Monday, February 26, 2018

Smash the sanctuaries

Around the time of the Kate Steinle verdict, Paul Kersey suggested on AmRen radio that Trump or Sessions order the feds to arrest a sanctuary an accomplice big city mayor for flagrantly violating federal immigration law. Cuffing governor Jerry Brown would be even better. It's the kind of thing Trump has the cojones to do.

It will be wildly popular. Following the Steinle verdict, I took a look at a poll of San Franciscans--who went 85%-9% for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump--and found just half the city's residents wanted it to remain an accomplice.

One of the most leftist cities in America, in the state that has both the largest Hispanic and the largest illegal alien populations in the country, and the residents are evenly split on the sanctuary city question. Guess how the rest of the nation feels?

Way back in 2012, when Obama was in the midst of unconstitutionally issuing an executive order to grant 'temporary' amnesty to nearly one million illegal aliens, Reuters-Ipsos asked if law enforcement should arrest people in the US who simply lack of legal residency documentation, no other preceding crime necessary. This is, of course, what accomplice cities--and now the entire state of California--work to keep from happening. The following graph shows percentages, by selected demographic characteristics, who agree that the 'undocumented' should be arrested for so being (N = 2,761):

Majorities across all racial, sex, religious, and political lines oppose cities and states shielding illegal aliens from interior immigration enforcement. And this was before the issue gained its Trumpian salience. Public sentiment is likely even more overwhelmingly in favor of the feds and against the accomplices now than it was then.

Frog march, with cameras rolling, a miscreant like Brown or de Blasio down the stairs into a white van and prepare for Trumpslide 2020.


Glen Filthie said...

I MIGHT disagree. I would love to see it, I would fall to my knees and give thanks to the God Emperor if he did it - but I can see an incident like that setting off the next civil war.

Mind you that is one fight we might be better off having now than later.

Glen Filthie said...

Another thought occurs - it might set a bad precedent. I can see the Donks twisting a precedent like that to arrest politicians that have the gall to tell creeps like Obama to shove his gun control up his ass.

IHTG said...

And this was before the issue gained its Trumpian salience. Public sentiment is likely even more overwhelmingly in favor of the feds

I'm afraid this is not the effect that Trump has had on the immigration debate.

Anonymous said...

The polarized politics of our times has shifted prog opinions to fanatically pro-immigration. Arresting mayors will only cause their people to rally behind them, while also inspiring the GOP base. The remaining centrists will see it as a path toward dictatorship.

The only fair solution is a split of the country along the lines of the USSR dissolution. Otherwise the oncoming leftist majority will put Red Middle America under permanent colonial rule that would make Julius Malema seem moderate.

Jig Bohnson said...

This post displays a surprising lack of understanding of contemporary American politics and culture.

Just to confirm: you believe that in the case of a president that is personally wildly unpopular with half of the electorate, but some of that half agrees with said president on one particular political issue, that if said president were to engage in an extremely provocative act such as arresting local elected officials, people will base their reactions on their positions on the particular political issue in question rather than their personal feelings about the politicians involved?

Dave said...

"It's the kind of thing Trump has the cojones to do."

lol. No.

Enochian said...

Immigration is a federal matter - California has no more right to run its own private immigration policy than it does to wage foreign wars. And after Trump has arrested these guys for aiding and abetting, he can seize databases of driver's licenses issued to illegals as evidence, and use that information to locate and deport illegal aliens.

mark auld said...

Both sides of this discussion could be right. The left would erupt and it could precipitate civil war 2. If you think it's inevitable, perhaps sooner is better.

Audacious Epigone said...

Glen Filthie,

If a civil war is in the cards, the sooner the better for us. Time is not on our side on that one.

As for worrying that the left will turn it around on us--we have to stop doing that. They're going to do whatever the hell they want to do. We should, too.


Disagree. Among some squishes, yeah probably, but among the rank-and-file, immigration is now #1. As someone who has been in this since 2005, that has emphatically never been the case. Reuters-Ipsos has some great polling on it that I'm going to post on soon.


Arrest Jerry Brown, Calexit gets new life. California leaves and the remaining union becomes unchangeably red for decades. Calexit might even cause a cascading effect of other west coast states bailing. Good riddance.

Jig Bohnson,

Yes. People hate sanctuary laws. Flyover moderates, even those who vote Democrat, hate big city liberal mayors, and most of the country hates California.


We shall see!

Mark auld,

Agree, though I suspect the support for the mayors would be much shallower than people think. It's the same thing with gun grabbing--look at the major media and it sounds like this time 2nd amendment types are going to get their reckoning.

Nope, not even close.

Audacious Epigone said...

Trump has the instincts. He's no small-r republican.

Consider, for example, how he likes to talk about how Chicago can't govern itself and needs to be taken over by someone from the outside. He didn't just say that on the campaign trail or even as president-elect, he said it after being sworn in, too.

If his approval continues to bump along around in the upper 30s and lower 40s, especially if we get an economic downturn, something 'drastic' like this will be less fantastical than many people think.

Audacious Epigone said...

By someone from the outside, I mean from the federal government.

Fiorentino said...


But let’s talk Jib Bohnson’s point more seriously. Would an arrest like this be overkill? What I mean by that is that such a move might violate some basic principles of war or combat as applied to politics, specifically I’m thinking of the idea of using the minimum force necessary (economy of force?) and not swinging for the fences (to mix metaphors). Why do it? For the right wing lulz? So the news cycle for however long can be framed as Trump taking this opposing politician away from all his (or her) local duties over this difficult to quantify situation? Why not just sort of ‘agree and amplify’ and let California sanctuary itself down the tubes while re-allocating enforcement elsewhere, like, say, to areas that are basically pro-Trump or (better yet?) near-pro-Trump? What would have more of a voting effect on Flyover Moderates? Getting somewhat stalled out on this (you can’t imagine frog marching California and/or NYC pols would go totally unremarked upon?) or taking down the low-hanging fruit in flyover country itself. “Gee, Trump’s policy really directly helped my life.” Wouldn’t you prefer people in flyover saying that to each other rather than debating the merits of costly fights over “the principle of the thing.” Arresting Cali mayors over this vs. just keeping on trucking picking off low-hanging fruit first seems to me like the difference between Reagan re-invading Vietnam vs. just knocking off Grenada.

Audacious Epigone said...


Well put. The frog marching would be gratuitous, though it could be leveraged by following on the heels of the next illegal alien murder in a sanctuary city.

Racketeering charges would have a similar effect without the inflammatory optics. It would be qualitatively different than merely suing cities or states--these would be DOJ criminal charges for conspiracy and the like.

Audacious Epigone said...


Here we go, nail Rahm Emmanuel for this.

Fiorentino said...

Thanks, yes, if true then that’s bogus and we need to get some new cool rules or we’ll be bogus too.. But is it Rahm or the city council or whatever? And what’s the problem? That Chicago will swing blue in the midterms? It’s already blue. That it will take Illinois blue in 2020? Do we need Illinois in ‘20? That the 2020 census will give Illinois another blue congressman? And what else is cooking? I mean if other strategies are leading to self-deportations out of Chicago, then this might be something that Trump should slow-play, draw out, and get all the t’s crossed and i’s dotted. I mean it depends on the numbers. Below a certain threshold, it would be a self own by Dems nationally and locally if they commit themselves to federal voter registration fraud. Like, yeah, have at it guys, we’re just gonna put our objections on the record here and file the lawsuits and injunctions on time —and, you know, hassle the @$#& out of your candidate in 2020, put ‘reminder’ comments in politically astute comboxes and let Tucker rek your guys on normie tv. But we’ll pass on the whole Bull Connor movie role you’re asking us to play for you.

At what numbers would this Chicago situation even be a problem? Would it spread? When’s the latest moves would have to be made?

Anonymous said...


Winning Illinois is of tremendous importance to the GOP. While only squishes like Rauner and Kirk usually win, it has a large amount of blue collar union Dems. Unless all of the Puerto Ricans return, Florida could well be lost. Felons will probably get the franchise by 2020 in Florida. Illinois, Minnesota, Colorado and Oregon present an alternative.

The best move, would be a division of both states. Cook and the Collar Counties could be their own state, as could South Florida (Broward, Palm Beach, Miami Dade). Perhaps in the future we could become a confederation without EU-style free movement.

Audacious Epigone said...


Illinois will eventually have to flip red around the time Texas flips blue. But this wouldn't be tactically precise, it would be for national PR. We underestimate how much even SWPL-types, let alone cuckservatives and other tradcons, hate sanctuary city policies. I'm not sure there is any more populist an issue available to the right than fighting against them.


Perhaps in the future we could become a confederation without EU-style free movement

In the future we will become something other than what we are now, that's for sure. This is one possibility, probably among the better of them.

AB.Prosper said...

Trump's been mouthing off about more gun control and whining about his AG not doing things he needs to do instead of giving orders to get it done or resign

I'm hard pressed to see anything in the way of "guts" here especially the kind that would provoke immediate succession by a good chunk of country and and old fashioned civil war. Hell Texas might see this as "them next" right after the Democrats get control and leave the union

Don't get me wrong, being rid of the progs would be good for the sane part is the country but the Republicans are looter cucks and as long as most of them get to loot, they don't care about the country any more than the Left does and wouldn't tolerate it . Trump would have to decale martial law first and its not in him.

President Trump's a deal maker and while being as shrewd as he is he'll come out a bit ahead , he isn't a gutsy leader . He just looks like one because the last leaders have been so weak

And yes he got a lot done, its all doctrinaire Republican stuff most of it what the Oligarchs desire anyway with a few things thrown in otherwise. Getting that through a Republican house and Senate isn't hard and being praised by the Heritage Foundation is no sign of bravery

And no ignoring insults isn't a sign of a war leader either Trump in his heart is a wrestling heel just like he played in the WWF back in the day . He thrives on it

Its good and fine to count on Generation Z but that kid David Hogg is a Zyklon too as were his wannabe gun grabbing classmates , its hopeful to count on President Trump but he's mouthing off about executive order gun control

Fact is its up to us and baring a miracle, its going to be ugly and baring two miracles, CONUS as a union is a goner

The trick is though instead of being a reactionary like nearly all Conservatives , do what the Left does figure out what a post Leftist society is going to be and to work to make that happen

The Right reacts but its always defensive and that's why they always lose. Vision matter and they ain't got one.