Image 01 Image 03

After Trump on-air immigration meeting, I hear that Amnesty Train a comin’

After Trump on-air immigration meeting, I hear that Amnesty Train a comin’

Trump meeting with congressional leaders was both political genius and worrisome.

The almost hour-long live on-camera discussion of DACA and immigration Trump had at the White House today with congressional leaders was at once genius, and very worrisome.

First, the genius part.

Having the networks broadcast extensive coverage of Trump being “presidential” was an amazing counter-narrative to the demented line pushed by Democrats and the media that Trump is a bumbling idiot who barely can string more than 3 words together and should be removed under the 25th Amendment. People got to watch him in action running a meeting and in control, the master of ceremonies presiding over the congressional leadership from both parties.

It must have killed CNN to have to admit Trump was in control:

Trump also came across as conciliatory, again contrary to the media narrative. While the media foams at the mouth about how Trump foams at the mouth, Trump came across as the most reasonable person in the room. A uniter, not a divider.

It also was a divide and conquer move, though not on the surface. To the Democratic base, seeing Democrat leadership at the table joking around with and hobnobbing with Trump must have sent blood pressures through the roof. Trump lured the Democrat leadership into a group hug, and thereby exacerbated the bitter divide in the Democratic Party between the Bernie-wing and the establishment.

Trump also only had one unmovable demand: Funding for the wall. The Wall is symbolic in so many ways – a campaign promise that energized crowds, and a non-starter for open border Democrats. The Democrat establishment thus is face with the choice of alienating its base by funding The Wall, or alienating its base by not striking a DACA deal because it wouldn’t fund the wall.

So at many levels, it was a genius political move.


As I was watching it, all I could keep thinking was, “here comes amnesty.”

The code words were all there, particularly “comprehensive immigration reform.”

The political dividing line is “pathway to citizenship.” If that’s in either a DACA bill or ultimate comprehensive reform, it’s amnesty. And it’s what the old Gang of 8 members still want.

Trump said he’ll “take the heat.”

The “best” view I can take of this is that a DACA deal gets done without amnesty now, since Trump has dangled something bigger down the road, and in exchange Dems have to agree to fund the Wall and other substantial restrictions on chain migration and so on. Then nothing happens on “comprehensive” immigration reform.

The “worst” view is that the Amnesty Train is rolling down the tracks, and to use a metaphor from the campaign, Trump will shoot his core campaign promise on immigration in the middle of 5th Avenue, figuring his base will stick with him anyway.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Professor Jacobson is showing insufficient enthusiasm. I hope he isn’t the first one to stop clapping.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Matt_SE. | January 9, 2018 at 8:45 pm


    I hear Professor Jacobson.

    I don’t like that sort of talk either.

    However I figure 50% or more of the Screamers are convicted felons who would fail for any deal for “citizenship.”


    “Leaked Memo: Keeping “Dreamers” in the US Is “Critical” to Democrats’ “Electoral Success”

    So this is all about replacing American voters with foreign-born ones?”

      RE: Not a member:

      Obama provided that these folks get 3 misdemeanors and I forget what else, and they still get a pass.

      Don’t forget: DACAs, and illegals are getting Get Out of Jail Free Cards from local sanctuary cities/states so they won’t be deportable.

        notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Close The Fed. | January 9, 2018 at 9:35 pm

        Time for a little Executive Disorder and Repeal Methinks!

        stevewhitemd in reply to Close The Fed. | January 9, 2018 at 9:37 pm

        Fed: what Obama ‘provided’ in his original presidential order doesn’t matter any more. What matters will be whatever deal Trump makes with the Congress. The “three strikes and you’re still in” rule may go by the wayside.

      I would not be so Sanguin. Whatever crimes the dreamers did were most likely south of the border ( these children range up to 30 years old). They come with no ID, and are coming from a place where papers with any identity you want can be bought for a modest amount of money. Quite a few were probably brought by their parents with the intent of having their child later bring the family over. That segment probably has no criminal involvement either here or back home.

      It’s not a monolithic group, there’s everything from people getting away from things they’ve done to people who wanted a better job and better pay, and other variants we haven’t even thought of. What they have in common is coming from a different culture, one which has not served of their home countries well.

Close The Fed | January 9, 2018 at 8:41 pm

Thanks very much for the videos, Professor.

I heard part of the love fest on the radio as I was driving this afternoon, and it made my blood boil. I heard nothing but code words for amnesty, citizenship, and NO border wall.

I have been contacting friends, asking them to call their Congressmen, since Congressmen count phone calls. They won’t do the right thing; they’re too enamored with foreigners.

I wish they would give Americans the same freedoms illegal aliens have: break any law you want, we don’t care, and we’ll still pay your medical bills, your kids school bills, you name it!!! As long as you’re not American, we love you to death.

No one has discussed ENDING legal immigration, as we did from the 1920s to the 1960s. This is what we actually need: a stop of all immigration and a return to the culture of assimilation.

    Trump and others were talking border wall. However, Trump did use the word “system” to indicate that there may be some parts of the border which will not have the wall, but increased security measures.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | January 9, 2018 at 8:42 pm

Best Comment I’ve seen on this.

Professor Jacobson: It also was a divide and conquer move, though not on the surface. To the Democratic base, seeing Democrat leadership at the table joking around with and hobnobbing with Trump must have sent blood pressures through the roof. Trump lured the Democrat leadership into a group hug, and thereby exacerbated the bitter divide in the Democratic Party between the Bernie-wing and the establishment.”

Don’t you just love it!

Remember the MSM thought they could just start telling all kinds of lies about Trump and have U.S. believe it (after 50 years of them covering Trump and showing us how consistent Trump is).

    One positive about this process of showing the entire meeting was that the Ds could not leave the room and discuss their talking points as well as misrepresent the Rs points.

      Arminius in reply to Liz. | January 10, 2018 at 8:34 am

      Never underestimate the power of the edit function. It isn’t enough that Trump invited MSM crews into the meeting. I wouldn’t put it past them to work hand in glove with the elected Democrats to try to gaslight the country.

      The only way to keep all the DNC operatives (in government and in the media) honest is to have your own WH communications office camera crew in there recording the whole meeting from beginning to end.

      I have a bit of experience with this. Not that I was that important, but I worked for people who were. I would never do an interview with these scumbags without my own camera crew in the room. I’ve seen media types ask for more time with an interviewee because the interview was “so interesting.”

      That was B.S (this Wolff character isn’t the only media type that will flatter or otherwise lie to get their foot in the door and get a story). They already had their story written, and it didn’t really matter what the subject of the interview said they were going to make him look bad. The only reason they wanted more time was because they hadn’t yet gotten the one sound bite they were looking for that they could take out of context and use as the last nail in the coffin.

      As I said, I certainly hope Trump or someone on his staff was foresighted enough to have their own crew recording everything.

    The problem with your sanguine interpretation is that Trump already has a history of going wobbly on immigration. The 2016 primaries were still going when he started talking about a “big, beautiful door” in the wall and increasing H1-B visas.

    His base (rightly) freaked out, and Trump immediately backtracked. The problem is, the backtrack position wasn’t his first instinct. That is an indication of intent, and is worrying.

    Not to mention that he’s squarely put the wall into play and has put the RINOs into the uncomfortable position of having to demand that the wall is part of any DACA deal. Miss Lindsey will have the vapors but has no choice other than going along.
    Upchuck will not allow the wall to be, so what has happened is that DJT has rolled Schumer into putting up or shutting up when it comes to the shut down.
    The little chihuahua Gutierrez will go apoplectic if Upchuck caves.

I had the tv on during the day and heard most of the event, but I need to rewatch the entire meeting. But, I agree that the priority is a DACA bill with border security and some visa rule changes like no chain migration, no lottery visas and more merit based visas. There was someone in the room who made sure that it was going to be DACA/border control first and the comprehensive stuff occurs later.

It was interesting to note that some were talking DACA and others tried to talk DREAMERS, which are two separate sets of people, with DACA being only 800,000 “kids”. Dreamers Act probably includes anyone who came over as a “kid”.

I thought that Trump came across as calm, measured, able to run a meeting, willing to make some adjustments to get something done. But he did turn the responsibility of crafting the bill to Congress, where it should be.

Whether it comes in step one or step two, IMO there is no doubt we’re getting amnesty/pathway to citizenship for 900k Dreamers. Again my opinion says the often campaigned on “wall” is going to be limited to a few places and at best will be a fence.

The Trump voters will be expected to accept this shafting because “they love Trump.” It will be interesting to see if he is as loved as he thinks.

Third option – Dem’s should take the deal they’re being offered, but won’t because its an election year and they don’t dare disappoint their base. So they blow the whole deal up, and nothing happens at all.

And if that’s what’s going to happen, then Trump is best off making it look like he is going to offer them anything they want, so that when it blows up all the blame will be theirs.

In the current political climate, it’s hard to go wrong betting on failure, it’s always the most likely option.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Tom Servo. | January 9, 2018 at 8:56 pm


    That’s what I’ve been thinking the past few days too.

    Trump is “baiting” the Dems and their corrupt supporters…..

    And, he can always say that the deadline was March 5th and that I told you that Congress had to deal with the matter. If there is no bill to sign, the deadline is it and everyone goes back.

    cloudbuster1 in reply to Tom Servo. | January 10, 2018 at 8:20 am


I’ve always said that I’m perfectly OK with some form of amnesty AFTER the border is secured.

What is not acceptable is what Rubio and the RINOs were doing and trying to ram amnesty through for a vague promise to maybe look at considering to think about border security at an unspecified future time.

    AmandaFitz in reply to Olinser. | January 9, 2018 at 10:44 pm

    We’ve seen THAT movie before. The Dems promised Reagan they’d take action on illegal immigration AFTER he signed an amnesty bill. The amnesty happened, the crackdown on protecting AMERICAN CITIZENS did not! Bait and switch all over again. I wouldn’t trust the Democrats to keep their word on anything.

      Matt_SE in reply to AmandaFitz. | January 10, 2018 at 8:53 am

      Don’t forget that the scoreboard isn’t even. The Democrats STILL OWE US for the screwing in 1986. If there’s any deal, we get our demands first.

Paul In Sweden | January 9, 2018 at 9:07 pm

Trump brought them in and said to them you are both very close to comprehensive immigration reform already, I think you can do it. I do not think he believes that they can do it, nor do I believe that with mid-terms around the corner it can be sold to the majority. Trump is sticking with border security of which The Wall is just one component and one that cannot be excluded.

The strategy seems to be showing the American people that it is up to congress to work out the solution and if congress can’t do it, he is not the one on the hook although he magnanimously says several times, I’ll take the heat. Trump is going to let the clock run down and Sessions is going to enforce the law.

I just do not see a bipartisan DACA border security with WALL & immigration reform as phase two. Congress is just too incompetent.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Paul In Sweden. | January 9, 2018 at 9:31 pm


    The DACA, Dems, and Screamers can’t beat the clock.

    The Dems will never be able to talk their way out of leaving offers on the table.

    Then their voters are gonna rip them some new………… ;X

Need I say it…???

Don’t get so excited over “code”. The key to code is that it’s flexible; what it means depends on who’s using it.

When D’rats say “comprehensive immigration reform,” they mean amnesty. That’s the only thing they’re really interested in, but they know they can’t come right out and say it.

However, when someone else says “comprehensive immigration reform,” he could mean almost anything. Even things which might actually reform something—an end to chain migration, diversity visas, “wet feet dry feet” policy, or any (or all) of the ridiculous bits and pieces which make the American immigration system such a ponderous and ineffective mess. One simply can’t tell merely from the text of the code phrase.

Code is not only useful PR, it’s a useful negotiation tool. I can easily see Nancy Pelosi, say, thinking that she’s getting “amnesty” mainly because she’s so conditioned to thinking that she “knows” exactly what “comprehensive immigration reform” means. But that doesn’t mean that’s what she’ll get.

I suspect (though I can’t know, any more than anyone else) that President Trump is perfectly aware that fighting off the foreign invasion is what put him on the map in the first place, and made him the outstanding candidate of the 2017 race. No one else would touch it; he did, and the public’s response was tremendous. And that hasn’t changed.

    hrh40 in reply to tom_swift. | January 10, 2018 at 7:48 am

    And Trump has not been a part of this code. As the Professional Conservative Cabal Never Trumpers love to point out, Trump is not an ideologue so we have yet to know what Trump means by comprehensive immigration reform. My guess is that he means what the phrase says. Which means a complete overhaul and probably much more restricted and enforced immigration system.

    drh445 in reply to tom_swift. | January 10, 2018 at 9:16 am

    Agree. Trump has a history of giving conflicting public signals in the lead-up to any negotiation. Sun-Tzu, or whatever…

    I wonder why the tea-leaf readers haven’t zeroed in on what Trump just did the day before this meeting with the Dems? When he announced he’s sending back 200,000 Ecuadorian “refugees” who have been staying here for the past 15 years because of an earthquake in their home country. They’ve been here longer than the “Dreamers” (ugh, sorry, just vomited in my mouth a little).

    The fact that that decision came out of the blue, and the timing of it, gives a very strong signal to those who are paying attention about what Trump’s real intentions are, IMO.

      hrh40 in reply to drh445. | January 10, 2018 at 9:27 am

      Thank you for paying more attention to what he does than what he says. Actions speak louder, but for too many decades DC has done nothing BUT speak, louder and louder. Trump speaks, sure, but he also DOES. Which is why the Do-Nothing DC Swamp doesn’t like him.

I didn’t hear amnesty’s a-comin’. I saw a president who outmaneuvered the Democrats and will settle for nothing less than what he wants on immigration. The Democrats have insisted on only DACA amnesty. They’re not going to get that because they reject a bill with Trump’s imperatives. It’s a win for Trump—he’s listening and standing up for the American people; Democrats are ignoring the American people in favor of illegal aliens. Democrats and GOPE will not support the bill that the GOP will offer and Trump will sign only what the GOP offers.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Juba Doobai!. | January 9, 2018 at 9:36 pm

    Bravo! Excellently put!

    stevewhitemd in reply to Juba Doobai!. | January 9, 2018 at 9:42 pm

    Juba, I think we take your comments on what is a win for Mr. Trump and combine them with Prof. Jacobson’s comments on how Trump looked and came off.

    Trump looked reasonable, in command, master of the subject at hand, leader-like, willing to listen.

    Trump made clear what he wants and, imperative to any good deal being struck, made clear what he WON’T agree to and won’t sign. Everything else is negotiable.

    This was a major step forward for Mr. Trump today, and it has to gall his opponents no end.

      rabidfox in reply to stevewhitemd. | January 9, 2018 at 10:05 pm

      He also didn’t look like a Amendment 25 candidate either.

        Tom Servo in reply to rabidfox. | January 10, 2018 at 7:48 am

        The funniest thing about the Amendment 25 proponents in the media is that you literally would have to be insane to think that’s an actual option. As if Mike Pence is going to lead a coup d’etat.

          Obie1 in reply to Tom Servo. | January 10, 2018 at 9:35 am

          But you forget that most of the idiots on the left think that if Trump is removed from office Hillary will become president.

      Ragspierre in reply to stevewhitemd. | January 10, 2018 at 7:18 pm

      That’s so odd…

      I heard Der Donald repeat several times that anything these guys produce would be signed by him.

      When I heard that, I thought that a very STRANGE negotiating anchor.

        “That’s so odd…”

        Not really. When you abandon the TDS, you’ll find that he knows what is going to be produced. Or not produced at all. Which is also a win.

          Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | January 11, 2018 at 9:39 am

          How sad. Did you see where the administration cut T-rump’s answer to Feinstein from the official transcript? How embarrassing, and how casually corrupt. But they know their dupes. You have to give them that…

          Barry in reply to Barry. | January 11, 2018 at 8:03 pm

          How sad.

          Did you see where Trump hasn’t done anything you predict?

          Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | January 11, 2018 at 10:20 pm

          Sure he has!

          What’s this tread about?

It feels like the Reagan green card lottery. Do the thing they want now, and never get the thing you want later. I hope Trump’s smart enough to see the game, and not buy into the vanity of being “in control”

There’s fake pressure that “something” needs to be done. So let’s do Feinstein’s DACA clean bill, give them amnesty (with the Republican types saying the entire way that Trump will get the credit).

Then, the future considerations which, shocker, runs into problems.

Subotai Bahadur | January 9, 2018 at 9:51 pm

They will do what they will do. The American people will do what they are going to do in response. If voting is shown to have absolutely no affect on policy and governance, that will inform the response.

Unless Trump was telling them, “they have to go back,” he’s betraying his country. Anything else is amnesty and amnesty will bring more.

No, ‘deal’ will deliver anything but more illegals and democrat votes. No end to chain migration, no end to birthright citizenship for illegals, certainly no wall. He. Will. Get. Nothing.

Giving the Republicans the benefit of the doubt on any issue is a mistake. They deserve a constant, withering cynicism until they’ve established a reliable record of not screwing over their voters. They currently possess no such record. Not even close.

Trump has not failed us yet. Be patient.

    Republicans haven’t done enough yet to warrant any patience. Patience gives them room to squish. They’re still manufacturing excuses to avoid winning… even to the point of quitting because they fear being held accountable by their voters. What momentum they have comes entirely from being pushed from behind. What they need to feel is pressure. Winning on immigration just might give Republicans the spine they’ve lacked for so long.

Michael Wolff said that Trump just wanted bills to sign and in the face of that remark Donnie is a at it again. And his senility is showing through with the repeats of the millions of immigrants who voted illegally against him, depriving him of the coveted majority vote and he told the tale of the massive crowd at his inauguration yet again. He also proved what a great negotiator he is by saying whatever I get from Congress becomes law.

His four-letter vocabulary didn’t improve and he held another public meeting to prove that he was running the show and that his toadies continue to love him. I think it is obvious that he cannot count to 25, so the significance of the 25th amendment is over his head.

Well….Looks like a judge just blocked rescinding Daca… much for the rule of law.

    herm2416 in reply to wendybar. | January 10, 2018 at 6:43 am

    The President did not rescind DACA, he is letting it expire. The judge is grandstanding.

    MarkS in reply to wendybar. | January 10, 2018 at 8:03 am

    So one judge can declare a sitting president unable to rescind the EO of a previous president that another Federal Court has ruled that the EO is unconstitutional? Someone please explain!

      Subotai Bahadur in reply to MarkS. | January 10, 2018 at 3:25 pm

      Short form explanation, there is no rule of law. The Constitution is moot if a Leftist objects to any part of it. Consent of the governed is gone. As is any obligation to obey other than when directly threatened with deadly force, and only so long as that force is credible or cannot be countered with superior force.

      I assume that this explanation will not meet with the approval of the GOPe.

    Close The Fed in reply to wendybar. | January 10, 2018 at 9:00 am

    Time to impeach the 9th circuit judge that ruled DACA has to be continued. From Breitbart:

    The cases were assigned to Judge William Alsup, a liberal Clinton-appointed judge who formerly clerked for the Supreme Court and served in the Clinton-era DOJ.

    Alsup originally issued extraordinarily broad and invasive discovery orders to force the federal government—even the White House—to disclose a broad range of sensitive documents on DACA discussions, possibly including communications with President Trump that would be protected by executive privilege.

    When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco did not rein in Alsup, Sessions’ top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Noel Francisco, went straight to the Supreme Court, which rejected Alsup’s order in a unanimous opinion.

    Back in the federal trial court, Alsup’s latest decision rejected DOJ’s motion to dismiss the five lawsuits. Instead, he issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration, ordering the Trump administration, “pending final judgment herein or other order, to maintain the DACA program on a nationwide basis on the same terms and conditions that were in effect before the rescission on September 5, 2017.” The San Francisco-based district court further ordered the federal government to begin renewing work permits for DACA recipients.

Here is your immigration buzzword translation list:

Immigration Reform = amnesty.
comprehensive = amnesty.
broken immigration = amnesty.
outdated system = amnesty.
out of the shadows = amnesty.
the right thing to do = amnesty.
want to make a better life = amnesty.
boom to the economy = amnesty.
path to citizenship = amnesty.
Do jobs Americans won’t = amnesty.

Any questions?

One thing that didn’t and won’t come up for discussion was the subject of anchor babies.

And why should it? This whole “dreamer” fiasco has rendered the anchor baby obsolete. Why bother getting here before the kid is born so that the kid will be a birthright citizen? Now, thanks to the disgusting concept of the “dreamer” any kid born anywhere in the world is your ticket to American citizenship.

As long as you bring in the kid as a minor. And stay.

Then the Democrats can say the kid is here through know fault of his own. Why, the kid doesn’t even remember the country of his birth! Only a heartless monster would deport the kid.

And while we may do away with chain migration I doubt very much that we’ll go so far as to say that once the “dreamer” sets foot on that vaunted pathway-to-citizenship we’ll say they can’t sponsor their own parents for at least permanent residency.

We can’t be breaking up families like that, can we, the Dems will lecture us (tell that story about how we can’t break up families to American citizens whose parents are in prison; we break up families all the time).

In other words, this whole “dreamer” thingy is a way to absolutely guarantee that, while the “dreamer” may be here through no fault of their own, the people who are at fault for the kid being here benefit from their criminal act.

buckeyeminuteman | January 10, 2018 at 8:58 am

I keep hearing politicians and media pundits say these DACA kids did come illegally through no fault of their own. Their parents brought them. Do they know it is possible to deport the whole family, parents and children? Children are perfectly capable of breaking the law, it is done everyday. The border wall campaign promise never included giving away free citizenship Oprah-style to illegals. Come to think of it, Mexico is supposed to pay for this thing, in one form or another.

“…….figuring his base will stick with him anyway.” If this DACA crap is passed, as a member of ‘his base’, I’m done.

Trump folds on this at his (And America’s) peril. He won’t survive his first term if he gets snookered by the Amnesty crowd.

Sen Feinstein:

DACA first, and a commitment to security.

This has been done, before. It resulted in massive problems. No. No. No. No.

There is indeed a trust issue, here, and Sen. Feinstein is part of the problem.

The DACA kids will and should get a path to citizenship. The border should be closed and a legal system that allows aliens to work here at low wages that keep our economy ticking makes sense.

I’m disappointed that Trump isn’t using his platform to say that the current system is morally wrong. Like slavery, though not as bad, the current system of servant labor is just wrong and evil. Poor individuals have to spend big money to cartels and coyotes to cross a very dangerous border, where they are often raped and robbed, in a Las Vegas style game of chance to get across. It’s wrong. It is wrong to have them live in a shadow class, where they work cheap but have to live in fear of deportation, unable to call the police if they are victims of crime.

Amnesty won’t stop this evil system because once they become legal, they are no longer the cheap labor, the servant class. So they cycle starts over again.

Why do those who support illegal immigration hate the poor so much? They don’t. They just want a servant class of nannies and gardeners and cheap lettuce. They are selfish and justify their evil selfishness by saying they are the ones who care. BS. “Hey Juan! Go get my water!” Disgusting.

    elle in reply to elle. | January 10, 2018 at 12:49 pm

    Seriously? What is there to down vote? Do you think it is okay to make a servant class cross the border the way we do? Who in their right mind does not support a system where these people can cross safely and legally?

    We are so brain washed that me actually believe that if we allow them to cross legally, then they have to be paid at least minimum wage and get free medical and SS for life. None of those things are true. They want the work, they are willing to do it for less, and the US needs the labor. It shouldn’t be that hard to set up a system to allow them to come in and work. If it weren’t for all of the people who benefit from their semi-slave labor, it could have been fixed YEARS and YEARS ago.

    As for the DACA kids…come on, they need a path to citizenship. Not amnesty, a path. Where are they supposed to go? This is their home. I’m not talking dreamers.

      katiejane in reply to elle. | January 10, 2018 at 1:42 pm

      Seems to me that they are “willing to work for less” because they come from cesspools where they would work for even less – if they had work at all. So you’re comfortable with keeping a low paid class that enables businesses to underpay their employees as long as they can come here for free.
      Once they get here with a legal stamp the Left would mount another hissyfit if we said – no you can’t ever qualify for all the usual benefits of being legal. Looks like you want a permanent cheap labor class.

      DACA people are the Dreamers

        I was under the impression from another post I read that there is a difference between DACA and Dreamers, maybe I’m wrong. But it doesn’t matter. I think we can all agree that there is a group of aliens brought as children who deserve not to be dragged from their bed and dropped off in downtown Mexico City with a hearty “Good Luck!”

        An no, I’m not comfortable with business “underpaying”. I’d prefer they got at least minimum wage. But if I’m from the cesspoool and I less sounds good to me, then it is certainly better to bring them here legally

          elle in reply to elle. | January 10, 2018 at 2:19 pm

          “Once they get here with a legal stamp the Left would mount another hissyfit if we said – no you can’t ever qualify for all the usual benefits of being lega”

          I actually agree with you on that. But that is not a reason to not work to fix the system to something that works better than the shadow class that we have today. It is 100% immoral to have a system that encourages and rewards them for coming, but makes them a servant class in the process of doing so. It can be fixed.

          elle in reply to elle. | January 10, 2018 at 2:39 pm

          and I don’t think that simply saying, “build a wall”, will fix what ails us. The truth is that immigrants are a good thing. They are a win/win for everyone. They WILL come. They will work for less. A wall won’t stop them. There will be tunnels, planes, visas, and boat landings. A wall won’t stop businesses from bringing them in to work at cheap wages. If I lived in Hell Hole Mexico, I’d come and so would you. But what we have now is can only be described as better than what they had in the South in the 1800s. It’s wrong to make them cross the border the way we do. It is wrong to keep them as a shadow class and I know that you agree with that.

          I’m sick and tired of our politicians punting on this. Fix it! Allow them to work and make it legal. How *(&^*(^*& hard is that?

If Trump caves on amnesty then he completely sinks his chances at re-election. Though that may be is point.

Amnesty is coming , It always was. I am not opposed to amnesty as long as its LEGAL AND PART OF A PLAN TO SECURE THE BORDER . felons need to be deported and those that come back after being deported need to face DRACONIAN penalties.

In all of history, everywhere in the world, no amnesty has worked to the ends intended.