Patterico's Pontifications

8/21/2016

The Big Trump Immigration Pivot…That Probably Isn’t

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:01 am



Sure, it could be coming. It’s not like Trump’s promises mean anything. But the big BuzzFeed story everyone’s talking about doesn’t prove it. Sure, it has a fun, attention-getting headline: In Reversal, Trump Indicates To Hispanic Leaders Openness To Legalization For Immigrants. Wowie! If you don’t read the body of a story, you’re likely to be shocked. But if you do, not so much:

In a Saturday meeting with his newly announced Hispanic advisory council, Donald Trump suggested he is interested in figuring out a “humane and efficient” manner to deal with immigrants in the country illegally, according to three sources. Trump, however, stressed that any new announcements will still be in line with the border security-focused approach that has invited intense opposition from Latinos and immigrants since he launched his campaign.

“He said people who are here is the toughest part of the immigration debate, that it must be something that respects border security but deals with this in a humane and efficient manner,” said Jacob Monty, a Houston-based immigration lawyer who sat in Trump Tower with other Latino supporters and Trump.

“The idea is we’re not getting someone in front of the line, we’re doing it in a legal way, but he wants to hear ideas of how we deal with 11 million people that are here with no documents,” said Jose Fuentes, who was chair of Mitt Romney’s Hispanic advisory committee in 2012, and attended the meeting.

In a statement, Steven Cheung with the Trump campaign dismissed the BuzzFeed News account of the meeting as “clickbait journalism” and disputed attendees’ claim that he opened the door to legalization behind closed doors.

“Mr. Trump said nothing today that he hasn’t said many times before, including in his convention speech—enforce the laws, uphold the Constitution, be fair and humane while putting American workers first,” Cheung wrote. “Today’s conversation was productive and enlightening, and Mr. Trump looks forward to speaking with these leaders again soon and often.”

I agree with Steven Cheung. I don’t see anything in there that says “legalization.” And indeed, further down in the story, we see that Trump didn’t even use the word:

Importantly, Trump did not explicitly use the word “legalization” at the meeting, but sources in the room said they feel it is the direction the campaign is going.

This story is about activists’ feelings, based on nothing objective? Stop the presses!

To the extent Trump said anything to encourage such feelings, I suspect it was more vintage Trump: giving a nod to both sides and letting people believe what they want. Master of Persuasion! Eight-dimensional chess!! The Dilbert guy probably has a 2000-word essay about it on his Dilbert blog.

Trump’s giving a big immigration speech Thursday. I think it will be Delphic; people will read what they want to read into it. I won’t watch it, or care about it, because Trump has proven that literally nothing he says can be relied upon. Plus I will be busy at work. But if you still think for some reason that his words matter, get them from him directly on Thursday, and not third-hand . . . laundered through activists and BuzzFeed (but I repeat myself).

96 Responses to “The Big Trump Immigration Pivot…That Probably Isn’t”

  1. Patterico now actually being sensible if still snarky.

    “Trump’s giving a big immigration speech Thursday. I think it will be Delphic; people will read what they want to read into it. I won’t watch it, or care about it, because Trump has proven that literally nothing he says can be relied upon. Plus I will be busy at work. But if you still think for some reason that his words matter, get them from him directly on Thursday, and not third-hand . . . laundered through activists and BuzzFeed (but I repeat myself).”

    Lots of alt-righters trusted him initially on the fact that his entire career has been built on real estate, more specifically the only way to profit reliably from real estate: finding good tenants. No one who succeeds in that task can ever fail to have a properly right-wing immigration and domestic policy, especially against people who habitually destroy property he pays good money for.

    Dystopia Max (76803a)

  2. the diseased stinkypig wants to do syrian terrorist refugees all up in it to where you can’t even go get an ice cream cone without someone doing suicide bombs on your children

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  3. I can think of only two or three commenters here whose first choice in the primaries was Trump. The rest supported Trump after it was clear he would win the nomination. That suggests that most Trump supporters could be Hillary opponents more than Trump fans.

    If so, then nothing Trump does will change anything. Hillary will still be Hillary no matter what Trump does.

    DRJ (15874d)

  4. They won’t even bail on Trump if he reneges on deportation and the wall. Instead, they will say he’s with them in spirit like all landlords, even if the law won’t let him act on it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  5. Voting against Hillary is one thing but any Party whose leaders believe not supporting Trump constitutes treason is stupid and un-American.

    DRJ (15874d)

  6. Doing the Dems work for them… sans pay. Just another way of throwing hands in the air and bending over.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  7. So much to work with, but if you can live with the subversion, by all means, carry on.

    Good intentions trump (no pun intended) results. How is that any different from what clueless proggies do?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  8. harvardtrash ted will save us

    eventually

    cause of stinkypig will do bad policies and everyone will say let’s get that snotty pudgy sore loser harvard guy and his grimacing sacky to do president stuff cause of we’re so so so aghast at what the stinkypig supreme court is doing on america’s precious widdle wiggle giggles

    it’s manifest destiny!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  9. I am completely opposed to citizenship for illegals already here. There has to be some penalty and some deterrent to future illegals. That being said, I also am against mass deportation (as if that was really going to happen anyway.) Teachers would be laid off en masse, housing prices would collapse, property taxes lost would bankrupt the state, etc., etc. Illegals are about 7% of the population of CA, officially, and I think in some places it is way more. Be careful what you wish for.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  10. I also am FOR a pause in all immigration for at least a couple of years. This would help the working class, especially AfAm workers. I have read that black leaders pushed to halt immigration before 1924, and black workers benefited tremendously.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  11. deportation of criminals and welfare trash is ok with me

    they suck

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  12. Patterico states that he won’t listen to Trump’s speech, but admonishes that if you think word matter then read/listen to Trump’s speech directly and don’t trust “third hand laundered versions”.

    Any comments about the Trump speech from Patterico will be “fourth hand”?

    Wake up. If you don’t want Hillary Potus, you must vote against her, not sit on your hands… be they second, third or fourth hand.

    PTS (ce7fc3)

  13. If you believe things Trump says, you’re a sucker.

    Patterico (bcf524)

  14. i believe he wants to beat that pig

    and that’s enough for me

    it’s the only way to save Christmas

    everyone’s counting on us

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  15. Let’s just start with a no-tat rule and work are way from there. And to #10, at least the newly will get filled in by hipsters, techies, asians, and whatever iterations of Okies tere are. Up within 100 miles of Chicago, it will be the Chiraq Section 8 crowd.

    urbanleftbehind (456f32)

  16. yes yes no tats sounds like a good rule of thumb

    you should be on the committee

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  17. Hillary has lead in her depends.
    Her catheter gear is huge.
    She has had too many fried clams with tar-tar sauce.

    mg (31009b)

  18. At this point the only option we have – okay, I have – is to try and keep both Clinton and Trump well under 50%. If we can prevent them from receiving a perceived mandate, that may make it easier to limit whatever damage they will do. That plus a divided government.

    I think a winning candidate with 42% or so of the vote will simply have to be more “sensible” as president.

    Maybe. Perhaps.

    Yes, a drowning man will cling to anything.

    SteveMG (1011f4)

  19. stinkypig’s gonna do exactly what the clinton global criminal cartel donors paid her to do no more no less

    that’s the deal

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  20. Teachers would be laid off en masse, housing prices would collapse, property taxes lost would bankrupt the state, etc., etc. Illegals are about 7% of the population of CA, officially, and I think in some places it is way more. Be careful what you wish for.

    Patricia, you say you’re “completely opposed” to citizenship for illegals already here then say we can’t deport them. The teachers would never be laid off because of the union so stop your fretting. Besides, teachers are one group that could use a good culling. Unless these penniless immigrants own a crap-load of property somehow housing prices will not be affected nor will property taxes.

    We can eliminate almost all illegal immigration with one law: no one can collect any federal, state or local benefits, money or subsidies unless they are US citizens. I can’t understand why that isn’t a law already unless it benefits the leftists somehow. Why on earth would or should American taxpayers subsidize non-Americans legal or illegal? That’s ridiculous.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  21. WEAKSAUCE WHININGS OF THE DAY

    “Instead, they will say he’s with them in spirit like all landlords, even if the law won’t let him act on it.”

    The law on immigration is actually pretty clearly in our favor, it’s the administrative enforcement that’s lacking. Which candidate is more likely to fire people who fail to administratively enforce the law’s decrees, especially when the needs of America cry out for it? Does Trump have any catchphrases, prior practice, or media precendent for firing people publicly?

    “any Party whose leaders believe not supporting Trump constitutes treason is stupid and un-American.”

    Not, perhaps, treason against USGOV, but treason against the revolution that upended it, certainly. The difference between you and a serious and motivated Trump supporter is mainly that you’ll get to continue to live your life on the sidelines, except with an entirely new set of people to hate! You got so used to it! You should love it! It’s so YOU!

    “At this point the only option we have – okay, I have – is to try and keep both Clinton and Trump well under 50%. If we can prevent them from receiving a perceived mandate, that may make it easier to limit whatever damage they will do. That plus a divided government.”

    YOU COULDN’T EVEN MANAGE OBAMA’S DAILY SCREWUPS, YOU COULDN’T EVEN ELECT CRUZ, WHAT THE HELL MAKES YOU THINK YOU CAN MANAGE THE OPINIONS OF HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS FOLLOWING YOUR ABJECT PRIOR FAILURE? KEEP DREAMING YOUR EGG MCMUFFIN DREAMS, CHUMP!

    “If you believe things Trump says, you’re a sucker.”

    Patterico continues to agree with the alt-right. This election is not about WHAT THAT GUY SAID, since WHO WE ARE has proven much more predictive about future results. Actions and genetic essence continue to speak much louder than words, which have been near-fully subsumed by hostile and arrogant wire-pullers from behind the scenes. Good on him for making that clear!

    “So much to work with, but if you can live with the subversion, by all means, carry on.

    Good intentions trump (no pun intended) results. How is that any different from what clueless proggies do?”

    Our intentions become reality, yours become screeds unread by anyone except those who stop to mock them.

    Dystopia Max (76803a)

  22. So Helena aguirre points out he said no such thing, and she’s in fan of trump.

    narciso (732bc0)

  23. Rev. Hoagie, I am saying the ones already here could have some sort of legal status but without voting or, like you say, benefits. I agree we should not subsidize them. And yes, I agree teachers, for instance, could use a culling, but they buy stuff and pay mortgages with their paychecks, so be prepared for mass unemployment and its ripple effect. I do disagree that many illegals don’t own homes. Many around here do–countless articles about how these “victims” fared in the crash.

    I’m just thinking of the economic effects of rounding them up and march them out the day after the election. There are better ways. Plus, I agree with Patrick, it ain’t gonna happen anyways.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  24. Well sessions had a five stage plan, if one recalls.

    narciso (732bc0)

  25. Trump never had any intention of deporting illegals. He knows America needs them to do the work his supporters are too lazy or too stupid (or both) to do. And they know it too. Their worst nightmare is they get a letter from the welfare office with a list of jobs formerly held by Mexicans that they must apply for.

    nk (dbc370)

  26. The only thing that Trump is really committed to is THE WALL and maybe “extremee vetting” which may mean anything.

    He was alwsys for touchback amnesty, and was never against increased legal immigration – never for keeping the total number of immigrants the same at any rate. He’s never been a NUMBERS USA type of guy, although nobody noticed.

    It would take a near genius, however, to figure out something cionsistent with all of what he has said.

    THE WALL doesn’t have to be built before anything else is done – I don’t thionk he ever said “enforcement first.”

    Trump has to get distinctively to the left of Hillary at least on some immigration issue, if he is to have any hope of getting Hispanic votes, and he’s most likely to propose abolishing the bar to legal immigration for people who have been deported. That requires now special hardship exemptions.

    I think he’d also have to promise to stop most deportations, but he may not figure out how can do it. (He should just read the constitution. I mean textually.)

    Citizenship, in any Trump plan, however, will probably be left till after <b THE WALL is built and paid for by Mexico.

    I don’t know what the chances are of Trump coming up with something that people think makes sense. He’s most likely to come up with something thst satisfies nobody.

    And he’s got to solve his Russia problem, too. It’s much bigger than Manafort.

    Then there’s his not knowing what he is doing and not caring about being right or making sense , although, for everythinbg except national security matters, that may be a plus. And if Hillary has an illness, thst’s a plus for Hillary so talking about that only hurts Trump. If trump could spread the rumor that he won’t last, that could help him.

    But unless he gets to Hillary’s left on immigration, he’s doomed.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  27. Trump needs to assure people that DACA will continue, and he’s got to have Hillary criticizing him. She might do it on the issue of legalization without citizenship, and maybe on some new category of legal immigration he may devise.

    I think Trump will propose removing the bar to legal immigrtion on people who have been deported, and if Hillary, or other Democrats, criticize that, he may be on his way to defusing the issue.

    But he’s most likely to come out with somne form of doubletalk.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  28. Our intentions become reality, yours become screeds unread by anyone except those who stop to mock them.

    Dystopia Max (76803a) — 8/21/2016 @ 11:00 am

    Let’s see who is doing the mocking if Trump loses.

    DRJ (15874d)

  29. How many Trump supporters here voted for Bill Clinton? I’m not asking the people who support Trump because he isn’t Hillary. I’m asking the people who supported Trump from the start.

    DRJ (15874d)

  30. I’ve voted straight Republican my whole life, twice for Reagan. Every time less enthusiastically than the last, until now.

    LBascom (b3f6be)

  31. “If you believe things Trump says, you’re a sucker.”

    Patterico continues to agree with the alt-right.

    Nope. That is completely false.

    Patterico (bcf524)

  32. His Panic is right. Maybe he’s been told to get his poll numbers up, or else.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  33. i believe he wants to beat that pig

    Then why is he trying so hard to lose?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  34. “Genetic essence.” What a dipsh*t.

    Leviticus (1bebeb)

  35. “3. I can think of only two or three commenters here whose first choice in the primaries was Trump. The rest supported Trump after it was clear he would win the nomination. That suggests that most Trump supporters could be Hillary opponents more than Trump fans.”

    That’s because “here” is a very small number of people — probably less that 100 — and a majority or strong plurality are disposed against Trump. And the host is strongly against Trump.
    So you are seeing a very distorted view.

    Out in the real world, I run into a lot of people whose 1st choice was Trump. An awful lot. Including my Mexican cleaning lady, who hastens to tell me that she & her husband are LEGAL immigrants,

    I also run into a lot of people whose 1st choice was originally Cruz, but who eventually rejected him even before he dropped out. There were a huge number of people who abandoned him in disgust after he blamed Trump for the Chicago rally that got shut down by protesters.

    fred-2 (ce04f3)

  36. I haven’t been in ages,

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/what-happens-to-the-gop-if-trump-loses/

    but it’s probably closer to neoneocon, in the general disposition of commenters,

    narciso (732bc0)

  37. “32. If you believe things Trump says, you’re a sucker.”

    So, what’s your plan?
    Do you have a plan, or are you just complaining & bitching?

    If you are pro-Hillary, then of course your plan is to denigrate Trump because he is the Republican candidate. If it was Cruz, you’d be denigrating him.

    OTOH, if you are anti-Hillary, then just what are you trying to accomplish? Trump may be an imperfect candidate, but he is the candidate we have. Tearing Trump down won’t get Cruz back into the race. Crus is out. Kasich is out. Rubio is out. Even Jeb! is out.

    SO, let’s posit that you are right, that I can’t believe anything Trump says. Okay, now what?
    Trump says he’ll control the southern border — but that’s a lie, he won’t.
    Trump says he’ll extremely vet Muslim immigrants and visitors — but that’s a lie, he won’t.

    So … what do you propose I do? What _effective_ action do I take?
    Note that I said “effective action”, not “fantasy action”. There is no realistic real-world action plan that will result in Cruz becoming the 2016 Republican candidate.

    fred-2 (ce04f3)

  38. I’m gonna look up “genetic essence” soon as I’ve finished reading Mein Kampf in the original Urdu.

    If not for Trumpkins like Dyskoilia Max, I might entertain the possibility that I was wrong about Trump.

    nk (dbc370)

  39. I do like to take a panopticon view of the matter, and compare past and present statements,

    http://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/feb/03/romney-needs-define-immigration-policy/

    narciso (732bc0)

  40. yes, genes over character, is a rather ridiculous test, take yeargh and lurch as examples,

    narciso (732bc0)

  41. “By their fruitcakes thou shall know them.”

    nk (dbc370)

  42. Apart from a cursory but necessary review of their documents at the hiring stage, or a traffic violation while inebriated, Fred’s cleaning lady and spouse should never feel the need to declare their legality.

    urbanleftbehind (f2b250)

  43. So … what do you propose I do? What _effective_ action do I take?

    None. There is nothing you can do. Supporting either Clinton or Trump takes us closer to the inevitable disaster. All anybody can do is pray for the asteroid.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  44. fred-2 – You accuse people who don’t jump on the Trump bandwagon of refusing to accept that we lost, but we have. The day Trump secured the nomination, the election was over. There is no chance to elect a pro-liberty president this cycle. The issue is that until November 9th, Trumpists will not begin to accept reality and begin to learn from their mistakes.

    StarkChoice (d0c7fc)

  45. pout pout let it all out

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  46. “45. The day Trump secured the nomination, the election was over. ”
    Yeah, that’s what Roosevelt said in late 1941. “The day that Japan wiped out our Pacific fleet, the war was over, so we threw up our hands.”

    “There is no chance to elect a pro-liberty president this cycle.”
    Or most any cycle.
    Especially if you give up when you don’t get your way.

    “The issue is that until November 9th, Trumpists will not begin to accept reality and begin to learn from their mistakes.”

    Yeah, well the thing is, the Trumpists (or whatever the insult-de-jour is) don’t think they made a mistake. They’ll do the same thing as the McCain & Romney voters did after they lost.

    When are the nevertrump folks get it thru their thick heads that just because they think they are right, that everybody else also agrees. Get this: You think Trump supporters are wrong. Trump supporters don’t agree that they are wrong — and so they will not agree with you and come around to your way of thinking.

    Especially if Trump loses, they won’t think that it was all their fault and that all the nevertrump “True” “Conservatives” who continually worked to tear down Trump had nothing to do with the loss.
    “Oh yes, that group worked against us, so let’s do what they say next time.”

    But actually, happyfeet said it better than me, and more succinctly,
    “46. pout pout let it all out”

    ——-
    “45. You accuse people who don’t jump on the Trump bandwagon of refusing to accept that we lost, but we have.”
    What is the word for someone who is nominally on your side, but who when they don’t get their way starts taking potshots at you?
    Ally of me?
    Or ally of my opponent?

    I expect Democrats to try to tear down Trump — they are our opponent.
    But when a Republican or “Conservative” tears down Trump, that is deliberate betrayal.

    Eh, whatever happens in November, the nevertrumpers are toast. Nobody trusts or respects a traitor. Everybody will note that when we went into battle, the nevertrumpers tried to trip our champion.

    fred-2 (ce04f3)

  47. StarkChoice, you gave a kinda answer, but I asked Patterico this:
    38.“32. If you believe things Trump says, you’re a sucker.”

    So, what’s your plan?
    Do you have a plan, or are you just complaining & bitching.

    He hasn’t answered yet. And I noticed that you didn’t answer either. Just some bitching and complaining and predicting.

    Do you have a plan?

    Or is your plan “Trump supporters will agree with us and vote for Cruz next time.”? Which isn’t really a plan, more like a plaintive hope.

    A plan means a series of steps to be carried out to achieve a goal, to accomplish something. Complaining and name-calling isn’t a plan.

    fred-2 (ce04f3)

  48. #45 StarkChoice,

    You’re absolutely right that there’s not a great proponent of liberty or conservatism on the ballot this November.
    But that’s not what a general election is about.
    The general election is about making a choice between two nominees.
    It really is a choice about the lesser of two evils.
    Because one of the two will be given the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and all the inherent powers of the Executive Branch.

    I’d love to vote for Grover Cleveland, Calvin Coolidge, or Ronald Reagan. But none of them is on the ballot.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  49. ’48.“There is no chance to elect a pro-liberty president this cycle.”
    Or most any cycle.
    Especially if you give up when you don’t get your way.’

    Voting for an authoritarian is giving up. The plan is simple. Deny anyone who doesn’t stand for liberty the ability to win. Either force the Republican party to nominate candidates who stand for liberty, or cause it to collapse and fight to replace it with something better.

    The “surrender your liberty, as long as it’s slightly more slowly than the worst candidate” strategy has resulted in consistently losing liberty for over 100 years now. Losing slowly is no better than losing quickly. You either stand for something or you stand for nothing – and a vote for Trump, who stands for nothing other than TRUMP!, i.e. his ego, is the clearest vote for nothing one could ever cast.

    ’48.I expect Democrats to try to tear down Trump — they are our opponent.
    But when a Republican or “Conservative” tears down Trump, that is deliberate betrayal.’

    The election is already two authoritarians, collectivists, career criminals, whatever you want to call them. They are both enemies of liberty. The only way to betray liberty is to stand for someone who stands against it.

    ’48.Eh, whatever happens in November, the nevertrumpers are toast. Nobody trusts or respects a traitor. Everybody will note that when we went into battle, the nevertrumpers tried to trip our champion.’

    This bit is wrongest of all. Nobody supports a general election loser. By mid-2017 almost nobody will publicly claim that Trump was ever their favorite or a good candidate. This always happens when a candidate loses badly, on either side.

    StarkChoice (45e938)

  50. whatever happens in November, the nevertrumpers are toast

    yes yes

    the nevertrumps have been defined forever by how sore loser ted made such a complete ass of his pudgy snotty self at the convention

    this is how they’ll be remembered

    no class

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  51. StarkChoice,

    Voting is an exercise by each individual person. It’s basically like herding cats. There’s no such thing as “forcing” a party to nominate someone of this stripe or that wing of the party. Can you kindly explain how you would “force” millions and millions of GOP primary voters to vote for a particular candidate?
    If we couldn’t manage to do it during this cycle, how can we do that in the next cycle?
    People vote for whom they vote for, and often it has to do more with likability and personality and less about rigid policy positions that appear “on paper.”

    This election cycle, we had an opportunity to nominate a pretty good conservative from among several candidates, but none of them generated enough enthusiasm to beat Trump.

    And how does burning down the GOP and then replacing it with something new and improved actually work?

    Regardless of how much we hate each of the two nominees, one of them is going to become the next President. Saying “I don’t care fo either one” is beside the point. One of them still will become the next President.
    So which one?

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  52. 47. I would like to see corporal proof of the cartels killing any perceived extremists. They’ll probably be cutting the 10 Bb check on January 21st as well.

    urbanleftbehind (e6186c)

  53. “Everybody will note that when we went into battle, the nevertrumpers tried to trip our champion.”

    If we cared what Trumpkins thought of us, we’d be Trumpkins too. Save it for the GOPes standing for re-election. I won’t vote for either Johnson or Stein, but I’ll offer a light to their supporters who did not dive into either the GOPe or Dem cess pools.

    nk (dbc370)

  54. StarkChoice (45e938) — 8/22/2016 @ 2:22 pm

    Nobody supports a general election loser.
    Well, there was Thomas E. Dewey (who lost in 1944) in 1948, and Adlai Stevenson in 1956, and even 1960.

    And Richard Nixon in 1968.

    And Hubert Humphrey in 1972, and even 1976.

    Some people thought of Ford in 1980.

    Losing vice presidential candidates often run but rarely get the nomination. Sargent Shriver in 1976. Bob Dole in 1980 (I think) – but he did get the nomination in 1996 after failing in 1988. Walter Monndale had been a vice president so it is not the same. Joe Lieberman in 2004. John Edwards in 2008.

    Sarah Palin was thought of, but killed her political career anyway. And let;’s not forget Paul Ryan.

    Sammy Finkelman (882d94)

  55. I heard on teh CBS Evening News that Donald Trump wass considering a version of touchback amnesty, and before the announcer could get thw words out, I thought it might be what it was: Instead of leaving the country, the illegal immigrant would go to the embassy or the consultate of his country, which is legally foreign territory.

    This won’t quite be suitable for everybody. A country likre Guatemala might not have many consilatesd in the United states and some of them might be living far away, and hw are they going to get there if they are not able to board a plane or train?

    Sammy Finkelman (882d94)

  56. The 51/218 triage effort is already underway. 270 is getting a morphine drip on a stretcher in an alcove. There will be plenty of GOTV resources utilized in “battleground” states but it will be Toomey, Rubio, Burr, Portman, Johnson and Ayotte doing the targeting. Mercer will be left to do his bit on his own dime for the Trump targets.

    Rick Ballard (ce29ad)

  57. Two thoughts: 1. if only Harper was still PM I’d think about this for next year and 2. somebody in Dearborn is planning a flying carpet flotilla fest.

    http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN10X216?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social

    urbanleftbehind (20a08c)

  58. with prime minister zoolander all things are possible

    narciso (732bc0)

  59. no, that top man is going down like the tidy bowl man,

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/08/deborah-ross-may-unseat-sen-burr-in-north-carolina/#comments

    narciso (732bc0)

  60. as for mcguffin’s solid judgement,

    https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/767867325278150656

    narciso (732bc0)

  61. Um, yes, the Brotherhood are pro-democracy. They win elections, after all. Democracy is good for them. So it would be very strange for them not to support it.

    Look at Egypt, for instance; democracy produced Morsi, who ruined the country, and the only solution was for Sisi to overthrow it and restore the old dictatorship.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  62. as was the ennadha party and other factions, but that isn’t how the arab spring was sold to us,

    narciso (732bc0)

  63. Who cares how it was sold? These are the facts. The Brotherhood is popular in many countries, and loves democracy. McMullin is quite right in pointing this out. Democracy is not always a good thing.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  64. chavez, morales, and correa, were popular in their time, yet they have taken the nation down to ruin in varying degrees,

    narciso (732bc0)

  65. Yes, as I said, democracy is not always a good thing. In general it’s less bad than all the alternatives; in some cases it isn’t.

    Milhouse (5a188d)

  66. 62. Did Beck have the same quick hook he used when some truther Tejana-by-injection made a fool of herself in his old Fox show? Her full name escapes me but Glenn actually broke the 4th wall to look into his camera and apologize to his viewers.

    urbanleftbehind (7c0103)

  67. I would think he would be in favor of the esteemed case officer, not against, then again we though he was a friend to Andrew as well, so who can tell,

    narciso (732bc0)

  68. 24.Rev. Hoagie, I am saying the ones already here could have some sort of legal status but without voting or, like you say, benefits.

    I agree we should not subsidize them.

    Problem is Patricia, the ACLU will shop around for leftist judges who claim just because they’re here they’re entitled to all the rights and privileges bestowed upon the welfare class from free housing to free medical. You know that’s true.

    And yes, I agree teachers, for instance, could use a culling, but they buy stuff and pay mortgages with their paychecks, so be prepared for mass unemployment and its ripple effect.

    They will still buy stuff and pay mortgages, Patricia, they won’t be destitute with union subsidies and UC. Plus, are you saying a person with a teachers education can’t get a job but we should keep bringing in immigrants? Besides, why should I care about leftist teachers, do they care bout me?

    I do disagree that many illegals don’t own homes. Many around here do–countless articles about how these “victims” fared in the crash.

    I don’t care where you live the overwhelming number of illegals don’t own homes. They can’t pay cash and no bank will give them a mortgage. Squatters, sure. Owners and property tax payers, no way. I think those articles about “victims” were stories by sympathizers with no basis in reality.

    I’m just thinking of the economic effects of rounding them up and march them out the day after the election. There are better ways. Plus, I agree with Patrick, it ain’t gonna happen anyways.

    I don’t think anybody says nor believes they will be “rounded up” and marched out the day after the election. That’s leftist propaganda. We don’t have to round up anybody just cut off their welfare, housing, medicine etc. and most will self deport. The few who don’t will sooner or later be caught. BTW, if you let it be know that if an illegal is arrested for ANY reason even just being here illegally they WILL NEVER be allowed in that should help.

    All people entering America should be invited to do so or not allowed in. Coming to America is an invitation not a right. We decide who does and does not enter our home.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  69. There’s a pretty specific invitation to a pretty specific group at Ellis Island. The idea was for us to be impressive enough, as a people, to convince the newcomers that we had things figured out. Maybe we failed.

    Leviticus (b0cfb2)

  70. an aspiration is not policy, just like the letter to the danbury congregation does not override the bill of rights,

    narciso (732bc0)

  71. Well, we incorporate this particular aspiration into our mythology on a regular basis.

    Leviticus (b0cfb2)

  72. 71.There’s a pretty specific invitation to a pretty specific group at Ellis Island. The idea was for us to be impressive enough, as a people, to convince the newcomers that we had things figured out. Maybe we failed.

    If you’re referring to the Statue of Liberty it’s on Liberty Island. If you’re referring to the actual Ellis Island immigration station that has been closed for years. So obviously if it’s a metaphor you want then it would be “We’re Closed”.

    However immigration was dealt with years ago as our nation was growing and we needed masses of people and we didn’t give them welfare to come is irrelevant today. We have a whole new set of needs and we need a whole new set of rules to meet them. Rule #1, no illegals, period.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  73. 62. Did Beck have the same quick hook he used when some truther Tejana-by-injection made a fool of herself in his old Fox show? Her full name escapes me but Glenn actually broke the 4th wall to look into his camera and apologize to his viewers.

    urbanleftbehind
    =========================================

    Perez Hilton???

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  74. It’s just funny how the left wingers are always lecturing us about how we need to be more like Europe, or more like “the world” regarding X, Y, or Z, yet most of “the world” has pretty strict immigration policies.
    Try moving to Canada, for instance.
    Or ask a Guatemalan how welcoming Mexico is at their shared border.

    Hey, did you overstay your visa in Saudi Arabia — no problem!
    After all, look how welcoming the Saudis are to the Syrian refugees!

    And China doesn’t mind if you want to take photographs or film your vacation in their fine country. You just can’t take the photos or film out of the country with you. (LOL)

    The left was borderline sympathetic to the Soviets during the Cold War. Before Reagan gave his ‘tear down this wall’ speech, the State Department was trying in vain to soften his provocative words. Charlie Checkpoint was just part of the real politick, according to the left.
    But now, the left freaks out if the United States wishes to facilitate a checkpoint that’s even 10% as tough as Charlie Checkpoint.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  75. she was a senate candidate, but somewhat of nor laup supporter if memory serves,

    narciso (732bc0)

  76. @75, coronello, that’s cruel. Not that I wouldn’t do it. But damn. Just Damn.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  77. when did everyone start going jason voorhees, on the continent, this is the second one in belgium, perhaps the sixth

    http://www.therebel.media/_asian_mentally_ill_woman_stabs_three_in_belgium_gets_shot

    narciso (732bc0)

  78. I’m thinking I can slip a Nissan 510 by my insurance company.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  79. of course the checkpoint charlie, was to keep people in not out, of course our plagiarizing chief executive to the south, doesn’t get that,

    narciso (732bc0)

  80. But now, the left freaks out if the United States wishes to facilitate a checkpoint that’s even 10% as tough as Charlie Checkpoint.

    That’s because the left loathes any standards even placed on who may enter our country. In fact it benefits their narrative to import poor, needy, and “people of color” so they can further their grip on minorities and the victimization industry. They can afford to kill a half million African American babies at Planned Parenthood this year if the trade off is importing a million Mexicans, Somali’s and Syrians.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  81. what am I talking about,

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/plagiarism-claim-teacher-standoff-start-224212547.html;_ylt=A0LEVu.ntbtXiycAMSoPxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw–

    narciso (732bc0)

  82. I’ll just be keeping quiet.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  83. those of us, who followed the rules, it took six years for the opportunity to leave cuba, back in the first decade of the revolution, then we were processed through the freedom tower, the southern ellis island,

    narciso (732bc0)

  84. Why the h3ll not, coronello?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvyOqKhKWQ4

    “One Fine Day”

    The Chiffons.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  85. Sorry. Brain farted.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  86. There’s a pretty specific invitation to a pretty specific group at Ellis Island. The idea was for us to be impressive enough, as a people, to convince the newcomers that we had things figured out. Maybe we failed.

    Leviticus (b0cfb2) p8/22/2016 @ 6:58 pm

    How did we fail? MacArthur made it clear on all the horses I WILL NOT RIDE IN ON that Shinto sucks and that it it is not a compromise of constitutional principles to say so. Shinto will not have a role in education or government nor will Islam and prove me wrong.

    We have f***ing been there done that.

    Steve57 (41f53d)

  87. Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/22/2016 @ 7:14 pm

    Try moving to Canada, for instance.

    It used to be much mch easier, for someone from the United states. As soon as they crossed the borderm, and it could be done with a birth certificate (of the old style) a personn became a “landed immigrant” and could stay. That’s how many – but not all that many – Vietname war draft evaders wound up in Canada (deserters had to go to Sweden)

    The policy of Canada has changed even since the 1960s. Although the big change, worldwide, was before, and especially during, and slightly after, World War I. The last place just plain open was Shanghai in the late 1930s.

    Sammy Finkelman (882d94)

  88. Trump has cancelled his big immigration speech scheduled for Thursday in Colorado, as a rally scheduled for Friday in Las Vegas, and a rally and fundraiser scheduled for next Wednesday, Augist 31, 2016, in Portland, Oregon.

    Looks like Trump is getting some pushback from some of his supporters. He’s at a turning point, maybe.

    Trump is going to have to decide whether he wants to get elected president or not.

    Sammy Finkelman (7c7fb2)

  89. Trump is getting “pushback” from local law enforcement who are afraid they can’t control rioting illegal immigrants from attacking Trump supporters.

    They riot at Trump rallies, rough up and spit on Trump supporters, wave Mexican flags and burn American flags. They are the most radical of the neverTrumpers.

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  90. 94. Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6) — 8/23/2016 @ 9:02 am

    Trump is getting “pushback” from local law enforcement who are afraid they can’t control rioting illegal immigrants from attacking Trump supporters.

    They riot at Trump rallies, rough up and spit on Trump supporters, wave Mexican flags and burn American flags. They are the most radical of the neverTrumpers.

    I don’t think those people are illegal immigrants, let alone typical ones. AndI don’t think the police are afraid of them. And if anyone would tell Trump to do anything, it would be not to show up, not to try to change his policy.

    In the Bill O’Reilly interview he is very pro-police. He also claims someone in Chicago, not the police commissioner, told him he could reduce murders in half in one week (or something like that) and the mayor of Chicago should appoint him because they have nothing to lose. He also wants to let generals who claim they could defeat ISIS do what they want, if you try to make sense of him.

    It comes out that anybody who has a shred of qualifictions who claims he could do a job that others aren’t doing successfully – he’ll give them the chance.

    Trump also says reporters got it wrong when they said he had never run before. Well, who was saying that?

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4434 secs.