Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
DACA Going Caca
There won’t be an immigration agreement. The President’s signature issue is going to be handled to his satisfaction or it will be vetoed.
The bipartisan bill in the Senate, which is mostly Democrat but with a few squish boys like Flake, makes minimal and irrelevant changes to chain migration and visas but grants amnesty to DACA folks. The bill states it will fund a wall over a decade which is, of course, a complete lie.
The President compromised already and greatly upset a big part of his immigration-hawk base. Sen. Grassley has a plan that the President will sign. Schumer has a plan the left’s psycho-base can live with, essentially making his bill something the president will never sign.
March 5 is the theoretical deadline although there are some rogue activist judges who feel otherwise, at least until the SCOTUS slaps them down based on that crazy non-malleable document all the old white men left us handcuffed with.
There will be no acceptable compromise I expect. Your guess?
I hope the dreamers are all deported, aggressively, if the dems fail to give the president his wall, NOW, and legitimate immigration reform, NOW. The future of the nation is at stake here and the president knows it. Giving in to democrat demands is suicide for Trump and our country. Time for hardball.
Published in General
This is how you hold your ground on a position. Republicans, take note.
I agree. The balls is in the Dems court. They will be seen as the villians regardless of how much the MSM says it’s Trump’s fault. I believe most Trump supporters would accept legal status, possibly even a path to citizenship if and only if:
If these three things aren’t in whatever bill is sent to Trump’s desk, I expect a veto and an immediate start to deportation. As far as I’m conerned, any of these people 18 and over aren’t “Dreamers”, they’re adults who know they are committing a crime. They may have been innocent when they came, but they are guilty as hell now . . .
Nope. I’m not willing to excuse that, as it would reward the very behaviour that got us into this mess. A long delay before citizenship for the kids (to weed out the bad ones), and no more chain migration (so the kids and other anchor babies can’t reward the parents) are the two absolutely critical pieces of Trump’s proposal. The kids do need to learn their home country’s language — so they can visit their parents occasionally in the future.
Hi Bryan,
Thank you for the opportunity for clarification. She is a family law client, not an employee. Both of my employees are American citizens.
Gary
“Innocent”? When Buraq Hussein’s qualification criteria were “no more than” two (2) misdemeanor convictions, plus of course whatever is on their juvenile records?
“Innocent”, when more than half of ’em didn’t even register for DACA? Probably unable to meet even that laughably low bar!
But here’s what I’m really on about today: what happens on March 6th , to the Schemers, to their parents, if there is no deal?
N O T H I N G.
Just like before Buraq Hussein’s unconstitutional policy.
I am okay with these, but I do not want to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Some 80% of Americans are opposed to deporting the Dreamers. Even a majority of Republicans want Legal Status for Dreamers.
I am not sure that you are right about this. Illegal entry is illegal. Remaining in the country is not a crime, per se, I think. Persons under the age of 12 or so cannot be found guilty of a crime. My client was 3 years old when her parents brought her here. She was too young to be charged with a crime.
Please cite the federal statute that says that presence here is illegal as opposed to illegal entry.
You are right to have the fear that given the amnesty in 1986 for 3 million, we are now facing the Dem proposal for amnesty for 10 million thirty years later. My fear is that if we do a full amnesty for 10 million, in thirty years we will be faced with demands for amnesty for 30 million, and in sixty years we will be faced with demands for amnesty for 100 million.
I am opposed to amnesty for the parents who came here illegally, and the granting of Citizenship. But, if there were a path to Legal Status, for the fully employed, I could go with that. Perhaps the penalty would be that they would be precluded from government benefits. Perhaps exclusion from Social Security and Medicare for taxes paid before they attained Legal Status. The penalty should hurt, but not cripple.
Hi Hypatia,
I would suggest that the use of the name “Buraq Hussein” detracts from your argument. It took me awhile to realize that you were referring to Obama.
I refer to Trump by his name, not as Drumpf (this family’s historical name a century ago) or the Orange Monster, or tRUMP, as he is sometimes referred to on Facebook, as those would completely detract from my arguments.
Respectfully,
Gary
Haven’t you heard? Anecdotal evidence doesn’t count! (Or wait, is that only applicable to people who have been victimized by these alien “innocents”…? )
Try to keep up. I guess you didn’t hear, the GOP is now ahead in the generic ballot, Trump’s approval rating is up, and a vast majority of us agree with his policies on immigration–oh, ‘cept he’s way too soft on the Schemers. (1.8 million, including about a million who couldn’t be arsed even to register for DACA because they had too many criminal convictions? We hafta hope Trump’s only putting that out cuz he knows Dems will never accept. )
Hi Hypatia,
I think that you are weakening your arguments by referring to Dreamers as “Schemers.”
How can you refer to someone brought her at the age of 3 as a “Schemer”? She didn’t scheme, she was brought here. And her younger siblings are citizens.
Respectfully,
Gary
Gary, we’ve been here before. I detailed in a prior post that it is a crime to fail to register as an alien, and a crime to fail to carry papers showing legal status. So she has committed multiple crimes.
You, and many others, keep incorrectly insisting that people are not criminals when they are. Please stop spreading disinformation.
I do wonder about the young woman you mention, based on prior back-and-forth on the DACA issue. Was she bilingual? In our prior discussion about this, I pointed to a survey showing 98% of the DACA people are bilingual.
Hi Arizona Patriot,
i have seen the argument both way about per se legality as to status. Do you have a citation to the U.S. Code or an appellate case?
Yes, she is bilingual. And she has never been to Mexico since her parents brought her here when she 3 years old. (I have never been to Germany, despite having half German heritage.)
Gary
Awww, you didn’t know who I meant by “Buraq Hussein” ? Not even with the clue about him being responsible for DACA? God bless the mark.
If you want to call Trump by his first and middle names, like I did to Prez Zero, that’s fine with me. “Donald John”, or better yet, “Don John”, like the hero of Chesterton’s great poem Lepanto!
Call either of them what you will, the substance of my arguments stands.
Gary, I’ve done this before. I’ll cite the SCOTUS case, Arizona v. United States, which itself cites the statutes.
The case says two things:
Thank you so much! I have some reading to do!
Moderator Note:
Rude.… “to you and conservative voters” ….. very interesting …..
Careful @garyrobbins [redacted]
The question of continuing illegal presence was also one of the reasons that Obama could not simply pardon every illegal alien in the country. (In addition to questions about being able to non-specifically pardon an entire class of people.) He can pardon only for past actions. So, he can pardon for being here illegally yesterday, but not for being here illegally tomorrow.
Failure to register as an alien and to carry proof of status is a federal misdemeanor.
A federsl misdemeanor= a CRIME.
Thank you , @arizonapatriot
For finding and citing the statutes! !
now, let us hear no more of this false protestation of “innocence”. ADDITIONALLY, as I already pointed out, a Schemer can have up to TWO misdemeanor convictions, and still qualify under Buraq Hussein’s criteria.
Also, for anyone who was previously deported and came back, they are guilty of a crime. Re-entering after deportation is a felony, punishable by five years in prison.
Agreed. But what I am talking about is the employed high school graduate who is a Dreamer and was brought her when she was 3 years old.
I have printed out the 41 page opinion. Light reading I am sure. Thanks for the citation.
Just watched this. Some might find it interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjthnMOFSZM
Trump has a plan to help her. The Democrats rejected it.
The man you hate has a proposal to help her.
No, the question is should the child get to keep the ill-gotten gains. No one is arguing the dreamers should go to prison, but that they should be deported, i.e. give up the ill gotten gains.
Okay, I should have scrolled down one to see if someone else had already corrected Gary.
Why does it seem that the Dreamer issue is the only one that makes out America to be exceptional? We’re so bad, until even the Dems recognize that everyplace else is worse to return home to.
Then there should be no problem changing the law. If the numbers are correct (which I doubt, but that’s my skepticism of polling). However, your statement leaves out the details. Eighty percent support may only come about in polls if there is a wall, no chain migration, no lottery, and any number of other factors.
I don’t think he would do that. Just a gut feeling . . .
If she remains here after age 18, I believe she has. Then again, I’m not a lawyer, even though I’ve stayed at multiple Holiday Inn Expresses . . .
That’s what the Harvard poll showed. I believe it was 70% for the package Trump was offering, and that might well have been before he raised it to 1.8 million. They supported the package, though.
I’m pretty darned sure there is one. Otherwise, progessives would be saying, “Follow the law!”
Knowledge of an illegal status (such as driving an uninsured vehicle) does not relieve one of the burden of having commited a crime. Even not knowing the law is no excuse.
And for goodness sakes, let’s all stop calling illegal aliens “Dreamers”. I’m a Dreamer in the sense I dream about the rule of law being restored in this country. If these illegals are granted anything up to citizenship through a Constitutionally legal process, then who am I to argue?
But they haven’t been, so they have to go if there’s no legal compromise. Either give Trump what he and his voters want, or tell them to pack their bags, submit their applications in their mother countries, and get in line like everyone else.