Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

“At the request of Democrats,” Trump Delays Planned Deportation Raids For Two Weeks

“At the request of Democrats,” Trump Delays Planned Deportation Raids For Two Weeks

The art of the deal?

Earlier this week, President Trump tweeted:  “Next week ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States.” Today, he has announced that the raids will be delayed for two weeks.

The raids were to target over 2,000 illegal aliens who have been issued deportation orders but chose to ignore them and remain in our country.

NBC News reported yesterday:

Immigration authorities are planning a massive roundup Sunday of undocumented families that have received deportation orders, two sources familiar with the matter told NBC News.

The raids will take place in several cities across the country and could target up to 2,000 immigrants facing deportation orders, the sources said.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting Director Mark Morgan confirmed the planned operation on Friday.

“This is not about fear,” Morgan said in an interview with ABC News Live. “No one is instilling fear in anyone. This is about the rule of law and maintaining the integrity of the system.”

Morgan said his agency will pursue more than 2,040 family members who are still living in the U.S. despite having received deportation orders. The goal, he said in the interview, was to deter others from entering the country illegally.

“Right now, the greatest pull factors for families to come here is they know that once they arrive in the U.S., they remain here untouched,” Morgan said. “We have to change that.”

It seems like the president had a plan, however, because just this morning, he doubled down on the planned raids.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142409512240013313

And suddenly Congressional Democrats are interested in working with Republicans to do something about immigration. The president is giving them two weeks.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142506687020130306

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

i believe this has much more to do with the fact that Acting DHS Secretary McAleenan has been caught leaking raids to the cities targeted, the press and to the Democrats. He is also suspected of denigrating his own detention facilities and policies and fabricating stories about his own personnel. A deep stater, he is another Wray. He is working for the Democrats.

    It’s long past time to dismantle the Department of Foreign Invasion. There is no fixing anything with these bureaucracies. Shut them down. We were far more secure before DHS was created. I wonder why that is.

I had assumed that we have been stepping up deportation for the last two years because it’s the right thing to do for America. Today I learn that deportations havn’t even started because it’s being held back as a ‘negotiating tactic’.

This is a disaster. Build the wall, deport them all, close the southern border. What on earth is going on here?

Close The Fed | June 22, 2019 at 7:29 pm

The advance notice definitely disadvantageous, but it has to be done.

What is the damn point of having a border, of having ICE, of having immigration judges, of paying ALL THOSE TAXES FOR THIS, if NONE of it means a HILL OF BEANS?

Illegal Aliens are First-Class Citizens in American.
Americans are Fourth-Class Citizens.

President Trump, man up, get it done. The ONLY thing the Dems will EVER agree to, is more, more, MORE illegal aliens entering and STAYING here, and everyone over the age of 15 knows this.

We can’t afford any more “Victories” like the omnibus or last week’s sellout by the GOP Senate.

Gremlin1974 | June 22, 2019 at 7:44 pm

I think it actually puts Trump in a good position. He looks reasonable and when Democrats spend the next to weeks not taking care of the nations real problems, he can throw up his hands and say; “Hey, I tried.”

    Anchovy in reply to Gremlin1974. | June 22, 2019 at 7:50 pm

    Instead of making this about politics how bout we do what we need to secure our country from the third world invasion. Trump is backing down on too many important things. Git her done.

      Andy in reply to Anchovy. | June 22, 2019 at 11:28 pm

      This is how it is supposed to work. Else in 2024 we get another Obama and the border is set wide open again.

    Bingo, right on the nose. Trump does this as a matter of habit. It’s backwards from Normal Washington which goes “I’m planning on doing this, any day now, anyyy day, soon, really honest, just need to get everything together, ok, NOW I’m doing it.” (Then deal with the objections)

    Trump: “I’m doing this.” (pause) “Well, with all the protesting that X, Y, and Z are doing, obviously they have a plan. Let’s hear it.” (pause) “They have no plan. We’re doing it.”

    rdmdawg in reply to Gremlin1974. | June 23, 2019 at 12:35 pm

    “He looks reasonable and when Democrats spend the next to weeks not taking care of the nations real problems, he can throw up his hands and say; “Hey, I tried.””

    Yeah, sounds good, but the Democrats have spent the last 80 years ‘not taking care of the nation’s real problems’. Does anyone think that 2 more weeks will change them in any way?

      Gremlin1974 in reply to rdmdawg. | June 23, 2019 at 3:44 pm

      No but it’s not about changing them. Leftist become more predictable the further left they go. This is about Independants and those on the fence. Remember, even though the Dems and leftist don’t want to admit it, the simple fact is that a good number of those that voted for Obumbles switched and voted for Trump. Trump knows that he won’t have someone who is one of the most unlikable human beings I have ever seen. So he has to retain those voters to win again, that is what this is about. Stuff like this takes away arguments and highlights the fact that the left’s only plan is complete amnesty and open borders, something that is not nearly as popular as the left and the media (I know redundant) would like to believe.

This isn’t a negotiating tactic as the Democrats have demonstrated this in non-negotiable.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/06/22/bam-tom-cotton-hammers-chuck-schumer-for-what-he-conveniently-omits-from-deportation-fear-mongering/

Chuck Schumer tweeted:

“When things aren’t going well, @realDonaldTrump plays to his base

Instead of putting forth solutions to fix our broken immigration system, instead of pursuing criminals, he threatens to tear families apart

This isn’t leadership
This is inhumane & unwise
https://www.
washingtonpost.com/immigration/ic
e-raids-targeting-migrant-families-slated-to-start-sunday-in-major-us-cities/2019/06/21/f2936318-942e-11e9-b570-6416efdc0803_story.html?utm_term=.10ad10eb7fa1
…”

To which Sen. Tom Cotton responed:

[email protected] conveniently omits that these illegal aliens’ cases have been heard & rejected, hence they’re under valid orders of removals.

If illegal aliens with final orders of removal can’t be deported, who can be? Democrats have a radical, open-borders position.
https://
twitter.com/senschumer/sta
tus/1142248472483155978
…”

And Kemala Harris accidentally told the world what the Democratic party’s goal is by protecting illegal aliens from legal consequences.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/06/20/whoops-kamala-harris-accidentally-admits-why-dems-are-fighting-to-keep-people-in-the-us-illegally/


Charlie Sunshine
@chadbecker777

This is an attempt by @HouseDemocrats to remake the demographics of our country by bringing in millions of illegal immigrants.
https://
twitter.com/SenKamalaHarri
s/status/1141162256408952832

Kamala Harris

@SenKamalaHarris

Let’s call this what it is: an attempt to remake the demographics of our country by cracking down on immigrants. That this threat is coming from the President of the United States is deeply reprehensible and an affront to our values. We will fight this.
https://www.
washingtonpost.com/immigration/tr
ump-vows-mass-immigration-arrests-removals-of-millions-of-illegal-aliens-starting-next-week/2019/06/17/4e366f5e-916d-11e9-aadb-74e6b2b46f6a_story.html?utm_term=.5b27f6d38bb9
…”

This isn’t, as I said, a negotiating tactic because now that the Democrats; led by de facto party leaders Occasional=Cortex, Omar, and Tlaib, have officially become the “Death to America” party there is no going back.

This is giving them more rope to hang themselves with. They can continue to deny that they’re the open borders absolutist they quite obviously are but they simply expose themselves as the brazen, shameless liars they obviously are.

If AOC is going to call ICE detention centers “concentration camps” and the other Congressional Dems are going to back her play, or at least they’ll remain silent about it, then they are morally obligated to build that wall so we have fewer people to put into those “concentration camps.” Or vote for Republican proposals to provide more aid for humanitarian assistance. That’s my least favorite option, but since the House Dems will keep blocking that money I don’t mind that they continue to expose the Dems’ actual goal. No border or immigration law enforcement at all.

These lies; Schumer’s, Harris’, Occasional-Cortex’s, are so easy to swat down it’s like the gift that keeps on giving. If ICE is running “concentration camps” at our southern border they are the worst SS camp guards ever. Because illegal aliens keep arriving begging to get into those “concentration camps” and stay there while their asylum claims are being adjudicated. They could leave whenever they want; just drop the asylum claims and say they want to go back their home countries.

Something tell me the Nazis didn’t run their camps this way. French Jews didn’t illegally cross into Germany or Poland and file asylum claims. They were of course rounded up against their will and sent there in cattle cars. And if they requested to back to France it isn’t like the “death’s head” crowd would have swung the gates open for them. They would have laughed and flogged them at a bare minimum.

Since the President is obligated to enforce the laws on the books (when the Constitution says that the President “shall” see that the laws are faithfully executed that means he has to do it, no ifs, ands, or butts).

Now, this two week delay may be part of Trump’s re-election campaign but I don’t mind. The voters need to be reminded what a disaster every single Dem presidential candidate PROMISES to be. They need to be reminded what a disaster every single Dem elected official has proven themselves. Thankfully we have the “Socialist it-girl” and her posse inadvertently making one in-kind contribution to the “Re-elect Donald Trump 2020 committee.”

Puhiawa makes an excellent point. There are too many top officials in the executive branch dedicated to blocking Trump at every turn. The acting head of DHS is just one. The current director of the CIA, Gina Haspell, is another. Trump has told the IC to cooperate with the DoJ’s investigation but Haspell has issued guidance that says in clear bureaucratese (I know that’s an oxymoron but if you understand bureaucratic double talk then the message is as clear as crystal) to stonewall, destroy evidence, and lie to protect themselves, each other, former CIA officials (cough, cough, Brennan, cough, cough) and most importantly their beloved director.

Or as she said in her memo, cooperate “while working to protect, sources, methods” etc. Same thing, as the CIA has long abused their ability to classify information to cover-up wrongdoing, including blatant criminal activity using exactly this sort of language. Trump didn’t put any limits on the cooperation he expects the Intel Community to give DoJ investigators. Haspell just did; an act of blatant insuboridantion. She and McAleenan should be fired at once.

Haspell is pursuing her own self-interest. Lest she forget she was the CIA’s London station chief when both the CIA and FBI were spying on Papadoupolis after he accepted a job offer that came out of the blue from a London think-tank, the London Centre of International Law Practice. It is an established fact that the FBI sent counter intel agensts, in particular the notorious Peter Strzok, to London to meet with the Australian ambassador who set Papadopoulis up. MI6 assets (the ambassador may well be one) also got into the act; particularly an Oxford professor whose name escapes me at the moment. He had a young, attractive female assistant who Mueller claimed in his charging document was a Russian agent. I have good reason to believe Mueller is lying and that she was an FBI counter intel agent or CIA operative.

None of this could have gone on without the CIA station chief’s knowledge and cooperation. In addition, the CIA station chief in London has regular meetings with MI6; at least weekly, perhaps more frequently. Haspell would have had to inform MI6 that all this was going on. Strzok couldn’t just go to London and operate right under British Intel’s collective noses. They would have found out about in any case. It was Haspell’s job to coordinate everything ahead of time.

How do you think she got the job as station chief in London. That’s the most desirable job in the CIA world short of director. Because she’s a Brennan loyalist; he hand-picked her for the job. Since he was planning to spy on/sabotage the Trump campaign and later presidency he rewarded her with that plum job, and he expected personal loyalty from her.

She didn’t disappoint him then, and she’s not disappointing him now. She’s up to her eyeballs in the scheme to derail and sabotage Trump so she has just as much to lose as he does.

Trump needs to can her and tell the deputy director, who will become the acting director, in no uncertain terms that he’s gone too if he doesn’t give AG Barr and his appointed prosecutors who are investigating this matter the CIA’s full, unstinting cooperation.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Arminius. | June 22, 2019 at 10:02 pm

    “Instead of putting forth solutions to fix our broken immigration system, instead of pursuing criminals, he threatens to tear families apart”

    Every illegal is already a criminal, and we should preserve families by kicking the whole family out.

      Milhouse in reply to JusticeDelivered. | June 23, 2019 at 1:01 am

      1. Not every illegal immigrant is a criminal.

      2. We can’t kick out those family members who are US citizens. But the correct response is that we’re kicking out the aliens, and it’s up to the citizens (or their parents/guardians) to decide whether to go with them or stay here. If they choose to stay then they, not we, are the ones breaking up their families.

        gospace in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 2:46 am

        Every illegal immigrant IS a criminal, hence the term illegal immigrant. Is there something about the term illegal you don’t understand? Or is it, in the famous words of a talk show hostess, they’re not criminal criminals?

          Milhouse in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 11:20 am

          I understand the word “illegal” just fine. You apparently don’t. Being in the USA illegally is not a crime. That is a fact, not an opinion, so you are not entitled to disagree with it. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to acknowledge it, because it’s the truth. You may call on Congress to change it, and I might well support you, but the chances of it happening in the near future are zero.

          Arminius in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 3:02 pm

          Apparently you don’t understand the word illegal, Milhouse.

          8 U.S. Code § 1325.Improper entry by alien

          It’s a crime for an alien to enter the US illegally. First offense is a misdemeanor, subsequent offenses are felonies.

          Milhouse in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 3:09 pm

          Many (perhaps even most) illegal immigrants did not commit a crime by entering illegally. Their presence in the USA is illegal, but is not a crime.

          Arminius in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 3:38 pm

          Facts which you are not allowed to dispute, Milhouse. The text to the statute I cite above.

          “Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or…”

          Nearly all illegal aliens attempt to cross the border at some place other than a designated port of entry.

          “(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or…”

          The reason of course to cross the border anywhere other than a designated port of entry is to elude examination by immigration officers. Border Patrol officers are not immigration officers.

          “…(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall,…”

          Ramzi Yousef entered the US using an Iraqi passport and claimed asylum, a willfully false representation. His chief conspirator attempted to enter using a Swedish passport, another willfully false representation.

          “for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both,…”

          The fine imposed under that title is a criminal penalty. Because illegal entry into the US is a criminal act, the first time, every time. The first time, however, it is not a felony.

          “…and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.”

          However, every subsequent time it is a felony.

          You are not entitled to your own facts, Milhouse.

          Arminius in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 3:45 pm

          No, forty percent of illegal aliens are visa overstays. Since they entered with a visa, they didn’t commit the crime covered by that statute. The penalties they face are different and are not criminal in nature depending on how long they have overstayed their visa. Over six months they’ll be barred from the US for three years. Over one year and they’ll be barred from the US for ten years, and if they overstay long enough they may be barred from the US for life.

          But that means sixty percent of illegal aliens entered the country without a visa, the vast majority by crossing the border at somewhere other than a designated port of entry in order to elude inspection/examination by an immigration official.

          So most illegal aliens have committed the crime as defined by the statute I cited.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 3:49 pm

          Milhouse is just splitting hairs to be Milhouse. IANAL and even I know that immigration law is a civil issue, not a criminal one. Milhouse is just stirring crap up because he finds it amusing.

          @Milhouse don’t take that in a negative way, it is certainly not meant to be negative.

          Arminius in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 4:06 pm

          I meant to say that nearly all illegal aliens who attempt illegal entry into the US do so by attempting to cross the border at a place other than a designated port of entry.

          If someone has a valid visa then that individual did not commit the crime of illegal entry. But since visa overstays account for forty percent of illegal aliens in this country that means sixty percent did commit a crime one way or the other.

          In the few instances where the illegal alien does gain entry at a port of entry they do so by making false or misleading representations or concealing a material fact. Ramzi Yousef’s accomplice Ahmed Ajaj attempted to enter the US using a Swedish passport and was arrested. His willfully false representation was using an invalid passport. Ramzi Yousef’s passport was not doubt valid courtesy of Saddam Hussein. But he was arrested for attempting to enter the US without a visa. His willfully false representation was his asylum request. He filed a false claim, but without that false claim he wouldn’t have been allowed in the country.

          After the ’93 WTC bombing he left the country using a Pakistani passport. That one had to be fraudulent.

          Most illegal aliens commit crimes in order to get into the country. They aren’t as elaborate as Yousef’s and Ajaj’s crimes, but they’re still crimes.

          Arminius in reply to gospace. | June 23, 2019 at 4:16 pm

          Gremlin1974, I know immigration law is a civil issue. But there’s more involved than just immigration law. Nearly all illegal aliens who attempt to work in this country commit perjury and document fraud when they falsely assert and support their assertion on their I9 forms that they can legally work in the US.

          These are violations of the Treasury code, and these are most definitely criminal violations. Falsely signing that form under penalty of perjury and committing the supporting document fraud are both felonies and the penalty is five years in prison.

          Then there’s the partial or complete identity theft that comes with the fraudulent documents, another criminal violation…

          I could never vote for Rubio because of how he insulted my intelligence when he insisted that the farcical pathway to citizenship wasn’t an amnesty. It was an amnesty. It was more than one amnesty. I wanted to know how many felonies he was going to turn a blind eye to.

          Milhouse in reply to gospace. | June 24, 2019 at 2:36 am

          Nearly all illegal aliens attempt to cross the border at some place other than a designated port of entry.

          This is not true.

          And not all of those who do cross illegally are criminals; some are minors being brought by their parents (or someone else) and therefore are not committing any crime.

        Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 7:47 am

        Milhouse as usual tells us that the U.S.A. is Gullivar and are hands are tied so that we must accept our death at the hands of the Lilliputians.

        Here is Mark Steyn’s response:

        ~Talking about birthright citizenship with Sean, I mentioned the case of Deena Gilbey. I wrote about her in my book The [Un]documented Mark Steyn:

        Her husband Paul was a trader with EuroBrokers on the 84th floor of the World Trade Center and that Tuesday morning he stayed behind to help evacuate people. He was a hero on a day when America sorely needed them, having been thoroughly let down by those to whom the defence of the nation was officially entrusted. Mr. Gilbey was a British subject on a long-term work visa that allowed his dependents to live in America but not to work. The Gilbeys bought a house in Chatham Township and had two children, born in New Jersey and thus U.S. citizens. All perfectly legal and valid.

        But then came September 11th. And a few days afterwards Mrs. Gilbey received a form letter from the Immigration and Naturalization Service informing her that, upon her husband’s death, his visa had also expired and with it her right to remain in the country. She was now, they informed her, an illegal alien and liable to be “arrested and deported.”

        Think about that. On the morning of Wednesday, September 12th, some INS departmental head calls the staff into his office and says, “Wow, that was a wild ride yesterday. But the priority of the United States Government right now is to find out how many legally resident foreigners have been widowed and see how quickly we can traumatize them further.”

        That’s from The [Un]documented Mark Steyn. After I and others wrote about Mrs Gilbey’s case, Tony Blair intervened personally with President Bush. The point is, as I said to Sean, that US immigration has no qualms about deporting “anchor babies” who are the children of legal immigrants if it happens to suit their perverse priorities. All this talk about amending the Constitution and that could take ONE HUNDRED YEARS (said in scary Doctor Evil voice) is ridiculous. US judges dispose of minor children every day of the week: it’s called “family court”. The other day, in a custody dispute between a US mother and a German father resident in Monte Carlo, a New York judge ordered the kids – both US citizens – to be dispatched to live with dad in Monaco. When two illegal immigrants are deported back to Guatemala, their six-year-old kid does not have the right to decide he wants to remain in Cedar Rapids. The judge will order that he accompany mom and pop.

        And, actually, a case of US-born offspring of persons in the country illegally has never been tested before the Supreme Court. Furthermore, whatever the Constitution says, Trump is right on the merits: Not a single European nation has US-style unconditional birthright citizenship, and no Asian or African nation has it at all.

        Australia: at least one parent has to be an Australian citizen or legal resident;

        France: at least one parent has to be born in France;

        Ireland: at least one parent has to be an Irish or UK citizen, or a permanent resident;

        New Zealand: at least one parent has to be a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident.

        Get the picture? There’s no point to American exceptionalism if it just means exceptionally suicidal.

        https://www.steynonline.com/7118/the-party-of-why-nothing-can-be-done

          Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 11:37 am

          Yes, the US’s hands are tied, because it must obey the law. (I’m talking about our law, not some foreign law.) US citizens cannot be deported. End of story. None of your examples contradict that, and it doesn’t speak well of your intelligence if you think they do.

          Deena Gilbey became an illegal immigrant when her husband died. Of course the INS computer would send her a letter informing her of that fact. It’s what computers do, just as the bank’s computer sends you a letter if there’s a one cent discrepancy in something, because nobody programmed it not to. Had she done nothing and not left, it’s very unlikely that anything would have happened to her. She’d simply be one more illegal immigrant among millions, and deporting her would have been at the bottom of the priority stack, somewhere after enforcing the “no spitting” signs in the subway.

          More importantly, though, your claim that her US-born children would have been deported is simply false. If she chose to leave them here, no government agency could or would have prevented her.

          Next. Family courts do not and cannot deport children. They merely decide which parent has the right to decide where the children should live. Your Monagesque father wanted the children with him, and the judge decided he was right, and had the right to bring them to him. Had he wanted them to remain in the US, no court or agency could have deported them to Monaco.

          When two illegal immigrants are deported back to Guatemala, their six-year-old kid does not have the right to decide he wants to remain in Cedar Rapids; but his parents do. The judge will not, and cannot order that he accompany mom and pop.

          The exact case does not have to come before the Supreme Court; the cases that have come involved the exact same question, and the court was crystal clear about what the fourteenth amendment means. There’s nothing about the parents’ illegal status that changes it.

          What other countries do is, of course, irrelevant. We are bound by US law, not by foreign law. Not even RBG says otherwise, no matter what you will hear from some dishonest commentators. And by the way, it’s not just the US, it’s almost all countries in the Americas. This has long been a difference between the laws of Europe and those of the New World.

          Close The Fed in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 11:45 am

          So, here’s Milhouse again.

          The foreigner who won custody of his children takes his children to a foreign country.

          It’s not a deportation, but it is a decision that American children don’t stay on American soil.

          USC does provide it is illegal to enter the U.S. without authorization.

          Why don’t you just flat out tell us how much you hate the U.S. and why Mexico is superior and we should just shrug our shoulders and say nothing can be done to prevent us from becoming Mexico?

          You are a sack of excrement.

          CTF,

          While I might agree with some of your sentiment, MH has the it right legally. While I love Steyn, we have laws and a computer generated letter is not indicative of a heartless government. She could have stayed without issue.

          Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 3:14 pm

          The foreigner who won custody of his children takes his children to a foreign country.

          Of course he does, just like any parent can take his children to a foreign country if he likes, and the foreign country agrees.

          It’s not a deportation, but it is a decision that American children don’t stay on American soil.

          No, it is not. It is a decision that the custodial parent can take the children wherever he likes. The decision that where he likes is Monaco is his decision, not the court’s.

          USC does provide it is illegal to enter the U.S. without authorization.

          Indeed it does. It also provides that it is illegal to remain in the US without authorization. However doing so is not a crime.

          It seems that you are the one who doesn’t understand the term “illegal”, since you seem to think that it must involve a crime.

          Why don’t you flat out tell us how much you hate the truth and why lies are superior, because your father is the father of lies, so they are your siblings.

          Close The Fed in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 4:45 pm

          Yes, Milhouse, the parents decided to remove the children with them to a foreign country.

          And the court paved the way for that. Happens every day in divorce court: the court doesn’t mandate the children move from Georgia to California, but authorizes a parent to do so. Same if a foreigner is a parent.

          But you can bet your bottom dollar the court weighs the alternatives before granting that parent the ability to take the child.

          Also, frankly, these illegal alien parents ought to have their children taken from them, their parental rights terminated, and the children put up for adoption. No American parent could get away with exposing their children to such danger.

          Illegal Aliens, Citizens-Above-The-Law-In-Every-Way.

          Close The Fed in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 4:46 pm

          Milhouse, maybe you don’t know it: “misdemeanor” and “felony” of terms in criminal law….

          I mean, read a book.

          Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | June 24, 2019 at 2:43 am

          Yes, Milhouse, the parents decided to remove the children with them to a foreign country.

          So you admit that you LIED when you claimed that minor citizens can be deported.

          But you can bet your bottom dollar the court weighs the alternatives before granting that parent the ability to take the child.

          No, it does not. It can’t. Once it’s decided that one parent should have custody it can’t second-guess that parent’s decision on where the child should live. In any case this has nothing to do with deportation.

          Milhouse, maybe you don’t know it: “misdemeanor” and “felony” of terms in criminal law….

          I mean, read a book.

          Now you’re just babbling.

I don’t like it, I didn’t like them publicly letting the cities know, now these illegals will hide and poke out somewhere else

Bad move all around

The base is tired of BS

We have more illegals now than ever

I went to get my license renewed in Texas and everything was in Spanish . Every frequenting announcement of what number was being called, every piece of paper, posters, the whole families came together, children, parents, grandparents taking up all the room speaking loudly in Spanish and this was in central texas…

Yet I needed a very certificate

Subotai Bahadur | June 22, 2019 at 8:29 pm

Democrat politicians have announced that they will oppose ICE raids in their cities/states. This could be the modern Democrat equivalent of Fort Sumter. So be it.

Subotai Bahadur

Well, have you noticed AOC urging supporters to report ICE sightings and give safety to people who could be deported? (Safe space or haven for others) Since Trump’s doing it with the Iranians too, I’m guessing this is something that he explained in his book, which to my shame I have not read.

From what I see, Trump is creating space for a deal to happen. Then, when people “call his bluff”, he has a stronger hand for being even tougher with his measures, and not necessarily telegraphed ones. Of course it doesn’t necessarily work, but if he’s going by Sun Tzu – I’ve read his work, translated – it’s goading people into foolish moves (like AOC) and leading them into lose-lose situations, where making a deal means losing less.

    The problem is it has been over two years without action, and now just started a bit of the wall (which is being opposed still), and we have over a million new illegal asylum aliens who have entered including Ebolans. (I wonder if Iran has thought about sending special forces through the southern border to destroy our infrastructure in case of war?).

    I don’t know if Mexico will continue to follow through now that tariffs are off.
    No EO on E-Verify or Anchor Babies.
    Now this. Also fixing the influx – if we can actually send the new arrivals back over the border immediately – won’t fix the millions here, only deportation will.

      JusticeDelivered in reply to tz. | June 22, 2019 at 10:10 pm

      We need to create a situation where illegals are scared shitless of what is coming, and leave on their own to avoid it.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to JusticeDelivered. | June 22, 2019 at 11:27 pm

        No we need to create a situation where only citizens and legal immigrants can gain access to government assistance and hold jobs. Do that and not only will illegal immigration plummet, but may illegals already here will self deport.

      txvet2 in reply to tz. | June 23, 2019 at 10:58 pm

      “”we have over a million new illegal asylum aliens who have entered including Ebolans.””

      We’ve had an influx of Congolese, but to date there’s no indication (at least in San Antonio) that any of them are carrying Ebola. That doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to let them into the country.

    Milhouse in reply to JBourque. | June 23, 2019 at 1:05 am

    AOC urging supporters to report ICE sightings and give safety to people who could be deported? (Safe space or haven for others)

    She’s entitled to urge them, but basic fairness requires her to inform them that following her advice would be against the law, and would put them at risk of arrest and prosecution.

      Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 4:43 am

      No, she’s not entitled to urge them. In fact, she’s doing more than urging them. She’s giving detailed advice on how to go about assisting illegal aliens to evade legitimate law enforcement activities since all these illegal aliens have been ordered removed by immigration courts. Which makes them fugitives, and that, Milhouse, is a crime.

      https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1907-title-8-usc-1324a-offenses

      “Title 8, U.S.C. 1324(a) Offenses

      …Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting — Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses.”

      She’s giving detailed instructions on how to commit several of the “foregoing offenses.” By doing so she’s aiding and abetting people to commit federal crimes. Anyone who follows those instructions and is arrested should name AOC as a fellow conspirator, if DHS or the FBI doesn’t take the initiative on their own to knock on her door.

        Milhouse in reply to Arminius. | June 23, 2019 at 11:41 am

        Nope. A conspiracy requires an agreement between all its members. AOC has not met these people she’s instructing, let alone agreed with them on any course of action. She is merely giving advice, which is her unalienable right, protected by the first amendment. Acting on that advice would be a crime.

Planned… That sounds nefarious.

I wanted the deportations to begin, but actually, this is a standard Trump technique, and he has won with it several times. He used it on the Chinese (tariffs will begin), Canadians and Mexico on the USMCA trade deal, Mexico tariffs if no help w/ immigration. I believe he used it on the Norks, and in the government shutdown, also in the ratifying of USMCA (you have til … to ratify, then Nafta expires).

It seems to be a no-lose strategy, he can still do the dirty if he needs to. In fact, it’s a little mafia-esque, with an explicit threat. Money by Friday or broken windows.

I think that’s what he did with Iran, too. Warned them what will happen if an American ia killed by their funny business.

Democrats are Acting to support their constituents’ interests over those deplorable Americans.

There’s a whole mess of “c’mon Trump, get ‘er done” going on here. And just how is he to do that? Flying solo, with his phone and his pen? We know how well that worked for Bammie.

The job of the Executive isn’t to wave a magic wand which will overcome all opposition; the job is to herd a bunch of slippery fish. There is no way in Constitutional government that the President can just “do it” by sheer determination or willpower or totalitarian fiat. We the voters have given him the tools he must use, and poor tools they are—the Democrats are determined to thwart him as best they can and throw the borders and the treasury to the world’s riff-raff, and the Republicans are determined to do nothing remotely useful. So, to justify the salary he isn’t taking, DJT will have to resort to maneuver. And pretty much by definition, obvious maneuvers are not likely to be useful ones. So, we have to look for not-so-obvious ones if we are to have any idea what’s going on. I don’t know if DJT’s maneuvers will work in the end, but America may have no other options short of going all 1776 again.

    snopercod in reply to tom_swift. | June 23, 2019 at 7:14 am

    I always thought the job of a good Executive was to fire people who can’t (or won’t) implement his plan.

      Tom Servo in reply to snopercod. | June 23, 2019 at 9:24 am

      Trump *has* been good at firing – the problem with D.C. is that firing may not be too hard, but hiring is damned near impossible when everything is lined up against. And so Trump ends up with a hollowed out administration that has a hard time finding people to even answer the phones.

      Milhouse in reply to snopercod. | June 23, 2019 at 11:42 am

      Career civil servants are almost impossible to fire. And of course he can’t fire Congress, or state administrations.

Actually, I think that Trump should continue with the plan to deport people starting Monday. All of these people have to be deported anyway. So, there is no reason why they can not be deported while the Congress addresses the immigration problems. After all, Congress will take NO action on immigration no matter what the POTUS does or does not do.

Trump’s judicial appointments are starting to bear fruit. Shopping for a judge requires more effort today than in the past.

Might be a win-win for Trump:

“Let the tariffs begin” strategy seemed to work with Mexico…

Or

Two weeks of Democrat immigration intransigence in the spotlight and then deportations.

    Tom Servo in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 9:33 am

    Do you realize that was a pro-2nd amendment decision, which further restricted the Federal Governments ability to criminalize handgun possession?

    I really don’t mind the liberals on the Court finding a reason to make the 2nd Amendment even stronger.

      Close The Fed in reply to Tom Servo. | June 23, 2019 at 9:42 am

      SURE. Cartels with illegal status SHOULD BE ABLE to have weapons inside our borders to kill Americans indiscriminately and/or to fight our ICE and EROS agents and soldiers while we try to deport them.

      SURE.

      OF COURSE.

      Wolf in chicken house. Totally.

      Eskyman in reply to Tom Servo. | June 23, 2019 at 7:02 pm

      @Tom Servo- I would love to believe that this was a pro-2A decision, but a glance at the Justices who voted for & against dispelled that notion. This case revolved around whether an illegal alien “knew” that illegal aliens were barred from possessing arms.

      Apparently now it’s OK to break the law, as long as you don’t know you’re breaking the law, so that old saying “ignorance of the law is no excuse” is no longer relevant!

      Justices Alito and Thomas dissented from the majority, and Alito wrote: ‘“Serious problems will also result from requiring proof that an alien actually knew—not should have known or even strongly suspected but actually knew—that his continued presence in the country was illegal,” Alito wrote in his dissent.’

    Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 11:45 am

    The right to keep and bear arms is an unalienable right of all human beings.

      Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 12:52 pm

      Sure, Milhouse.

      And it is an absolute right of United States Citizens and the United States of America, to keep invaders OUT.

      So, I say, shoot to kill all invaders at the border. All of them.

      I have a right to protect my country. An absolute right.

        Milhouse in reply to Close The Fed. | June 23, 2019 at 3:21 pm

        Actually you do not have any such right. 1. Protecting the country from invaders is the President’s responsibility and nobody else’s. 2. Would-be immigrants are not invaders. 3. Shooting them would be a crime; even if the President were to order the military to do so they would be required by law to disobey the illegal order, and would go to prison if they obeyed it.

          Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 4:29 pm

          The threads have gotten unmanageable.

          Regardless, Milhouse, if we don’t have a right to protect our country from invaders – and that indeed they are — then you are conceding that the U.S.A. cannot lawfully avoid suicide.

          So, either they are invaders and we have the right to repel then, or declare War on Mexico.

          Or they’re not invaders and we have no right of self-defense.

          If your position wins, that they are not invaders and we have no right of self defense, then I’m out. I’m done.

          If law requires suicide, so I’m out. OUT. OUT. OUT.
          Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

          As JFK said, those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

          In other words, those who make peaceful self defense impossible, will make violent self defense inevitable.

          https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/john_f_kennedy_101159

          Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 4:32 pm

          We have an inalienable right to protect our country.

          We delegated it to the national government, WHICH HAS INTENTIONALLY FAILED AT IT’S DUTY.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 24, 2019 at 2:48 am

          They are not invaders, and you have no right whatsoever to kill them.

          If your position wins, that they are not invaders and we have no right of self defense, then I’m out. I’m done.

          Good riddance. Get lost and don’t come back. I won’t miss you.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | June 24, 2019 at 2:50 am

          We have an inalienable right to protect our country.

          No, you do not. You have an inalienable right to protect yourself, but you are not under attack, so you have no right to harm anyone. The country is the state, which is the government, and you have no right to defend it against its will.

        Damn straight! An ABSOLUTE RIGHT to defend if the gubmint won’t.

      tphillip in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 12:56 pm

      That’s great Milhouse. Now prove it by carrying a firearm in Maxico, Canada, or Venezuela.

      I eagerly await your report on how it goes.

        Barry in reply to tphillip. | June 23, 2019 at 2:18 pm

        Bad people/countries take away human rights all the time. Doesn’t change the existence of such rights. If Milhouse said humans have a right to live, would you disagree because communists in China have murdered some 50 million?

        Milhouse in reply to tphillip. | June 23, 2019 at 3:17 pm

        Those countries are notorious for violating human rights. That’s why we have a Bill of Rights, to prevent our government from doing the same.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | June 23, 2019 at 8:26 pm

      “The right to keep and bear arms is an unalienable right of all human beings.”

      Absolutely untrue. In the first place, there is no such thing as an unalienable right. “Rights” are granted by a society to members of that society. And, the rights practiced depend upon the society which the person is residing within.

      The term unalienable right is used to give increased status to an enumerated right, within a society. The Founding Fathers listed unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence. One was the unalienable right to Life, unless you were convicted of certain crimes or are a child in the womb. Another was the unalienable right to Liberty, unless you were a slave. And the third was the right to pursue Happiness, unless your happiness deprived another of theirs. So, all “rights” come from the human mind and bestowed upon the members of a society by the members of that society.

        Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | June 24, 2019 at 2:46 am

        there is no such thing as an unalienable right. “Rights” are granted by a society to members of that society. And, the rights practiced depend upon the society which the person is residing within.

        That is a statement of pure evil. If that’s what you really believe, what the **** are you doing on this site in the first place?

buckeyeminuteman | June 23, 2019 at 9:00 am

Trump doesn’t need non-help from either party in Congress. Shut down the border, build the wall, and deport the illegals. All at the same time. All within the purview of the chief executive.

    Tom Servo in reply to buckeyeminuteman. | June 23, 2019 at 9:27 am

    We like to speculate about the conversion of America to an Imperial System, but Trump hasn’t become Augustus just yet.

      Close The Fed in reply to Tom Servo. | June 23, 2019 at 9:35 am

      Tom: Perhaps you’re unaware these were cases where Court Orders of Deportation already exist.

      It’s not “imperial,” it’s implementing lawful orders or immigration judges. The salaries of everyone involved has been appropriated and authorized.

      When I go to court, and a client of mine has disobeyed a court order, they are JAILED.

      Got that? GOT IT??!!

Close The Fed | June 23, 2019 at 11:19 am

President Trump tweeted this a few hours ago:

“I want to give the Democrats every last chance to quickly negotiate simple changes to Asylum and Loopholes. This will fix the Southern Border, together with the help that Mexico is now giving us. Probably won’t happen, but worth a try. Two weeks and big Deportation begins!”

Again, waiting is ridiculous. ARE WE OR ARE WE NOT, GOING TO DEPORT ILLEGAL ALIENS WITH FINAL ORDERS OF DEPORTATION??!!!

If they make a deal, those orders will STILL BE OUTSTANDING. No reason to wait, except for the American people to be doubly screwed: 1. paid taxes for this useless crap; 2. illegal aliens still clogging up our hospitals, schools, roads, dmvs, et cetera.

I never voted to become Mexico, and I sure as hell didn’t serve in the United State Army in order to defend the Mexican way of life.

    Timing is critical in this struggle. So Trump gives the Dems 2 more weeks to hang themselves. They immediately start providing what he needs:

    1) Pelosi has just demanded a massive amnesty.

    2) The first Dem 2020 elections debate are this week and we can anticipate a cacophonous train wreck as the party self-destructs.

    2) We’ve also learned that the acing Director of DHS (and his surely his minions) leaked the ICE plans to sanctuary city mayors AGAIN so that will quell those who argue that he blinked.

    I am very confident that in 2 weeks, the Dems will have left no doubt that they are determined to oppose the will of the voters until the bitter end while giving voters a taste of what it will be like to ruled by the finger-wagging, foot-stomping communist children running for POTUS in 2020.

    I’d like to see Trump pounce on that calamity by firing the DHS leakers and starting at the very top and ordering the deportations to proceed apace. A speech announcing the firings while laying his case for how the DHS exposes ICE tactics to sanctuary city mayors as an informal policy is just what we need.

    Trump could also point out that those mayors are subject to arrest and cite his oath to protect and defend the Constitution from enemies abroad and within

Close The Fed | June 23, 2019 at 11:47 am

And Prof, we need an edit button. I’ve made a ton of typos this morning. :^((

Trump was elected to:
1. Build a wall.
2. Deport the illegal INVADERS.

On that, he is a failure. One wonders what his true intentions are. My hope is that 10,000,000 ARMED PATRIOTS head to the border to fix this mess. Because the gubmint won’t.

The gubmint will arrest 10 citizens. The gubmint will arrest 100 citizens. The gubmint will crap their pants at the sight of 10,000,000 citizens. It’s OUR country. There is strength in numbers. Have doubts about that – ask the Hong Kong legislature.

    Barry in reply to walls. | June 23, 2019 at 2:24 pm

    If you think that is all he was elected to do, you are very shortsighted.

    Building the wall and fixing the illegal flow into this country has been abject failure.

Trump is playing from a position of power.
He was going ahead with the raids, and forced Nancy into the position of begging him off.
Trump said ok. Two weeks, show progress, or I proceed.
In two weeks, either there will be progress or raids.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend