Today IECN Reporter Anthony Victoria posted a lengthy article that took a look at the events that transpired at Rialto’s City Hall last Friday December 30th 2016. In this story Mr. Victoria’s article begins to craft an alternative definition to the Term “Sanctuary City”. A simple google search will provide you the definition we provided in a story we wrote last week:
A sanctuary city is a city in the United States or Canada that has adopted a policy of protecting undocumented immigrants by not prosecuting them solely for violating federal immigration laws in the country in which they are now living illegally. … The designation has no precise legal meaning.
According to Mr. Victoria’s article this is the definition that is now being used:
The term is used generally to describe the process in which local governments refuse to use their own resources or funds to enforce national immigration laws, according to the California Law Review.
When we searched the California Law Review we were left with no results for the term Sanctuary City. So why are those in favor of protecting those who break our borders and laws working so hard to redefine what a Sanctuary City means? Well it’s elementary my dear Watson you see the idea of a local governing body standing in the way of prosecuting people who have broken Federal law no longer sits well with the American people, But we are tired of watching our resources being abused. So the term is changed not by legal experts or educational bodies no we have activists and career politicos working to redefine a word to make it more palatable.
Another popular tactic within this activist crowd is word play. You see we are talking about the future of Illegal Immigrants not legal immigrants or anyone else here LEGALLY. So Mr. Victoria inserts a quote from Ana Gonzalez the former challenger for the City Clerks job last election, Mrs Gonzalez is quoted as saying “A lot of [undocumented residents] are asking, ‘What’s going to happen? Are we going to be safe? The immigrant” population is scared.” You see what they did there they first used the new term undocumented residents (illegal alien) then turn it around to say immigrants are scared (people with a legal right) living here. Why would a legal immigrant have anything to fear?
Mr. Trujillo who apparently only speaks to Spanish media writers said this to Mr. Victoria:
“Gonzalez and several stakeholders were scheduled to meet with Rialto councilmember Rafael Trujillo at City Hall on December 30 to discuss the issue, but were instead met with protest from Claremont-based group We The People Rising. Trujillo–feeling threatened by the large presence of the group–decided to postpone the meeting. Trujillo claims that the meeting was unofficial and that no city committee has been created to address the issue. A lot of people are afraid of the new [presidential] administration coming in,” Trujillo said. “I’m trying to learn about the issue and what it means.”
Even though Mr. Trujillo claims that no Committee was formed this is the message that Blanca Gomez the Freshman Council Member sent to our editor 2 days before the meeting (see above). To further complicate things for the councilman who refuses to tell the truth, Alejandro Cano Spanish reporter for La Opinion news posted this on his Facebook page the night before the meeting:
Even though Mr. Cano tries to deny why he was at the Rialto city hall in the video below he made it very clear on his Facebook page what he was doing and why he was there.
These dangerous activists want you to believe that this law protects your tax dollars and illegal immigrants just looking for a better life. Yet sanctuary cities have been on the front lines of harboring some of the most dangerous illegal aliens that rack up felonies yet get released back into our cities and neighborhoods. Francisco Sanchez admitted to shooting Kate Steinle shooting in 2015 he did this after being released for drug charges and was a 7 time felon and a 5 time deportee. The San Francisco Sheriff refused to honor a detainer request from ICE because his city was a Sanctuary City.
Rafael Trujillo, Blanca Gomez and these activist groups refuse to look at the bigger picture. President elect Donald Trump has said he will pull Federal Funding from cities that refuse to work with Federal authorities. Since Mr. Victoria’s article failed to address the potential money lost if Rialto were to deny Federal Authorities the right to remove dangerous illegal alien criminals we decided to ask City Administrator Mike Story what this might look like for Rialto:
“I do not have specific numbers on what a sanctuary city would cost the city, but just if we lost CDBG federal funds for capitial and community services programs it could be over 1 million dollars just for that program. Not sure of the others.”
So what we should be asking Rafael Trujillo and Ana Gonzalez is are you ready to put Rialto in a $1 Million dollar hole? Also Ana Gonzalez statement in the article by Mr. Victoria speaks to not wanting to allow our police to break up families:
“Ana Gonzalez agrees with Nolasco. “Our city is not prepared to do this kind of enforcement,” she said. “If there’s a crime committed, then of course action needs to be taken. But we shouldn’t be focused on breaking up families.”
Mrs. Gonzalez must be confused because police all over this country are forced to do this to people every single day. When a mother or father breaks a law and the police are forced to arrest that person a family is broken up. Many times the families are forced to leave their homes and become homeless because the fruits of their financial support came from illegal deeds. If a bank robber gets caught we don’t let his kids keep the stolen money because that is all they have no we take it away. This is why we used to punish people so that others would count the cost of breaking our LAWS!!!!!