Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
Moderator T

White House proposed releasing immigrant detainees in sanctuary cities

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Ladybird

Funny how you just admitted that they will be a drag on society. Why allow them to be “dumped” anywhere? Why allow them in at all?

 

Just dumping people in a city will of course be a drain. I don't think it's any reason to stop immigration or hear the cases of asylum seekers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Donald Trump’s Idea to Ship Illegal Immigrants to Sanctuary Cities Is Ridiculous and Wrong

By DAVID FRENCH

April 12, 2019 4:11 PM

 

 

<snip>

 

 

We need better border security. We need to reform our asylum laws. And we can only do both things truly effectively through congressional action, but the idea that you can use human beings as pawns to punish your political enemies is not only repugnant, it’s politically disastrous.

 

First, to the extent that the order applies to immigrants seeking asylum, we have to remember that they’re exercising a legal right. The relevant statute is broad and clear:

 

Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including analien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(B) of this title.

 

The idea that we will then punish people who are exercising legal rights granted by our own government by shipping them to domestic locations chosen for purely partisan and punitive purposes is plainly wrong. Depending on the circumstances, it can even be cruel.

 

If a person who lacks resources has a place to stay with, say, an aunt in Waco, is it right or reasonable to ship them to Silicon Valley?

 

Moreover, if the actual goal is to deport an illegal immigrant rather than use him or her to punish your enemies, then why send them to sanctuary cities that make deportation more difficult? And if Trump truly believes his hyperbole about illegal immigrant crime, how can we interpret his tweet as anything other than floating an intentional effort to sow chaos in specific American cities?

 

 

<snip>

 

Link

 

 

Like I said, it's chum for the base. However, if the sycophants have truly taken over the asylum and do this crazy thing, I hope the first stop is Trump Tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
corporal_little

Funny how you just admitted that they will be a drag on society. Why allow them to be “dumped” anywhere? Why allow them in at all?

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noclevermoniker

After they get dumped in these cities Mr. Trump has a beef with, then what? Homeless families living in the streets and former detainees (some of whom are criminals) roaming free around the country. Wonderful.. This will make the job of the ICE agents even harder and spread misery all around. I understand he is frustrated, but too bad. This is the job he signed up for and punishing the constituents who live in places which he did not receive electoral votes is not part of the job.

But you want them here, so what does it, you know, matter?

 

You're straddling two sides of the issue, and don't even realize it.

 

Wake the fk up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noclevermoniker

Donald Trump’s Idea to Ship Illegal Immigrants to Sanctuary Cities Is Ridiculous and Wrong

By DAVID FRENCH

April 12, 2019 4:11 PM

 

 

<snip>

 

 

We need better border security. We need to reform our asylum laws. And we can only do both things truly effectively through congressional action, but the idea that you can use human beings as pawns to punish your political enemies is not only repugnant, it’s politically disastrous.

 

First, to the extent that the order applies to immigrants seeking asylum, we have to remember that they’re exercising a legal right. The relevant statute is broad and clear:

 

Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including analien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(B) of this title.

 

The idea that we will then punish people who are exercising legal rights granted by our own government by shipping them to domestic locations chosen for purely partisan and punitive purposes is plainly wrong. Depending on the circumstances, it can even be cruel.

 

If a person who lacks resources has a place to stay with, say, an aunt in Waco, is it right or reasonable to ship them to Silicon Valley?

 

Moreover, if the actual goal is to deport an illegal immigrant rather than use him or her to punish your enemies, then why send them to sanctuary cities that make deportation more difficult? And if Trump truly believes his hyperbole about illegal immigrant crime, how can we interpret his tweet as anything other than floating an intentional effort to sow chaos in specific American cities?

 

 

<snip>

 

Link

 

 

Like I said, it's chum for the base. However, if the sycophants have truly taken over the asylum and do this crazy thing, I hope the first stop is Trump Tower.

Reading and understanding are tough for you, I realize. Trump's "proposal" is only giving the dems what THEY ASKED FOR, no wait, WHAT THEY DEMANDED.

 

And now you're butthurt? What if The Black Jesus had proposed dumping them in Amarillo? You'd think it was the greatest thing since hair extensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
corporal_little

After they get dumped in these cities Mr. Trump has a beef with, then what? Homeless families living in the streets and former detainees (some of whom are criminals) roaming free around the country. Wonderful.. This will make the job of the ICE agents even harder and spread misery all around. I understand he is frustrated, but too bad. This is the job he signed up for and punishing the constituents who live in places which he did not receive electoral votes is not part of the job.

No, how about you and your liberal friends put your money where your mouth is and take care of these poor people? You guys oppose every policy aimed at ending illegal immigration, you force tax payers to pay for anchor babies, you demand drivers licenses for illegals and you pass laws that bar your law enforcement agencies from cooperation with ICE even when it comes to trying to deport violent criminal illegal aliens.

 

This is what you guys want, or at least what you say you want....until someone calls your hypocritical bluff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
You're straddling two sides of the issue, and don't even realize it.

 

To liberals, logic is racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

No, how about you and your liberal friends put your money where your mouth is and take care of these poor people? You guys oppose every policy aimed at ending illegal immigration, you force tax payers to pay for anchor babies, you demand drivers licenses for illegals and you pass laws that bar your law enforcement agencies from cooperation with ICE even when it comes to trying to deport violent criminal illegal aliens.

 

This is what you guys want, or at least what you say you want....until someone calls your hypocritical bluff.

 

"anchor babies" are American citizens.

 

I'm not opposed to all of Mr. Trumps policies, but I'm against the demagoguery of immigrants from certain regions and separating little kids from their parents (unless they are unfit or dangerous).

Edited by Ladybird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
I'm not opposed to all of Mr. Trumps policies...

 

Trying to appear reasonable?

 

Which Trump policies are you not opposed to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shaky McSelfie

"anchor babies" are American citizens.

 

I'm not opposed to all of Mr. Trumps policies, but I'm against the demagoguery of immigrants from certain regions and separating little kids from their parents (unless they are unfit or dangerous).

How is it that you do not see that it is your side that has "demagogue'd" this issue, and it is was Obama that separated children? Just a few years ago, your side agreed with Trump on immigration. Now that Trump is POTUS, they don't . explain that one?

 

You all are just strengthening Trump and you can't even see it. Priceless!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
corporal_little

"anchor babies" are American citizens.

 

I'm not opposed to all of Mr. Trumps policies, but I'm against the demagoguery of immigrants from certain regions and separating little kids from their parents (unless they are unfit or dangerous).

Please.... your side does everything in the world to encourage people to immigrate here illegally and to oppose every effort to stop it. I don’t agree with Trump on a whole host of things, but this idea is the right thing to to. These sanctuary cities and states should bare the responsibility for the issue they’re helping make worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squirrel

How is placing these wonderful hard working people and families in sanctuary cities a burden on them or the cities. We have been assured they are upstanding members of the community so they shouldn’t be a burden. Also these cities are believers everyone else should bear any cost. Could it be the cost is higher then they claim or they just want someone else to pay it? I don’t understand what the left has against these people. I think they would be safest in cities that have made laws to protect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

After they get dumped in these cities Mr. Trump has a beef with, then what? Homeless families living in the streets and former detainees (some of whom are criminals) roaming free around the country. Wonderful.. This will make the job of the ICE agents even harder and spread misery all around. I understand he is frustrated, but too bad. This is the job he signed up for and punishing the constituents who live in places which he did not receive electoral votes is not part of the job.

 

In.F'ing.Cred.Ib.Le.

 

You really just have no properly-functioning brain cells. Homeless families are already living in the streets, and bringing in millions of homeless illegals only makes it worse everywhere. Why should sensible, law-abiding areas be burdened when there are places which are DELIBERATELY flouting the law to accept them?? It is PERFECTLY LOGICAL to put them in the places who have openly declared they'll protect them by breaking American law.

 

Good GAWD Ladybird, pull your head out of your @$$.

 

:pinch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL

Please.... your side does everything in the world to encourage people to immigrate here illegally and to oppose every effort to stop it. I don’t agree with Trump on a whole host of things, but this idea is the right thing to to. These sanctuary cities and states should bare the responsibility for the issue they’re helping make worse.

The TDS is very strong in this one. She has been twisted in a knot since the night of his election. It is difficult to support things with emotional lip service and then be asked to actually support those policies. It is difficult to be all butthurt about Trump and find out that things like family separation and catch and release are Obama policies. It is hard to vocally support asylum laws when you know that 90+ percent of the applicants are economic immigrants and don’t meet asylum requirements. It is difficult to have your party actively work to cause the border crisis and then just as actively block doing anything about it.

 

The amount of contradictory BS you have to believe to be a leftist/Democrat would make anyone crazy. LB’s cheese is slipping off her cracker but she is « all in » on her ideology and can’t back out now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

Donald Trump’s Idea to Ship Illegal Immigrants to Sanctuary Cities Is Ridiculous and Wrong

By DAVID FRENCH

April 12, 2019 4:11 PM

 

 

<snip>

 

 

We need better border security. We need to reform our asylum laws. And we can only do both things truly effectively through congressional action, but the idea that you can use human beings as pawns to punish your political enemies is not only repugnant, it’s politically disastrous.

 

First, to the extent that the order applies to immigrants seeking asylum, we have to remember that they’re exercising a legal right. The relevant statute is broad and clear:

 

Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including analien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(B) of this title.

 

The idea that we will then punish people who are exercising legal rights granted by our own government by shipping them to domestic locations chosen for purely partisan and punitive purposes is plainly wrong. Depending on the circumstances, it can even be cruel.

 

If a person who lacks resources has a place to stay with, say, an aunt in Waco, is it right or reasonable to ship them to Silicon Valley?

 

Moreover, if the actual goal is to deport an illegal immigrant rather than use him or her to punish your enemies, then why send them to sanctuary cities that make deportation more difficult? And if Trump truly believes his hyperbole about illegal immigrant crime, how can we interpret his tweet as anything other than floating an intentional effort to sow chaos in specific American cities?

 

 

<snip>

 

Link

 

 

Like I said, it's chum for the base. However, if the sycophants have truly taken over the asylum and do this crazy thing, I hope the first stop is Trump Tower.

 

:crybaby2:

 

Seek help.

 

In.F'ing.Cred.Ib.Le.

 

You really just have no properly-functioning brain cells. Homeless families are already living in the streets, and bringing in millions of homeless illegals only makes it worse everywhere. Why should sensible, law-abiding areas be burdened when there are places which are DELIBERATELY flouting the law to accept them?? It is PERFECTLY LOGICAL to put them in the places who have openly declared they'll protect them by breaking American law.

 

Good GAWD Ladybird, pull your head out of your @$$.

 

:pinch:

 

:clap:

 

The TDS is very strong in this one. She has been twisted in a knot since the night of his election. It is difficult to support things with emotional lip service and then be asked to actually support those policies. It is difficult to be all butthurt about Trump and find out that things like family separation and catch and release are Obama policies. It is hard to vocally support asylum laws when you know that 90+ percent of the applicants are economic immigrants and don’t meet asylum requirements. It is difficult to have your party actively work to cause the border crisis and then just as actively block doing anything about it.

 

The amount of contradictory BS you have to believe to be a leftist/Democrat would make anyone crazy. LB’s cheese is slipping off her cracker but she is « all in » on her ideology and can’t back out now.

 

:clap:

 

Please.... your side does everything in the world to encourage people to immigrate here illegally and to oppose every effort to stop it. I don’t agree with Trump on a whole host of things, but this idea is the right thing to to. These sanctuary cities and states should bare the responsibility for the issue they’re helping make worse.

 

:yes:

 

How is it that you do not see that it is your side that has "demagogue'd" this issue, and it is was Obama that separated children? Just a few years ago, your side agreed with Trump on immigration. Now that Trump is POTUS, they don't . explain that one?

 

You all are just strengthening Trump and you can't even see it. Priceless!

 

Yes, she's definitely cementing his reelection.

 

Reading and understanding are tough for you, I realize. Trump's "proposal" is only giving the dems what THEY ASKED FOR, no wait, WHAT THEY DEMANDED.

 

And now you're butthurt? What if The Black Jesus had proposed dumping them in Amarillo? You'd think it was the greatest thing since hair extensions.

 

:yes:

 

After they get dumped in these cities Mr. Trump has a beef with, then what? Homeless families living in the streets and former detainees (some of whom are criminals) roaming free around the country. Wonderful.. This will make the job of the ICE agents even harder and spread misery all around. I understand he is frustrated, but too bad. This is the job he signed up for and punishing the constituents who live in places which he did not receive electoral votes is not part of the job.

 

:bs:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squirrel

And if you want to bring up anchor babies ladybird? Have you even read that amendment, I believe it was the 14th. Have you researched why it was put in place or any of the court desicions on it? Guess what it was not put in place for the reason it is being used. I’ll give you a hint it was originally intended to protect freed slaves. Not to automatically grant families a place here that illegally enter. So let’s have that talk since you brought it up? What are your views on its original intent verses current use? Was the original intent to grant anyone born here a us citezen if thier parents entered against the law? Even if that’s what you view it to mean how does that make it illegal to deport the parents? Other then your hurt feelings of breaking up a family? No ones saying we are going to keep your kid and deport you, your welcome to take the baby with you. See all those facts are based on facts he parents choice. Do you think we should not jail drug dealers or killers if they have kids? So why is this crime different? Let’s talk and talk about things you bring up. Again there will be no answer. I know throwing out left wing talking points and terms are a bit difficult when you are asked to explain them with facts. The history of the law and then logically defend your opinion. So I’ll just assume I’m a right wing , trump nazi waiting to rejoice when those families and kids die in your mind. We can’t just be running around all Willy nilly asking for facts after all

Edited by Squirrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Severian

Wow, David French disapproves of something Trump wants to do. I'm shocked, shocked I say. And, well, if David French says so, we have to listen!

 

In case anyone needs it: :sarcasm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Time to clarify a couple of things.

 

1) Legal immigrants are OK. Stop equating illegal immigrants and legal immigrants. It’s like equating a gang banger with a stolen weapon with a legal gun owner.

 

2) Asylum seekers are OK. But there’s a process that must be followed, with the result that those who have a legitimate claim get granted asylum, and those who don’t, get sent away. Do not demand that every asylum seeker must get asylum. Stop being stuck on stupid.

 

3) Illegal immigrants are not OK. Ever. ALL must be turned away, to the best of our country’s ability. This is fair, makes sense, keeps America strong, and keeps her able to provide to even the world outside her borders. Stop trying to break the law. Stop trying to equate this to anything. Separated immediate families can be reunited through the asylum process or the legal immigration process. Stop lying. Stopping illegals doesn’t mean they are considered less than human or that they don’t have bad situations or that we don’t care. However, illegal immigration is not the solution to ANYTHING. Nada.

 

4) Walls work. The fact that one must be built is because of the illegal immigrants and their supporters, not because of their opponents. People lock their doors because of thieves, not because the people themselves are mean or unfair or greedy. Locks work. Walls work. Barriers work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

:coffeenpc:

 

Just one quick comment:

 

 

It’s like equating a gang banger with a stolen weapon with a legal gun owner.

 

Well yeah, but remember that's an equation the idiot leftists do make: If you have a gun, you're just as bad as everybody else who has a gun. Everybody who has a gun is a bad guy.

 

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buckwheat Jones

After they get dumped in these cities Mr. Trump has a beef with, then what? Homeless families living in the streets and former detainees (some of whom are criminals) roaming free around the country. Wonderful.. This will make the job of the ICE agents even harder and spread misery all around. I understand he is frustrated, but too bad. This is the job he signed up for and punishing the constituents who live in places which he did not receive electoral votes is not part of the job.

 

Nice word, that. Dump.

 

You dump garbage and you dump trash. If you care about these people, why do you refer to them that way? Why didn’t you use the word “relocate?” You think these people are trash?

 

I don’t think they’re trash. I think they’re here illegally, and I think the naturally conducive places for them to be are the sanctuary cities because those governments have expressed a desire to protect and support them.

 

What’s your problem with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sgt1255

Release them and then what? Since the federal goverment is releasing them wouldn’t that mean they’re not violating the law and are free to move about the country? If it happens, I suggest a big bus to non-full North Dakota (with adequate supplies). Lots of elbow room there.

 

The whole thing is impractical and is just Trumpf throwing chum to his base.

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/u-s-releasing-undocumented-immigrants-wont-say-many

 

Did you get all upset when Obama flew illegal from Texas to Arizona and dumping them there? He did this to thousands of illegals to numerous cities throughout the U.S. At least Trump want to send them to cities that claim they want the illegals.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noclevermoniker

"anchor babies" are American citizens.

 

I'm not opposed to all of Mr. Trumps policies, but I'm against the demagoguery of immigrants from certain regions and separating little kids from their parents (unless they are unfit or dangerous).

The adults are criminals for illegal entry. This country doesn’t have a history of imprisoning children with criminals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator T

Release them and then what? Since the federal goverment is releasing them wouldn’t that mean they’re not violating the law and are free to move about the country? If it happens, I suggest a big bus to non-full North Dakota (with adequate supplies). Lots of elbow room there.

 

The whole thing is impractical and is just Trumpf throwing chum to his base.

 

Then what? Wait for their court date, which they'll surely show up for. Then determine whether they can stay or need to be deported. You know Ladybird, the same thing we're doing right now. The only difference is instead of dumping them in border states, they're being sent to areas that seem to want to protect them. Why should border states be the only ones to suffer? What is the logic in forcing areas who aren't contributing to the problem be the only ones to pay for it? Just mass amnesty and free damn land in North Dakota isn't going to ever be offered. Whether you like it or not, our laws will be enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

It’s funny that LB claims Trump is just playing nasty politics without a real plan. While at the same time sanctuary cities have apparently been just playing nasty politics with no intention of living up to their promises. And democrats who say illegals are still people, actually didn’t mean it, they think they’re garbage that should be dropped into republican areas like North Dakota instead of San Fran.

 

Leftist hypocrisy thicker than San Fran fog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...