Patterico's Pontifications

2/21/2016

Marco Rubio Has Said Different Things About Amnesty in Spanish and English — Part Two

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 3:28 pm

I almost didn’t write this post, because Ace covers it so well here. But when I saw Rubio’s recent interview with Jake Tapper — once again falsely accusing Ted Cruz of lying when Cruz is telling the gospel truth — I became so outraged that I felt compelled to do my own post, which mostly amplifies the points Ace has already made . . . but is worth doing because it shows how deceptive Rubio is when he talks to Tapper.

Here is the Tapper video:

Here is a transcript of the relevant portion at 4:06:

TAPPER: On that subject, last night at the town hall, Senator Cruz had the following to say. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He went on Univision and in Spanish said that he would not rescind the president’s illegal executive amnesty on his first day in office. If I am elected president, on the first day in office, I intend to rescind every single illegal and unconstitutional executive action.

Now, in response to that, Marco followed the same strategy as Donald. He just screamed liar, liar, liar. He didn’t actually dispute any of the substance.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I want to give you an opportunity to respond, Senator.

RUBIO: Yes. Well, that’s not what Univision says. In fact, Univision has consistently reported. In fact right after that interview, Univision reported that I said that DACA has to go away and it will. I will on my first day in office get rid of it, because it’s unconstitutional.

I was against it when the president did it. I remain against it now. It cannot be a permanent policy and I’ve said that repeatedly.

And even Univision who conducted the interview said that after the interview, that the interview was about me saying that DACA was going to go away. So, again, another example of him misleading people.

So. You should be aware that, number one, the interview with Jake Tapper is the first time that Rubio has ever said he will get rid of DACA on Day One in office. Moreover, he said the exact opposite to Univision, in Spanish (transcript at Ace’s post):

JORGE RAMOS: As you know, it has always been hard for Republicans to get the Hispanic vote. I wanted to talk with you about very concrete issues that affect Hispanics directly. I would like to start with the issue of deferred action and DACA. If you made it to the White House, would you keep the DACA program; that is, Deferred Action for the Dreamers, and would you keep President Barack Obama’s executive action, which would benefit more than four million undocumented people?

RUBIO: Well, DACA is going to have to end at some point. I wouldn’t undo it immediately. The reason is that there are already people who have that permission, who are working, who are studying, and I don’t think it would be fair to cancel it suddenly.

But I do think it is going to have to end. And, God willing, it’s going to end because immigration reform is going to pass. DAPA hasn’t yet taken effect, and I think it has impeded progress on immigration, on immigration reform. And since that program hasn’t taken effect yet, I would cancel it. But DACA, I think it is important; it can’t be cancelled suddenly because there are already people who are benefiting from it. But it is going to have to end. It cannot be the permanent policy of the United States. And I don’t think that’s what they’re asking for, either. I think that everyone prefers immigration reform.

As Ace says:

So yes, he says it is going to have to end at some point — that’s the soundbite he makes sure English-speakers hear — but he doesn’t tell you he also said he would not terminate it right away because people are already “benefiting” from it and he “do[esn’t] think it would be fair” to take it from them. Then he says, the reason it will go away is because it will be replaced by comprehensive immigration reform, that is, a legislative amnesty instead of an executive-order one.

Si Dio quieres. If God wants/God Willing.

So yeah, Rubio says one thing for English speaking Republicans, but says something different for Spanish speakers.

In English, he only talks about border security and DACA “ending.” In Spanish, he says it will have to end at some point to be determined, and also says that won’t matter much anyway, because we’ll have a permanent legislative amnesty in place by then. (He also speaks of it ending in the third person — he won’t end it. It will just “end” itself, somehow. If we’re doing a close parsing.)

So. In English, Rubio says it is “another example of him [Cruz] misleading people” when Cruz says: “He [Rubio] went on Univision and in Spanish said that he would not rescind the president’s illegal executive amnesty on his first day in office.” Yet in Spanish, Rubio tells Univision: “I wouldn’t undo it immediately.”

Rubio does indeed say different things about amnesty in Spanish than he says in English. And he lies about it. And when he says Cruz is lying, Rubio is lying again.

Marco Rubio will say or do almost anything to become President.

P.S. I have a page for the “microparsing horseshit” (to use Ace’s memorable phrase) that the Rubiobots will engage in, here. Rubiobots be warned: don’t you dare claim I didn’t address your argument without first reading the linked page.

Marco Rubio Has Said Different Things About Amnesty in Spanish and English — Part One

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 2:32 pm

“First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border.” — Marco Rubio, speaking in Spanish to Univision

This is Part One of two posts showing that Marco Rubio has said one thing about immigration in English, and quite another in Spanish.

Here is Marco Rubio speaking to Rush Limbaugh, January 29, 2013. Note how he emphasizes, in English, that border security comes before anything else:

RUSH: Yeah, but, Senator, that’s in a way the point, because, you’re right, 1986, President Reagan agreed to outright amnesty, is called Simpson-Mazzoli. He was reluctant, by the way, but he did it, because he was promised border security. The border security never happened. And the same language is being used today as was used in 1986. You know, the president’s gonna be out in Las Vegas today, I know for you border security is the first and last, if that doesn’t happen, none of the rest does, right?

RUBIO: Well, not just that. That alone is not enough. It has to be a combination. We need border security. We need workplace enforcement. We need a visa tracking system. You know, 40% of our illegal immigrants of our undocumented people that are in this country, they didn’t cross the border, they came legally. Their visa expired and they stayed and we don’t track people when they leave. We only track them when they come in. So all three of those things have to happen and, by the way, the language of the bill has not even been drafted yet. These are just principles. And I agree with you; this is gonna be a challenge. If, in fact, this bill does not have real triggers in there, if there is not language in this bill that guarantees that nothing else will happen unless these enforcement mechanisms are in place, I won’t support it. But the principles clearly call for that. Now, obviously, we have to make sure the law does, too.

So. That is Marco Rubio stating in English that border security has to happen first — before anything else. He tells Rush Limbaugh, in English, that he won’t support a bill unless that bill guarantees that nothing else will happen until these enforcement mechanisms are in place.

Here’s Marco Rubio in a recent English interview with Jake Tapper, making exactly the same point:

When I’m president, we’re going to do it our way. And that means before we do anything, we are going to secure our border and enforce our laws. Until we do that first, we won’t be able to do anything else on immigration. And after we’ve done that, we’ll see what the American people are willing to do with someone who’s been here for a long time, and passes a background check, learns English, pays a fine, starts paying taxes.

But all that, of course, is Marco Rubio speaking in English. To an English-speaking audience concerned about border security. What does he say when he speaks to a Spanish-speaking audience that wants them some legalization and wants it now? Why, he says something quite different.

Here is an excerpt from a transcript of a Univision interview with Rubio from June 9, 2013. The transcript is provided by the Center for Immigration Studies, but anyone suspicious of their transcript can consult the video here, or a similar transcript from PolitiFact which tries to defend Rubio on this issue (more about that sloppy and incomplete PolitiFact entry on a separate page). Rubio says at 3:35:

Let’s be clear. Nobody is talking about preventing the legalization. The legalization is going to happen. That means the following will happen: First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence.

There it is. Marco Rubio said one thing about immigration in English, and a totally different thing in Spanish.

I have much more analysis on a separate page, to deal with the inevitable retorts from the Rubiobots. Rubiobots: do not tell me that I failed to address your argument x, y, or z without first reading the linked page. I’m not getting bogged down in your minutiae here, but I am getting plenty down into the weeds at the linked page.

P.S. The point of the post is not to claim that Rubio has always said different things about amnesty in Spanish and English. The point of the post is to debunk the claim made by Rubio supporters that it is a “lie” for Ted Cruz to say Rubio said different things about amnesty in Spanish and in English.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1602 secs.