Stout - Grandstanding & Immigration Hypocrisy

In general, resolutions annoy me. They are non-binding action taken by a body and have been used for so many different things that they have cheapened their impact - everything from Chuck Norris recognition to state and federal policy stands.

Sometimes they are feel-good efforts to recognize an individual or say a high school team that won a state championship. I don't mind those so much.

Usually they have about the same impact as a letter from Epstein's mother. Sorry, that is a pretty obscure reference to the show Welcome Back Kotter, but if you got that reference, good for you Jeopardy Champ!

But Ambassador Stout has been using resolutions for his political soapbox - whenever he is actually in the United States or actually in the precinct he represents. I guess it makes him feel like he's doing something.

More often than not, it exposes his hypocrisy - like his resolution yesterday. Stout brought forth another resolution in opposition of Trump's policies on immigration. He and Representative Annello have been pushing companion resolutions at the city and the county.

The city should have passed their version since its a do-nothing piece of paper than has zero impact on anything. To postpone passing the resolution was stupid.

Ambassador Stout went on somewhat of a rant about the city postponing the resolution because he was calling BS on the idea that it wasn't passed because the feds were considering whether or not to compensate the cities for their expenditures.

Stout was right to call them out on it and he's right that the feds aren't going to cough up any dough.

The problem with Stout's resolution is that its great that he's pushing back against Trump's immigration policies and all, but it would be even better if Ambassador Stout was also voting in favor of Trump's immigration policies.

Family separation begins at the tax-payer funded El Paso County Jail.

And thus the hypocrisy of Ambassador Stout begins. He's opposed to Trump's policies because they are inhumane.

Unless of course the County of El Paso is doing it, at which point he suddenly no long cares if its inhumane and then twits himself into some ridiculous policy pretzel in which he actually convinces himself that immigrants in our county jail somehow won the immigration lottery being locked up here.

Its absolutely ludicrous.

In fact Stout makes his own argument against his own point. He votes for a policy in which the local tax based takes on the duties of the feds and the feds aren't making us whole. Its the EXACT argument he rightfully made about why the city should've passed the resolution.

So when there is a photo-op, Stout wears his cowboy hat and gets on a bullhorn and talks about how he's opposed to Trump's policies, but then reaffirms his SUPPORT for separation of families - at local tax payer expense - the VERY NEXT DAY.

But wait...Stout's hypocrisy goes even further. When Commissioner Perez raised the point about the concept of pushing forward a resolution that calls for the end of Trump's policies while simultaneously being the only elected body in El Paso County that actually has sanctioned Trump's policies by making them local policy, Stout felt he needed to double-down.

Stout said that he hopes that Perez will support his Office of New Immigrants initiative and take funding from the jail contract to fund his new office initiative.

Let that soak in for a minute. Stout wants not only to continue to support the separation of families and the criminalization of immigrants - but wants to actually USE THE MONEY off the incarceration of immigrants for his initiative!

Here is the question that should be posed to Ambassador Stout is 1) Do you support the repeal of section 1325? It’s a yes or no.

If yes, do you believe that people who are jailed for illegal entry or illegal re-entry only should be jailed? If his answer is no, then why do you jail people you believe that shouldn’t be?

This is the glaring hypocrisy that I'm talking about that no one in the media is calling him out for. Hell for that matter, with that question in mind, how the hell can Border Network for Human Rights continue to support the jail contract? Its antithetical to their existence. 

They (Stout and Annello) can’t have it both ways - they can’t keep making the argument that they’re better off here than at a private jail, but also be against the whole premise for their detention. 

And what is so bizarre about Stout's entire premise of diverting funds collected off the detention of migrants is that he criticizes the profits of private prisons, but he wants to use the revenue here at the county to fund his own project proposals. 

This is what happens when you don’t take a very clear, principled stand - that you don’t compromise on. 

Stout's argument is that we disagree with virtually everything done by the Trump administration, except the part where we are 100% ok with incarcerating them.

You know what that does? 

It furthers Trump's narrative that immigrants are “illegal” - that they’re criminals - and furthers the acceptance of extreme policies like the one he just had a resolution on by right wing immigration hardliners. 

Sooner or later the Trump Administration, or Fox News, or some other conservative state-run entity is going to actually pick up on the fact that the community making the post noise about Trump's immigration policies is home to a policy like this and we are all gonna look like idiots. 

Seriously, we have to end this contract. We are massive hypocrites for having it. Its shameful and can be changed, with the same amount of effort as it takes to write a do-nothing resolution.