Trump Tweets Deportation Delay UPDATED
[Headline from DRJ]
At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border. If not, Deportations start!
1:56 PM · Jun 22, 2019
Mayors in multiple cities had vowed to oppose deportations in their cities.
UPDATE: Miami Herald Editorial Board: Reprehensible immigrant round ups in Miami postponed — for now.
— DRJ
Trump loves Twitter.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 2:37 pmThe chances of the D’s coming through and closing the loophole? Zero.
My suggestion is to tie border security to aid to Israel. For every $ we give to border security we will give one $ to Israel. Watch the D’s agree in two seconds.
rcocean (1a839e) — 6/22/2019 @ 3:06 pmChumming the base.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/22/2019 @ 3:55 pmrcocean (1a839e) — 6/22/2019 @ 3:06 pm
I will ask you, rcocean, since you directly mentioned it, but anyone else who wants can chime in.
What is this alleged “loophole” Trump keeps referring to?
The way Trump talks, I have the impression he thinks allowing people to apply for asylum in any way, shape or form is the loophole. (If so, Congress can’t close it except by repudiating a whole bunch of international treaties.) Or else he seems to think that immigration itself is the loophole.
I won’t ask you to tell me what Trump actually means (probably an impossible task even for a mindreader). But what does a Trump supporter like yourself mean by “loophole”?
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 4:22 pmCheck the calendar; always overlay the media cycles with the ‘politics’ of Trump; he’s off to the G20 in Japan and the accompanying coverage next week. Why bigfoot his story there; can wait two weeks and get more media mileage dropping this shoe in the media cycles when he returns.
And there’s his July 4 party to look forward to!
So many fireworks to enjoy!
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:08 pmkishnevi,
I think there is an asylum loophole that originated in 2009 (effective in Jan 2010) when Obama expanded the ability to claim credible fear to include fear of drug, gang and ultimately domestic abuse violence in their home country. I have several links for this but no time right now. Start here.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:24 pmAnd here and here and here.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:42 pmDRJ, thanks.
I will repeat my earlier point: if we reformed immigration laws to allow those people a realistic way of fetting here, they wouldn’t be abusing the asylum system. If you merely close the “loophole” without doing that, you simply ensure more smuggling and more illegal immigrants. Trump’s “solution” would merely make the problem worse.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:50 pmKishnevi, my read on this is that once you’ve claimed asylum, you’re protected from being deported until you get your hearing.
IN many cases, these asylum cases are released to the public, especial for family units since the detention centers are stretched to the max. In these cases, may do not attend the followup adjudications.
In making it harder to claim asylum, it’ll reduce the abuse potential and make it easier for ICE to deport.
whembly (4605df) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:54 pmPlus this.
We do need a legislative fix but it won’t happen as things stand, and whembly is right that once here they get to stay. But we can’t allow mass migration under current laws because these asylum seekers don’t qualify without Obama’s loophole. They should be turned away. Most are trying to escape poverty and while that is heart-breaking, it is not grounds for asylum or most of the world would qualify.
Trump’s use of safe 3rd countries to screen these asylum seekers is probably the best option. I hope it lasts more than 45-90 days as currently planned.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 5:57 pmTrump is trying to change the asylum rules but he waited a long time to do it and now it is hung up in court.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 6:00 pmActually, AG Barr is changing the rules. Sessions tried a different way — separating families and trying to deport adults more quickly, but Trump caved when the bad press hit showing children separated from parents.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 6:03 pmProgressives insist on ignoring or misinterpreting immigration law, the 9th circuit is like an alien hive, there has been some progress on moving it, but challenging each iteration like the pause takes 18 months on average.
Narciso (e49d7b) — 6/22/2019 @ 6:09 pmDRJ, I have you known for as long as I have commented here, and I deeply respect you, but….you are totally wrong here. There are things in which basic decency and compassion, love of God and fellow man, require one and only one outcome, even when it seems impractical and counter to one’s interests. Abortion is one such thing. That’s why you and most other people here are pro-life. Immigration is another such, but here you are on the wrong side. *There is no reason not to let those people in, and every reason to let them come here simply for the sake of us wanting to be decent human beings*. Change the law to make it easier to let them come in, and what problems with border security would remain would be far easier to deal with.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 6:50 pmNarciso, do you realize that if Trump’s rules had been in effect back when you and your family came here, you would not have been allowed in?
When you come down to it, probably 80%, if not more, of modern Americans are descended , ultimately, from people who came here at one time or another to escape poverty in their home countries.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 6:55 pm@14. As long as they enter legally and want to assimilate that’s great. But there is the NIMBY factor; always is; but small bites; can’t allow the system become overwhelmed.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/22/2019 @ 7:02 pmYou lived in a totalitarian country, the kind of place that ocasio Cortez and Warren and practically every Democrat wants to institute here, why my uncle took up arms trying to liberate, why another relative died in the Florida straits trying to escape it
Narciso (e49d7b) — 6/22/2019 @ 7:14 pmWe have a choice: Either scale back legal immigration or gut the welfare state. We can’t have both in their current state
Gryph (08c844) — 6/22/2019 @ 7:37 pm@ Kish: You attribute to everyone who believes in any type of border enforcement a lack of “basic decency and compassion, love of God and fellow man.” That, sir, is untrue, a conclusive presumption that damns everyone but those who agree with you. It’s no more appealing when used on behalf of illegal immigrants than on behalf of either side in the abortion debates, where it’s also very common.
I would not try to change your belief, and I bear for you the same respect and affection you’ve expressed toward DRJ. But this mode of argument is uncharacteristic of you, and singularly unpersuasive. It’s possible and, alas, all too common for folks to let their decency, compassion, and love of God and fellow man turn them into inflexible ideologues, which does nothing but widen divisions.
Beldar (fa637a) — 6/22/2019 @ 7:47 pmA realist, which I also know you to be, Kish, will also recognize that no change in the immigration law on anything — except, perhaps, funding for border facilities — will happen before January 2021 at the earliest, and even then it would depend on one side obtaining sizable majorities in both chambers of Congress and (absent a blow-out that creates a veto-proof majority, a la the 1974 election) probably the White House as well.
Beldar (fa637a) — 6/22/2019 @ 7:51 pmBeldar! You have me quite wrong here. You are wrong in thinking I am against border enforcement. I am very much in favor of strong borders. The best reason to expand legal immigration is because it will make it much easier to keep the border secure. An ICE that doesn’t need to bother about housemaids and sweatshop workers creeping through the desert to get here will be able to focus that much more attention on MS13s, drug smugglers, and others whom no one (not even AOC) wants to let in.
But I raised to believe certain things, one of them being that our duties as citizens are merely a subset of our duties as human beings. God does not create Americans and Mexicans. He creates human beings who happen to be born in the US or Mexico. But there is nothing divine in the US borders, and our duties as creatures of God to other creatures of God are not limited by whether they were born on the same side of the Rio Grande as us.(The only set of borders given in the Bible is that of the Land of Israel, and even then only the borders it will have when the Messiah, he should come quickly, is enthroned in Jerusalem.)
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:27 pmI don’t think of myself as being ideological. I think I am simply trying to put into action what the Bible is fairly explicit about: love your fellow human being no matter how unlovely they may be. Nor do I think it wrong to point out to a group of people who contain a large percentage of active Christians that they ought to be considering what God wants us to do in dealing with political matters.
BTW, what you say in comment 19 is perfectly true. I happen to think the situation is due to the intransigence of anti-immigrant ideology.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:30 pmI agree we want immigration laws that are generous and expansive, but before we open up immigration to the many we need to solve the problems we already have. Otherwise we make things worse.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:31 pmI would submit that we can not solve some of the problems we have without expanding legal immigration.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:37 pmKishnevi, we do, in fact, admit many people (around 50k per year) adjudged to have valid claims to asylum.
Absent completely unfettered legal immigration (which I think I understand you do not support), there must be some determination made about whom to admit, based on some criteria, no?
Dave (1bb933) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:46 pmProbably true, but remember our present restrictive laws are a disincentive. If the barriers to legal immigration were lowered, we would have to reckon with not only everybody who seeks to enter now, but everybody who has been deterred. Throwing open the doors to the world (and I’d be interested to understand whatever limiting principle governs your expanded legal immigration policy) would almost certainly lead to enormous dislocations and problems. Incremental, or tightly focused, changes (like a guest worker program, for example) seem to me like the only responsible approach.
Dave (1bb933) — 6/22/2019 @ 8:53 pmAnd of course, you believe Mexico, Ireland, and Israel should have the same “open borders”. Right? Or is that Different?
rcocean (1a839e) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:05 pmDave, my criterion are simple to state
The potential immigrant needs to show
1)they are not a criminal or a jihadi
2) they will be able to find gainful employment quickly or have children or parents (not siblings or less immediate relatives) already here who are able and willing to support them.
The applicant would need to apply in their home country (meaning an illegal immigrant would not be able to legalize himself unless he went back home).
I would have no objection to imposing a lengthy waiting period for becoming a citizen or getting welfare benefits. Nor would I object to a quota as long as it allowed the applicant a realistic chance to come here in a few years.
Kishnevi (573b0b) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:07 pmWe have an insane asylum law that once you get on US Soil you can claim to need to asylum for any reason whatever. You then get to stay until your court date. 90% don’t show up for their court date.
Its just an insane scam. Of course Mitch and his Chamber of Commerce boys and the koch brothers love it. All they want is more bi-peds in the USA. Cheap labor. More consumers buying bread and toothpaste. All welfare/health costs downloaded to the US taxpayer. These characters don’t give a blast about the country. They only love money.
rcocean (1a839e) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:09 pmWell that’s nice. My plan would be to stop immigration completely. 320 million people is enough.
rcocean (1a839e) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:10 pmLOL.
Dave (1bb933) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:17 pmAnd what fraction of the people who currently attempt to get in, plus the additional number who would avail themselves of a more lenient policy, do you suppose this would admit?
It seems to me like this idea would incentivize an enormous surge that we could not accommodate, but still leave vast numbers with no other option than to enter illegally – the worst of both worlds in other words.
Dave (1bb933) — 6/22/2019 @ 9:23 pmI updated the post with a link to a Miami Herald editorial.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/22/2019 @ 10:27 pmHow does a city block deportation? Are they going to draw down on federal officials? Are they going to actively shelter illegals, or block roads so that federal officers cannot enter certain areas?
Insurrection isn’t just a word.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 1:29 amI will repeat my earlier point: if we reformed immigration laws to allow those people a realistic way of getting here
If we reformed our economic system to allow everyone a guaranteed income, we wouldn’t have theft. But that doesn’t make theft acceptable.
I am all for reforming our system, and would not mind greatly if ONLY people from Mexico and Central America could immigrate. Or at least a quota system that favored those who leave nearby. But no matter what our laws say, if we just ignore them, it doesn’t matter does it? If we allow anyone to say: “but I really want to come in” or whatever the magic words are, we have open borders and get to choose bewteen shanty towns or socialism.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 1:34 am*There is no reason not to let those people in, and every reason to let them come here simply for the sake of us wanting to be decent human beings*
How many are you allowing to live in your house? Until the answer is non-zero HOW DARE YOU try to shame anyone here.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 1:37 amWe have a choice: Either scale back legal immigration or gut the welfare state. We can’t have both in their current state
Sure we can. We can deny any benefits to non-citizens, and accept shanty towns like in the third world. Or we can accept that the welfare state needs more money, and bleed “the rich” white. Either of those things will let us pretend that we can have both at the same time. For a while.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 1:40 amHow many aborted children are you willing to adopt and provide for through adulthood? Until the answer is non-zero HOW DARE YOU try to shame anyone who supports third-trimester abortions on demand.
(n.b. I do not support third-trimester abortions; but Kevin’s argument and others like it are unserious)
Dave (1bb933) — 6/23/2019 @ 5:42 am“(n.b. I do not support third-trimester abortions; but Kevin’s argument and others like it are unserious)”
Dave (1bb933) — 6/23/2019 @ 5:42 am
I’ll think of your stellar counter argument if I ever run across someone with a gun pointed at an illegal immigrant’s head.
Munroe (df9855) — 6/23/2019 @ 7:53 am(n.b. I do not support third-trimester abortions; but Kevin’s argument and others like it are unserious)
As are the “how can you not care, are you not human?” arguments when refusing to attend to every unmet need.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 9:13 amApparently, the delay was caused by leaks to a number of outlets. And the leaker is now known: The Homeland Secretary himself.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/multiple_fingers_pointing_at_alleged_leaker_of_plans_for_ice_raids_today.html
Were the plans classified? Should acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan be arrested, or just fired for cause?
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 9:55 amSo the GOPe lives, or the Deep State, or NeverTrump, or maybe someone with a personal agenda? Or maybe someone who hates AcAleenan. I bet we find out someday, probably after we no longer care.
But I also suspect Trump will resume his deportation policy before two weeks.
DRJ (15874d) — 6/23/2019 @ 10:03 amKish: Thank you for your very gracious #20. I stand corrected.
Beldar (fa637a) — 6/23/2019 @ 11:09 am@22. Bingo.
Common sense. The Trump Administration could use you, DRJ. 😉
DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/23/2019 @ 11:38 amExcept we saw how the 86 deal went, no enforcement three times as many were amnesties as described and the lions share voted Democrat. Just like immigration policy in the 90s.
Narciso (e49d7b) — 6/23/2019 @ 12:06 pmIt used to be we didnt jump to conclusions, take a pause to evaluate the nature of certain allegations or statements
Narciso (e49d7b) — 6/23/2019 @ 12:18 pmYes, I was harsh with respect to Kishnevi, and I apologize and retract.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 3:13 pmThe problem is not really that we refuse to accept bona fide requests for asylum, but that the previous administration solicited false claims as a way of gaming immigration law to allow a mass influx of Central American immigrants. The result has to make the asylum process unworkable, to the detriment of actually persecuted people.
Really the only correction — at this point — is to introduce an element of hardship into the process, hopefully sufficient to weed out some of the false claimants. Which Trump’s people have tried to do. The blame for whatever harshness is added should not fall on Trump, but on the utterly lawless actions of the Obama administration.
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 3:22 pmAs in all things Trump, his administration seems utterly unable to state its case, even when the facts favor it. In part this is because they lie at all other times, but still…
Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/23/2019 @ 3:24 pmthe courts don’t care, they create their own ridiculous interpretation, no matter how much statutes argue against it, it took 18 months for the immigration pause to be cleared, and that was on an expedited schedule,
narciso (d1f714) — 6/23/2019 @ 3:36 pmit seems the whole point is delay,
https://cis.org/Report/History-Flores-Settlement
narciso (d1f714) — 6/23/2019 @ 3:42 pm