In his (I believe, it’s hard to keep track) 46th lawsuit against the Trump Administration, Sideshow has assigned seven, count them SEVEN attorneys and who knows how many paralegals. This in spite of there being 12 other states involved in this litigation.
That is seven attorneys not working on mental health commitments. Seven attorneys not working on consumer protection issues. Seven attorneys not assisting local prosecutors trying to rein-in crime.
Understand: Sideshow is using your money to try to force the federal government to give MORE of your money to people who wish to immigrate to our country. I have said it before and I will say it again: Why are we subsidizing foreigners when we are not taking care of the people who are already here? Where is the hand-wringing and so-called compassion for those Americans?
Sideshow released the following statement yesterday:
OLYMPIA — Attorney General Bob Ferguson released the following statement following the Trump Administration’s announcement of changes to the “public charge” rule that would allow immigration officials to deny new or continuing legal status to immigrants who use or may use public benefits to which he or she is entitled:
“The Trump Administration’s anti-immigrant agenda continues today with the announcement of proposed changes to the public charge rule,” Ferguson said. “These changes force legally present immigrant families into a Hobson’s choice — to sacrifice their dream of becoming Americans in order to provide health care, food or a roof over their children’s heads, or let their families go without in order to remain in the country. That’s a choice they should not have to make, and we’re taking a close look at whether or not this action is legal.”
The law in question, 8 U.S.C. 1182, has been on the books since 1891. You read that right, for 128 years. A problem was a lack of a formal definition of “public charge,” and more recently a lack of enforcement by our government.
The law is aimed at legal immigrants. Why would we want to encourage others to come to this country if we would have to support once they are here? When I was living in Australia on the equivalent of a “green card” I was not eligible for public assistance for two years. Other countries have similar laws, why are our laws “racist” or somehow unjust?
As usual, Sideshow likes to conflate legal and illegal immigration. Pay close attention to Sideshow’s use of the word entitled at the end of the first paragraph. He apparently believes that those who break our laws to enter, and almost certainly break our laws to remain (identity theft is a big one!) are entitled to your tax dollars.
Even if we decided to be that generous, has Sideshow looked out of his window recently? Should we not ensure we can take care of those already here before we start throwing our money at foreigners?
On a final note, I thought the reasoning behind sanctuary laws was that the state is not responsible for enforcing federal immigration law. It would be nice if Sideshow would quit virtue signaling and stay in his lane for once, but I won’t hold my breath.
Today’s stabbing spree in downtown Seattle was tragic, and given the suspect’s reported criminal and mental health history, preventable. Under Jay Inslee’s watch our mental health system has deteriorated. Likewise, Bob Ferguson does not seem very concerned with mental health or public safety issues; he’s too busy “resisting” the federal government to focus on matters that impact our daily lives.
If the mental health and criminal justice systems had paid attention to this individual, today’s injuries could have been avoided. Make no mistake, if today’s crimes had been committed with a gun instead of a knife Ferguson and Inslee would have been promoting this incident as a reason for more gun control.
It is convenient that government leaders use problems that perhaps they did not create, but they certainly enable, to try to convince you it is necessary to give up your rights for your own safety.
Why didn’t the government protect today’s victims? Given that lack of protection, shouldn’t people be given every opportunity to protect themselves?
I have heard it said that the government establishment finds a certain amount of crime and disorder acceptable as it creates the need for government “protection” and helps justify their existence. Events of the past several years lend credibility to that notion.
As your Attorney General I will ensure that the mental health and criminal justice systems have additional resources available to keep the truly dangerous in custody, and where appropriate in treatment, while at the same time ensuring your rights to protect yourself are not impaired.
Independence Day is a good day to reflect upon where we have been, where we are, and where we are heading. A lot of people seem to hate America these days. Of course they have their opinions and have their rights, but I shake my head and think that they would not have the ability to think and act as they do if it was not for the courage and wisdom of those who came before us.
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” I am concerned that we are rapidly reaching a point where losing what we have achieved is a very real possibility. Complacency is no longer an option. Neither is giving up.
NOW is the time to make sure your family, friends, and neighbors are registered to vote. The August primary is just around the corner and November will be here before you know it. Then the push to the 2020 elections and what I imagine will be an insane period.
I will post more thoughts about the importance of voting in the coming weeks. In the meantime, take the time to educate yourself. Be prepared to vote in every race on your ballot.
I wish everyone a safe and happy Independence Day.
Many of you have probably heard about the Antifa attack this past weekend in Portland. If not, a number of media outlets are reporting on it; do an internet search for your favorite. There are some reports that a witness approached police and told them the witness had photographic evidence and could point out the suspects, but the police said there was nothing they could do. Some media are assuming police were given a “stand-down” order, although I am not aware that has been confirmed.
This leads me to today’s thought experiment: One of the talking points of the anti-gun crowd is, “Why do you need a gun? The government and police will protect you.”
If the government prevents you from defending yourself, what happens when the government decides that you are no longer worthy of protection?
For those who may not know, the victim in this attack was Asian. And gay. And a journalist. You cannot depend on the government to protect you, even if you are a member of a “protected class” or are exercising your Constitutional rights.
Former Washington Governor Gary Locke, currently the Chairman of the Washington State Complete Count Committee, has encouraged people to “boycott” a citizenship question if it appears in the 2020 census. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/boycott-that-question-citizen-query-unnecessary-says-chair-of-washington-state-census-committee/
Locke’s advice raises a few questions:
1) Considering that illegal aliens ARE counted when apportioning seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, why shouldn’t everyone answer that question? Illegal Aliens will be counted as part of the state’s population regardless.
2) Is it wise for a representative of state government to encourage people to violate federal law, in this case 13 U.S.C. § 221? (Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers)
3) If any census-takers follow or encourage others to follow Mr. Locke’s advice, would he have violated federal law? 13 U.S.C. § 222 (Giving suggestions or information with intent to cause inaccurate enumeration of population)
4) With legal advice like this, one wonders why former Governor Locke voluntarily surrendered his law license? https://www.mywsba.org/PersonifyEbusiness/LegalDirectory/LegalProfile.aspx?Usr_ID=000000006470
5) As the legal advisor to the State of Washington, what advice has Attorney General Bob Ferguson provided to Mr. Locke on this issue?
And most importantly:
6) If government officials encourage some people to ignore some laws, how can they object when other people decide to ignore other laws?
Consider making a donation to restore sanity to our state’s government: https://brettrogersforag.com/donate/