.
.
.
What had been looking like an unstoppable juggernaut of OC cities rushing to join Trump’s lawsuit against California’s sanctuary status – starting unexpectedly in tiny Los Alamitos, growing through Aliso Viejo, Huntington Beach, and the County itself – sputtered to at least a slowdown Tuesday night in educated Fullerton, where after hearing from over 100 immigrant supporters and half a dozen out-of-town hardliners, council voted 3-1-1 to receive-and-circular-file the motion. [I’ve heard that today, Friday April 6, was the last chance for a city to join in on Trump’s anti-California suit.]
It was a relief – given that this whole thing’s really a nakedly partisan wedge issue – to see two Fullerton Republicans refuse to board the train – Greg Sebourn joining the two Democrats’ vote to receive and file, and Bruce Whitaker (who was originally the second for the motion) quietly abstaining. The only member left supporting the measure was Curt Pringle employee Jennifer Fitzgerald, which surprised me as her boss (at least through his closest Anaheim ally Kris Murray) has been seeming to promote a kinder gentler kleptocracy, one that even spoke out against Trump in 2016; but it did exhume old memories of Pringle’s racist Santa Ana Poll Guards controversy of 1988.
We of course appreciate the votes of Doug and Jesús, but we expect Democrats to vote in favor of immigrant rights. I had to ask Greg and Bruce their reasons though. The comments by both men at the meeting were vague and led listeners to expect them to vote the opposite way – they both emphasized their concern for law and order, federal supremacy over immigration, and Sacramento’s “constitutional overreach.” But Greg told me he was really moved by hearing from so many Fullerton immigrants that he knows and thinks highly of as “valuable upstanding residents,” and concerned about the cost, and unconvinced this was a burning Fullerton issue. Bruce simply texted me that he was “frustrated at how amplified and angry the partisan polarization is now.”
And both men have received plenty of nasty phone calls and messages, from angry fellow Republicans, since their votes.
**********
I’m told different things, by different Republicans I know, about exactly who’s been driving this anti-Sanctuary pro-Trump movement. OC GOP insider and immigration hardliner Tim Whitacre swears that it’s a “grass roots” thing, just regular folks out there who’ve had enough of Sacramento’s arrogance and lawlessness, and want to take their country back again! Funny, most of these “grass roots” people look pretty familiar, and are generally from out of town – that whole little “We the People Rising” crowd that tags along with Torrance’s foul-mouthed, MAGA-hat-wearing Arthur Schaper, who told the Board of Supervisors last week that Mexicans were making California “a shithole.”
But I believe OTHER Republican friends of mine who characterize it as a hyper-partisan wedge-issue campaign driven by the California Republican Party and specifically longtime power broker Shawn Steel, husband of dingbat OC Supervisor Michelle. Like the “In God We Trust” movement of 2008-9 and the stupid “Rule of Law City” movement 0f 2010, Shawn and other GOP leaders are gambling that enough OC Republicans backing Trump on immigration will bring out the knuckle-dragging base in the crucial upcoming elections. Well, we’ll see about that. But in any case a Republican politician who doesn’t play along is probably looking at some punishment coming down the pike.
****
The folks evolving into the spokesmen of the OC anti-sanctuary movement, the ones who get the most press, like new FOX News star HB Mayor Mike Posey (right), evince great messaging discipline, almost suggesting their big passionate movement has nothing to do with immigration or even crime, but simply a concern over “constitutional overreach” by the state. Oh, come now. Latinos and liberals know perfectly well what it’s all about. How many people or politicians join up in a passionate movement over simple constitutional disagreements? There’s always something really motivating that. In this case there are three bogus but powerful motivations, and in reverse order we’ll dispense of them:
#3. An exaggerated worry about “releasing criminal illegals back into our communities,” commensurate with listening to Trump uncritically. People stoking these fears never tire of bringing up the freak, tragic story of Kate Steinle’s accidental shooting as though that were typical of anything, and ignoring the Steinle family’s wish for them to stop using her as a political football. But anyone who really wants the facts should read this handy primer – under SB 54 there are STILL over 800 crimes for which local authorities can still alert ICE that an undocumented criminal is about to be released. And the connection between immigration (illegal or not) and crime is also bogus, as this NY Times piece explains:
#2. Okay, so it’s not REALLY about crime per se. Folks who are excited about helping facilitate Trump’s deportations (or frustrated at any obstacle to that) may eventually admit at least to themselves that they’re tired of looking at immigrants, especially Mexicans. To not sound racist, they couch that in OVER-concern about Mexican-looking people’s legal status. They’ve probably even convinced themselves that more Mexicans than ever are streaming over our border, and we are on the verge of losing the very white-skinned English-speaking essence of our Republic! Well, rational talk is quaint these days, but maybe another graph would help:
#1. “Fine, maybe illegal immigration is not actually on the rise, and SB 54 will not make Californians less safe, and we admit the balance of powers between state and feds in the Constitution makes us kinda yawn, but … this WILL help get more folks out to vote Republican in June and November, won’t it?” I don’t know. Don’t they say that those who refuse to learn the lessons of Prop 187 are doomed to repeat it? Or something along those lines?
Senator Kevin De León, our choice over Dianne Feinstein for California Senator as well as the author of SB 54, chastised these OC Republicans well:
“The county that gave us Prop 187 more than two decades ago is at it again with another unconstitutional attack on our immigrant communities. I am confident the courts will reject this challenge to SB 54, just as they roundly rejected Prop 187.
“This kind of obsessive immigrant bashing is embarrassing to the county and its residents, and seems designed to court the approval of a racist President and his cronies.
“‘Blue’ and ‘progressive’ we may be, but these repeated efforts to portray hardworking immigrants as criminals are a repulsive, black stain on California’s history.”
Thank you Fullerton and Santa Ana!
Oh, did I mention: And the people rejoiced!
Except for the ones who didn’t.
Now it’s your Weekend Open Thread.
Speak up, we can’t hear you!
True to Form!!
The Republican Party Lemmings,grabbing to wrong end of the stick..and running of the cliff with it!!!
I was quite proud to see a couple of real conservatives do the right thing.
Constitutional law is not a popularity contest. SCOTUS will reach a decision based on the merits of the law irrespective of Fullerton’s opinion.
The election of 2018 will be one about Ethical, Caring and Honest Government. Pity those that choose the Devil and his Ship of Fools!
Are you guys going to cover this story of Patrick Brenden’s appointee?
https://www.ocweekly.com/hb-finance-commissioner-called-blacks-colored-people-on-social-media/
Might talk about a Jennifer Fitzgerald appointee who got busted telling a bunch of Latinos to “go back.”
Our old friend Baxter wrote in on Facebook (from Australia where he’s getting some time away from Trump):
“A bit off topic but regarding Jennifer Fitzgerald. A few years back I helped to organize an art show on same sex marriage at the Art Colony in Fullerton. I made a point of inviting all the council members for walk through prior to our opening. To their credit they all showed up, but by far Jennifer was the most uncomfortable.
“I took great pleasure in dragging out the private tour with Ms. Fitzgerald for far longer than I needed to. I could have done the job in 15 minutes but seeing how uncomfortable she was I talked to her for two hours about all things LGBTQ. It was hilarious.
“I can’t imagine how ill this show made her. I wish I would have recorded all the ignorant, bigoted statements she made. It may have ended her political career. She is the worst of the fucking worst.”
Vern again: I had been picturing JF as more of a Kris Murray type but she’s starting to sound more like Lucille Kring.
It got me thinking, and I don’t know anything about this woman, but…
Why is it very cool and smiled upon to say “people of color” but old-school dorky and now apparently even offensive to say “colored people?”
Gabriel did good enough on this…
Who is Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) which is backing the federal lawsuit against California’s Sanctuary City laws?
FAIR has been pressuring California cities and counties to file supporting Amicus Briefs to the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice lawsuit against California’s Sanctuary City laws (SB54, AB450 and AB103). FAIR’s president Dan Stein sent a letter to the Yorba Linda City Council and other councils and county seats with requests though Fullerton city council did not admit to receiving a letter from FAIR.
FAIR, based in Washington, D.C., has been identified as a hate group since 2008 by Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit which tracks hate crimes in America.
Far from being a group dedicated to ending “illegal” immigration, FAIR with a budget of over $11 million spent against DACA (that protects those brought to US as children) and DAPA (which would protect their parents from deportation) and the ENLIST Act (where service in the US military earns citizenship); lobbied to deny law enforcement grants to sanctuary cities and produced legislation guidance and talking points to lawmakers on immigration and refugee resettlement issues; produced social media ads on immigration policy in 33 states; and provided material on immigration issues to students from grade school through college; – according to its IRS non-profit filing for 2016.
FAIR’s founding leader John Tanton warned that unless Latino immigration was restricted it would lead to liguistic, economic, racial and religious apartheid in the US. This and other comments and documents of over a decade of research says SPLC show the true intent of Tanton’s anti-immigration advocacy is “to limit the number of nonwhites living in the U.S.” FAIR’s current president Dan Stein, has warned that immigrants are engaged in “competitive breeding” aimed at diminishing white power.
FAIR is a non-profit funded by The Colcom Foundation (the single largest donor to anti-immigrant groups with assets exceeding $493 million founded by Cordelia Scaife May), The Swensrud Endwoment Fund, The Carthage Foundation, Sarah Scaife Foundation, Blair Foundation, Galbraith Foundation and F.M. Kirby Foundation.
FAIR is affiliated with the Center for Immigration Studies (publishes false statistics) and NumbersUSA both founded by Tanton. In 2007 FAIR ran a sucessful campaign against President George W. Bush’s proposed Immigration Reform which included a path to citizenship for most illegal immigrants. FAIR also controls two other tax-exempt organizations: FAIR Congressional Task Force Inc., which develops immigration policy; and Immigration Reform Law Institute Inc., the legal arm which promotes enforcement of immigration laws with a $1.4 million budget.
For much more on FAIR and the affiliated groups visit http://www.splcenter.org and enter its full name into the search engine.
*The long term Immigration Debate….has been just that….long term and certainly few concepts about resolution. DACA is an important First Step..in admitting that our Immigration and Naturalization Service is either unfunded or unadministered to preform the necessary procedures. When Homeland Security came on board after 911, the idea was to beef up the INS, Border Patrol and getting a better grip on who was coming into our country. Having said that, the Center for Immigration Studies has been around many years and had been promoting the concept of tractability of immigrants for some years. This all stems from the change in the law back in 1965 which had required that ANY Alien (not a citizen) be required to let the INS know where they lived and how many folks were in their family. The forms used to be available at the Post Office as many may remember. Tracking folks in this country may in fact require that we return to this policy eventually. The results of the Alien form allowed INS Agents to check when someone came up into the criminal system. Usually, these were nasty felons that appeared Without Papers! Our DMV in California has been very strict about issuing licenses without a birth certificate or school records. Anyway, FAIR seems to be an Activist Arm of the Center for Immigration Studies…..and is probably considered a 501-C4 or other designation – much like the NRA’s ILA.. The Center for Immigration Studies…..we believe is a 501-C3 Organization which is dedicated to just doing research on the immigrant population and doing think tank studies. But heck, things change as we all know….but you can certainly check on it. Don’t forget when you say an Organization is Tax Exempt…..it is whether they are considered a 501-C3 or C-4 that matters. Under the C-4 Designation you can participate marginally in political activities..while under the C-3….political or partisan activities are restricted. You seem to have done some good work investigating these groups so we suggest you take the next step to be sure or their intentions.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is actually the hate group. FAIR provides the most honest and accurate numbers on illegal immigration and the numbers aren’t good so they have been demonized by the left with the standard racist, white supremacist moniker.
The truth is the SPLC lists the border patrol as a hate group but refuses to list antifa as a hate group. They are proven far left liars who make millions slandering conservative groups. If you do some digging, some real research you will find that there is zero evidence that FAIR is a racist organization. There is just no evidence there except the SLPC’s word which isn’t worth much.
I know you are but what am I.
You got it wrong on HB Vern! HB is not “joining Trumps lawsuit againts CA…” We are suing CA ourselves (the 1st city to do so)!
Suit theories:
Dept of Justice suit = Feds r supreme over States on immigration!
HB’s suit = CA is violating CA’s constitution for 121 Charter cities’ autonomy (right to spend $ & police as we wish)!
#Apples&Oranges 🙂
—-
BTW, HB called ICE twice last year, so only 2 people in HB got deported last year:
1) Got homesick and wanted a free ride back!
2) A really bad guy!
After the court eventually sides with HB, we get to deport those 2 guys still; and will still receive free INS/ICE training; and we will not be violating the constitution anymore either.
Oh, and HBPD will have Daddy CA’s permission to make phone calls to ICE again! Off of phone restriction! Yay!
————-
Also, the SB54 Sanctuary City law is just another attraction/benefit that will attract more, and more, and ever more ILLEGAL immigrants!……more criminals……bid wages lower…..more low income housing being taken…..(and most importantly), need to exercise LOCAL CONTROL (from Sacramento)!”
—
NEXT UP from Sacramento control center:
A bill that will take away even more LOCAL CONTROL – Scott Weiner’s SB827. which bypasses local zoning and auto-allows 8 story HDD (“would have minimum height requirements between 45 and 85 feet”) within 1/2 mile of big corridor (Beach/Goldenwest street) bus stops. SMDH
I actually attended this city council meeting in Fullerton. The author of this piece obviously did not. The handful of “hardliners”,who are actually people for law and order, were all from Fullerton and most owned a home here. We are hardliners because we can’t understand paying for illegal alien’s rent and food while we have thousands of Americans living in tents all over the place. Anyway there were hundreds of far left activists at this meeting that were not from Fullerton. Get it straight Vern Nelson.
Jeff,
I can attest that your representation of who attended is not true.
Vern has his story straight.
“Home Owners? Don’t strike at the heart of Democracy and Republican Government by using the HOME OWNER card. What makes you any better than any other citizen? We are not impressed! OK, so bless us with your answer to the Homeless issue again? Take away Medicare and Social Security perhaps? You folks have been riding the wrong bus for so long you never realized that you actually were going in the wrong direction the entire time. You guys probably think that the Railroad Moguls of the 19th Century were Progressive Social Activists? Time to start looking up more information on Google…..before you attempt to follow the false gods of rhetorical metaphors!
“We are hardliners because we can’t understand paying for illegal alien’s rent and food while we have thousands of Americans living in tents all over the place.”
I can’t understand it either, particularly since Bill Clinton signed the ‘Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act’ in 1996 which put a stop to it.
On a federal level, illegal immigrants pay around $90 bn in taxes but receive about $5 bn in benefits (subsidized lunches for kids in school and maternal care) – it’s significantly more likely they’re paying for your food and rent than you’re paying for theirs. On a state level, illegal immigrants probably do more to put food on the table of average Californians than just about any other group of people, certainly more than idiotic bigots like you.
Also Vern, Baxter is a full blown lunatic who uses social media to threaten and intimidate people. If you want to be taken serious as a journalist you should distance yourself from violent radicals like that loser!
You’re on thin ice, sir.
I can attest that your representation of Baxter is not correct.
If you’re here to spout nonsense, please find another platform.
If you say so, sir.
Bax moved to Australia. Cant get much more distant than that
COPY OF LETTER SENT
Dear City Council, of Los Alamitos,
Subj: Sanctuary City
I support your decision to challenge California’s Sanctuary City Law. I support your decision as being heroiac and protective of our Constitution. I support Legal, controlled, Immighration.
I look upon the Sanctuary law (SB-54) to be comparable to when the Southern States succeeded from the nation United States, the move resulted in the Civil War. Any law, even a partial one like (SB-54), that illegally separates and removes itself form the United States Government, is Unconstitutional.
The Sanctuary Law (SB-54) is illegal, unconstitutional, and detrimental to the Citizens of the United states. In fact, it undermines the citizens of the United States.
I, nor any veteran, did not serve in the United States Armed Forces, to come home, and to preserve, illegal immigration. We served to protect and preserve the Constitution of the United States of America.
Why would anyone serve in the military to support rampant illegal immigration?
I support the United States Constitution, and legal immigration. We are a county of Legal Immigrants.
Thank you for a job well done.
Larry Bales, Viet Nam Veteran
Ps: For those who are concerned about the finance, remember some of our veterans have paid the ultimate price to preserve our way of life.
Hello Mr Bales! I covered your BoS interview for County Clerk-Recorder back in 2013! http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/04/live-dirty-your-county-clerk-recorder-special-coverage/
You were a whistle-blower at the Assessor’s Office. And I liked your answer to Spitzer’s weird question about gay marriage: “I have married gay couples, and I’m sure the Supreme Court is going to overturn Prop 8.” Too bad your open mind and tolerance doesn’t extend to immigrants.
BTW your experience in Vietnam does not make you knowledgable about immigration or SB-54 specifically, nor does it make your opinion more valuable than any of ours.
“I look upon the Sanctuary law (SB-54) to be comparable to when the Southern States succeeded from the nation United States,”
Then you need some glasses. That’s OK; a lot of us do.
A lot of folks who oppose illegal immigration think that SB-54 ‘helps’ immigrants.
It doesn’t. In effect, it limits when police can initiate deportation proceedings.
Here’s a few cases from the real world:
(1) In Texas, a woman complains that her husband is abusing her and seeks police help. Her husband complains, and they launch deportation proceedings.
(2) In California, a tenant complains that the landlord is operating a dangerous slum. The landlord tries to launch deportation proceedings.
(3) In Arizona, an employer withheld payment of wages to a number of employees. They complained, and he launched deportation proceedings.
As you invoked the Civil War, it’s worth bearing in mind that the beneficiaries of the 13th Amendment weren’t just the slaves who were liberated, but every person who didn’t own a slave, but had to compete with slave owners. You don’t have to love illegal immigrants to support SB-54 – you just need to hate rapists and extortion.
Wish I could edit that. The three cases I referred to are precisely the types of things SB-54 stops: extortionate landlords, abusive husbands, greedy employers who gouge their workers, and similar people who break the law, then threaten the ones who are victims or witnesses with deportation if they try to hold them accountable. These aren’t the people you want to fight for.
Law enforcement has immense discretion to go after violent immigrants – that’s not changed, or even affected by SB-54. What is changed is that – at least in California – law enforcement cannot be tricked into accidentally helping thugs, extortionists, and rapists who threaten victims and witnesses with deportation to get them to shut up.