to 'increase funding' to these jurisdictions to persuade them to stop harboring illegals.

I would say cut funding. Tally up an estimate of whatever federal funding is or could be used to house/feed/clothe/or otherwise care for illegal immigrants and cut it. Don't even warn them that you'd do so. Just cut it. (The ARPA funding is already due to expire in 2025, and must be used by 2026. Denver has been using these COVID relief funds to buy hotels and house illegals. But I'm sure that's just one program) Then let Denver figure out how to handle the issue itself.

No one really cares about the impact of illegal immigration until they have to endure it themselves. As Martha's Vinyard showed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top