Karine Jean-Pierre: ‘We’ve Expanded the Pathway to Citizenship Under this President’
The truth slips out.
Biden White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre let the mask slip on the border crisis this week, unwittingly saying that the Biden administration has expanded the pathway to citizenship.
Katie Pavlich of Townhall caught it:
KJP just slipped up during the briefing by revealing the endgame of Biden letting millions of illegal immigrants into the country with a parole period: eventual citizenship which means, voting. She tried to walk it back but didn’t do a very good job.
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) August 31, 2023
One of the reporters in the room heard it, too.
Here’s a transcript via C-SPAN:
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I will say this: The President has done more to secure the border and to deal with this issue of immigration than anybody else. He really has.June saw the single largest month-to-month drop in lawful – unlawful border crossing because of the policies this President put in place.We’ve got a record number of federal agents and officers – more than 24,000 – working to secure the border because of the funding this President secured.We brought – we brought 21 world leaders on the West Coast, as you all remember, together for the first time to – ever to deal with this issue in a – in a regional way because of the alliances that this President has put forth. And we secured record funding for border security and management.And let’s not forget, we expanded – we’ve expanded the pathway to citizenship under this President. And mind you, he’s been doing this on his own. Does he want to do it in a bipartisan way? Absolutely. That’s why he put forth his first piece of legislation to be on immigration to fix this broken system.We are – we are willing to work with Congress and with Republicans. We need Republicans to do this. We just do. But they keep turning it into a political stunt.Go ahead.
Reporter: I just wanted to follow up.
KJP: Yeah, sure.
Reporter: You said that this administration has expanded the pathway to citizenship?
KJP: The pathway of legal – legal pathway – pardon me – the legal pathway for migrants to enter this –
Reporter: Okay. You were talking about –
KJP: The legal pathways to mi- – to migrants coming. Yes.
Reporter: From – from the parole program?
KJP: Right. From the parolee program. That’s –
Reporter: Which don’t have any – which don’t lead to any sort of permanent legal –
KJP: Well, it – it’s a legal –
Reporter: Right – it’s a – it’s a two-year program with –
KJP: I – I agree. You’re right.
Reporter: Okay.
KJP: It gives you a legal pathway to come in – and that’s what –
Reporter: Okay
KJP: – that’s what I’m talking about – in trying to prevent the unlawful pathways.
Reporter: And –
KJP: So, just to clear it – clear – clear what I was trying to say.
Reporter: And when the two-year parole for those folks – whether they be the folks from South and Central America or Afghanistan or Ukraine – when the parole ends, does this President intend to renew the two- – two-year paroles for those? Or are they – or is he going to send them back?
KJP: So, that’s a very good question. That’s why we keep asking for help from Congress to help us fix this bro- – broken system. That is why we’re –
Reporter: And –
KJP: – we’re – we – we’re just not there yet. That’s why we keep asking for help from Congress, from Republicans to help actually come together in a bipartisan way to fix this issue.
Reporter: But if they – but if they don’t –
KJP: I – like – like I said, we’re going to continue to do what we can, right? This President is going to continue to do what he can to – to deal with it – to deal with a broken system. So, we’re taking the steps to do that. And that’s where we are today.
See the video below:
JUST IN: Karine Jean-Pierre SLIPS UP, says Joe Biden has single-handedly expanded pathways to citizenship for illegals, gets FACT-CHECKED in real-time:
"The president has done more to secure the border and to deal with this issue of immigration than anyone else…Let's not… pic.twitter.com/PbC9Y6DrL8
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) August 31, 2023
It seems pretty obvious that the border crisis is really about importing new voters for the Democrats.
Featured image via Twitter video.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
1) Make E-Verify mandatory.
2) Double or triple fines for employers caught hiring illegal aliens.
3) Triple the number of immigration judges to start processing asylum claims.
4) Immediate deportation of illegal aliens convicted of any felony or violent misdemeanor upon completion of sentence.
5) Five years in federal prison for anyone caught smuggling illegal aliens into the USA.
6) Any illegal alien caught in the USA after being deported= 5 years in prison.
7) Special immigration prisons based on Sheriff Arpaio’s model of nothing more than three basic meals ( cold cereal for breakfast, bologna sandwich for lunch and stew for dinner) and a cot. Prisons to be established on the border.
Maybe add in some carrot with that bundle of sticks, perhaps allow the ‘dreamers’ who actually applied and were accepted into the program before the window closed to be granted not a green card but a yellow card, not the larger group who didn’t register or were denied. IOW regularize their current status with permanent legal status but short of the perks of a green card. Basically they can stay and work but can’t sponsor others or bring in anyone else. Just as now so no real change.
That would help take the PR BS of the ‘dreamers’ largely off the table and makes the rest of the bitter pill you propose a bit more palatable for those who oppose it as too harsh. The d/prog will still reject it but when they and the open borders crowd do so they will lose some support b/c the middle of the road voters will view them as extreme and obstructionist. It isn’t as if there is mass support to round up the ‘dreamers’ anyway so we don’t really give up much on this one.
Maybe allow the ‘dreamers’ parents to stay IF they haven’t had much more than parking violations/speeding tickets AND they elocute naming every place of residence and every employer who illegally paid them. Then we can go after the other villains in the illegal immigration saga; employers who use cheap, illegal labor to out compete those who play by the rules.
I might be talked into a deal where the Dreamers status is legal resident ( no citizenship) but I would want part of the deal to be that henceforth anyone caught in the USA illegally would never qualify for any legal status whatsoever. Not even simple residency and certainly not citizenship. Codify that as law and maybe we have a deal.
Tried something like that under Reagan. Democrats can’t be trusted.
That works for one generation only. Then the kids get born here.
That needs to be dealt with.
It can’t be dealt with without amending the constitution.
That’s what I mean by ‘yellow card’. It would bar any citizenship application. Further we should restrict all claims for ‘family reunification’ for all non Citizens. We shouldn’t be rewarding folks for anything but successfully becoming US Citizens. Frankly I would like to see a cumulative time limit of no greater than ten years on all persons not US Citizens living in the US. If they can’t bother to become a US Citizen in ten years then send them on their way elsewhere. Eliminating dual Citizenship is another must, everyone born with dual Citizenship should have until age 18 to decide when they register for Selective Service while naturalized Citizens would renounce it at the time of naturalization. Actually renounce not not the BS they do now. Cross check the names periodically with former Nations and if any Nation lies or refuses to play ball then halt the ability of that Nation’s Citizens to enter the US for any purpose.
It’s impossible to eliminate dual citizenship without a constitutional amendment. People born in the USA or validly naturalized cannot involuntarily lose their US citizenship, no matter what they do. So if someone is born with dual citizenship and refuses to renounce their foreign citizenship, there’s nothing US law can do about it. Ditto for someone who started out as a US citizen and then became naturalized elsewhere; if they did not renounce their US citizenship (or even if they did renounce it, but they had their fingers crossed) they remain US citizens and any law Congress makes to the contrary is automatically invalid.
Just deport them.
There is no need for more judges or any other effort to facilitate the eventual permanent settling of these illegal aliens within the country.
The real effort should be to prevent their entry in the first place. At the same time, there should be the elimination of any and all benefits to the illegals, including food stamps, medical care, schooling, work permits, etc.
The judges are needed to process their asylum claims and officially deny them or the left will take any deportation to a regular court instead of immigration court.
I agree denying entry must be of paramount importance( does no good to deport an illegal alien when they are replaced almost immediately).
Finish the wall and disincentive more coming by taking away any potential employment ( E-Verify and fines for employers caught hiring illegal aliens), make deportation more certain and quicker ( the additional immigration judges). Finally make it clear that there will never be another amnesty and any who do make it into the USA will never be citizens.
I’d rather just try those who have been orchestrating an invasion of America for their treason and have their capital punishments carried out quickly and unceremoniously, finishing up in a landfill somewhere.
1) Make E-Verify mandatory.
The idea behind E-Verify is good, but the legislature made its enforcement basically toothless. Pass E-Verify 2, with meaningful penalties and enforcement mechanisms.
2) Double or triple fines for employers caught hiring illegal aliens.
No problem here, I totally agree, but civil penalties are not enough, We need C-Suite executives facing prison penalties, but I see you get to that later.
3) Triple the number of immigration judges to start processing asylum claims.
Insofar as this is a legal blog, many readers already know that immigration judges are Article II appointees. They are not part of the judiciary. They ultimately report to the executive. They will rule in a manner that the executive wishes, laws passed by democratically elected congressmen be damned. VDARE.com has a number of informative articles on this.
4) Immediate deportation of illegal aliens convicted of any felony or violent misdemeanor upon completion of sentence.
All illegal aliens must deported as soon as their presence comes to the awareness of any government agency. It matters not if they have committed a felony, a misdemeanor, or an infraction. If an illegal alien tries to sign up his anchor child for school, medicaid, any government benefit, deport him. If he refuses to take his child with him, charge him with child abandonment, force him to serve his sentence, then deport him, and threaten him with a second count of child abandonment if he refuses to take his child with him.
5) Five years in federal prison for anyone caught smuggling illegal aliens into the USA.
Already on the books. See https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1907-title-8-usc-1324a-offenses#:~:text=Subsection%201324(a)(1,any%20of%20the%20preceding%20acts.
It looks like a 3 year sentence, although your suggestion of 5 is fine with me.
Smuggling of illegals should be treated with the same severity as smuggling narcotics. I have read too many stories of the county coroner dragging 30 bodies out of the back of an 18-wheeler, all dead of suffocation or heat exhaustion, as their traffickers load them up for a 300 mile journey across the Sonoran desert in 115 degree F heat.
6) Any illegal alien caught in the USA after being deported= 5 years in prison.
Already on the books. See https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1912-8-usc-1326-reentry-after-deportation-removal. The penalty is 10, not 5 years. The executive has ordered all US Attorneys to not enforce this law. We repeatedly read stories of people deported 5+ times and committing heinous crimes here.
7) Special immigration prisons based on Sheriff Arpaio’s model of nothing more than three basic meals ( cold cereal for breakfast, bologna sandwich for lunch and stew for dinner) and a cot. Prisons to be established on the border.
The states and counties need to pass laws through their legislatures, something like trespassing laws. The federal courts keep knocking these efforts down by way of the supremacy clause. Kris Kobach of KS has been very creative in his capacity as Secretary of State and now Attorney General for KS. I still think there is a way to craft state and local laws that will both survive federal judicial scrutiny and provide a mechanism for local law enforcement to defend against the illegal invasion.
The basic idea behind this response to your post is to explain that it does not matter what laws the legislature passes. The executive is free to ignore the laws, issue executive orders that circumvent the will of the people, and laugh at us if we complain. The federal courts cannot issue a “Writ of Mandamus” commanding the executive to enforce the laws or be held in contempt.
The only relief is through impeachment and removal, a political, not legal process, which is not going to happen with a split senate.
In summation, we are f%@ked.
Erronius
1) E-Verify is already mandatory. Problem is that as far as I can tell there are no penalties for ignoring the results. The only penalties occur if a business is actually caught with illegals on the payroll.
2) Agreed. But will never happen if the current democrat regime remains in power.
3) Agreed. But will never happen if the current democrat regime remains in power.
4). That’s already federal law. But of course, the Biden regime is not enforcing immigration laws so there we go and here we are.
5) Only five years? Should be at least five years per illegal alien smuggled into the country. 1=five years, 2=ten years, 3=15 years, etc. No exceptions. And make it a mandatory penalty so that feds can’t refuse to prosecute offender(s).
6) Agreed. And they should be put on a list of those permanently banned from entering the U,S. for any reason.
7) Won’t happen but nice thought.
There are states ( Florida is one) where E-Verify is mandatory but nationally it is optional.
Yep. Other States could could join in as well. The other piece is to upgrade E Verify to make it more comprehensive by including Social Security info; basically it should give age, sex, race data that corresponds to that # plus death data or if that # has been subjected to ID theft. Also a basic criminal record data check of any convictions in a Y/N format.
One other thing to add but it would probably take a constitutional amendment is to only count citizens in the census for apportionment of House members ( and thus electoral votes). Do that and the left’s desire for illegal aliens would diminish a lot.
Alternatively block grant most of the programs to the States but tie distribution of the funds to the number of US Citizens on a proportional basis.
I’m so old that I remember when Congress passed the laws, not the Executive branch. Good times.
Should be a crime against humanity the way Biden has acted, with intent, to cause mass suffering.
There are MILLIONS of Americans who believe this idiot: like the mental cases in Hollywood. And who believe the tripe coming out of Nancy Pelosi’s mouth.
No surprise they project onto us the accusation that you and I are in a cult.
President Trump Joins Jay and Jordan to Discuss “Biden Indictments”
By American Center for Law and Justice
1 Sep 2023
https://rumble.com/v3dvtbj-sekulow-live.html
MUST WATCH: The ACLJ’s Jay Sekulow and Jordan Sekulow were guest hosts for The Sean Hannity Show yesterday, and they welcomed a special guest to the national radio broadcast: former President Donald Trump. President Trump discussed several current issues, including his campaign for the White House; the never-ending Deep State witch hunt to remove him from the GOP presidential ballot; the election interference as a result of his political indictments; the investigations into alleged corruption involving President Joe Biden and Hunter Biden – and much more. Today’s Sekulow broadcast offers an encore presentation of this exclusive Trump interview with Jay and Jordan, including their expert legal analysis of the Deep State’s political schemes to railroad the former president.
Love how they give PRESIDENT Trump his due respect
PRESIDENT!!!!!
I’m only posting this because jr constantly say’s President Trump didn’t accomplish anything… he did amd he tried to do so much more
Listen to the Gov of Alaska on Fox
https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1697635393603084409?s=20
Did you even listen to the video at this link? It was all about what Trump wanted to do, planned to do, hoped to do . . .NOTHING about what he actually did.
Because he didn’t do a whole lot that was lasting. It was EO’s and plans and hopes and dreams that had zero to do with the reality of actually getting anything lasting done. This clip is about Trump’s promises, none of which were fulfilled. Why did you even post this? It makes Trump look incompetent and very much the politician, promising this and that, convincing people he means ti, and then backing out or dropping the ball. That’s exactly what Trump did with Hillary and “lock her up”: https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1693819775464382897
Look, Trump lies to his followers all the time, and as you can see here in his own words, he’s great with that. It’s all a game to him, a well this is now, but when I win, that’s then. A new day, new rules, new promises that are nothing like the ones that got him elected. He will NEVER drain the swamp because he doesn’t care about, never did, never will. I’m not even sure he understands what the swamp is. He probably just latched onto a moment, a buzz word, and took off.
Trump wins, and he’s happy to tinker with the economy, but he has zero interest in the civic and socio-cultural decay facing our country, and he’s really not that bothered whether or not the middle classes survive. He’s good with paying people more (from taxpayers coffers) to NOT work than to work. Sure, that aid didn’t go to Ukraine, but it went . . . well, who knows where? He’s great with sending out Trump checks to people, any people, doesn’t matter. In prison, dead? No worries, your Trump check was on the way. And he wants his big smiling face and signature on it, so you know where it came from. Beyond. Disgusting.
Respectfully, then why did you vote for him in 2020 and will vote for him if he wins the general? I don’t believe the worst of DeSantis. Others do, and if they do, why would they vote for him? I wouldn’t vote for any candidate that I despised to that degree. At that point, I would consider the country officially done, gone, because neither candidate would matter.
Yes I did , did you?
He did pass legislation that he could , he did open up the oil industry amd exportation in Alaska, money was pouring in, gas was cheap, all boats rose
He would have and tired or do
More but his own party stabbed him in the back , but you
Know this already dont you
Your just sad over little d present situation, shall we say?
Yes, new pathway to citizenship:
Step 1) Enter USA
Step 2) Receive citizenship papers and a completed voting form
I can’t find where the President has that power in my copy of the Constitution. I must have gotten a broken copy.
First find where in the constitution Congress is given the power to regulate immigration.
Hint: People moving here of their own free will are not being imported. Nor is their immigration a form of commerce.
Congress has the authority to set rules for naturalization once people are here, but a pure originalist will find it difficult to justify our entire regime of immigration law. In order to support that regime you have to compromise on originalism.
If Congress has no power to regulate immigration then by default it seems the States do.
10th Amendment thingy.
Yes, that would seem to be the case. But once someone is legally in one state, no state can prevent that person from moving there. So the result would be the lowest common denominator, which would effectively be open borders.
“Hint: People moving here of their own free will are not being imported. Nor is their immigration a form of commerce.”
Considering all of the benefits given to those that enter the country without documentation and those benefits are only given to those… there is a demonstrated contractual agreement for coming to this country. The intended goal is a one party socialist state which cannot be gained by any other method. Remove all of the goodies, as was done prior to 1925 and let the “marketplace” determine the course. For now it is an artificial construct that discriminates against the citizens of this country. Rush had a good option…. for all illegally entering the country, citizenship course but without voting privileges for 30 years.
1. As far as I know there aren’t any benefits that are given only to illegal immigrants.
2. In any case, that is not a constitutional argument. It’s a policy argument, which is irrelevant to the constitution. If you claim to be an originalist, then regardless of how good a policy you think it is to regulate immigration, you have to figure out where Congress gets the authority to do so. If it doesn’t have that authority then it can’t do it no matter how good an idea it is.
If you’re not an originalist then you don’t have this problem. If you think the constitution means whatever we would like it to mean, or whatever seems like a good idea, then Congress gets the authority to regulate immigration from the same place it gets the authority to ban marijuana or to make people buy insurance.
The states have no power over immigration because they delegated that power to the Congress via the Naturalization Clause.
Immigration is not naturalization. They’re two different things entirely.
Though I disagree with them, the Supreme Court has said specifically that immigration IS a form of commerce:
“In Fong Yue Ting v. The United States, the Court held that the federal government’s power to regulate and enforce immigration was derived from its foreign policy power, which is located in Article I and Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Article 1 of the Constitution establishes the enumerated powers of Congress. Specifically, “Congress’s foreign policy powers include: the power to ratify presidential treaties, the power to declare war, the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, the power to punish felonies on the high seas, and the power to provide advice and consent for the president’s foreign ambassador nominations. Executive foreign policy powers include: the power to make treaties, the power to command the military, and the power to receive foreign ambassadors. Although power over immigration is noticeably lacking from these provisions, the Court has interpreted immigration to be an implied power based on the branches’ respective foreign policy powers.”
(https://lawblogs.uc.edu/ihrlr/2021/01/17/the-source-of-the-federal-governments-power-to-regulate-immigration-and-asylum-law/)
Personally, I subscribe to the more originalist interpretation found here. The author of that blog remarks, “people should never be considered commerce.”
As Henry Bowman says, the naturalization congress has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration. Congress has the power to regulate how immigrants naturalize, should they wish to do so. Not all immigrants intend to naturalize, and even if they do that doesn’t give Congress authority to regulate their coming here in the first place.
And no, the piece Henry quotes does not say anything about commerce. It says Congress’s power to regulate immigration comes from its role in foreign policy; regulating international commerce is only one of the items it lists as examples of that role. It doesn’t say which of those items gives Congress power over immigration, or even that any of them do; rather it says that since it has this role in foreign policy it “must” also have some sort of power over immigration.
Which is why I wrote above that the problem only applies to originalists. Anyone who wants to be a consistent originalist has to ask how Congress gets this power; those who don’t believe in originalism don’t have that problem.
True that. Immigration and Naturalization are related but not the same thing at all.
Hint; Foreigners are not under the jurisdiction of the United States and therefore the Congress has no authority to enact laws or regulations against them. That’s why they are Rules of naturalization and not Laws.
As far as Originalism goes: The world in the 18th century understood the concept of borders and how they are essential in a nation’s self-preservation. Using their sovereignty a nation can determine what or what not to allow crossing their borders, whether they be goods or people, and also have the right to repel or expel anyone who attempted to cross their borders. The mechanism for exercising this power to preserve the sovereignty of the U.S. was given to the Congress with the Naturalization Clause.
BTW: The Supreme Court case of Turner v. Williams explicitly cites the Commerce Clause as a foundation of congress’s power over immigration.
This is obviously false. Foreigners (non-diplomatic) are under the jurisdiction of the US as long as they are in-country. If they smuggle, steal, or kill while here, you can bet they will be processed accordingly.
Aliens are only under the jurisdiction of the US if they are here lawfully and have no other government representing their rights.
We can process people accordingly (by our estimates) anywhere in the world if we want (which is what war in a foreign land is, or our government taking action against foreigners for anything we deem injurious to our interests) but that doesn’t mean that everyone in the world is under our jurisdiction.
As Henry says, that is obviously false. If an illegal immigrant commits a crime, are you seriously suggesting the united states have no authority to arrest or punish him?! That’s ridiculous. The only way a foreigner can be in the USA but not subject to its jurisdiction is if he has diplomatic immunity, or is part of an invading army.
Reply to Milhouse:
LOL.
That’s hysterical. If an alien kills an American, say, in Guatemala we can go kill him in Guatemala, too. DOes that mean that everyone in Guatemala is “under the jurisdiction” of the US? Of course not. The power to hold someone accountable for actions is not restricted to AMerican territory. We demonstrate that all the time … and it’s something that anyone who gives it more two seconds of thought realizes.
Illegal aliens are most definitely NOT under the jurisdiction of the US. BTW, there is no such thing as an “illegal immigrant”. Lawful alien visitors are not even “under the jurisdiction” of the US.
Primordial, you’re an idiot. If someone is not under our jurisdiction he is not required to obey our laws and we can’t do anything to him. That’s what jurisdiction means. So if someone kills an American in Guatemala he cannot be tried in any US court for it. He must answer only to Guatemalan law, not ours.
There are certain laws where Congress has explicitly asserted universal jurisdiction, where the victim is American. For the purpose of those laws, Congress claims to have jurisdiction over the whole world. US courts agree with that; pretty much nobody else’s courts do. Terrorism is one of those laws; but ordinary murder is not.
“In Fong Yue Ting v. The United States, the Court held that the federal government’s power to regulate and enforce immigration was derived from its foreign policy power…”
“The Supreme Court case of Turner v. Williams explicitly cites the Commerce Clause as a foundation of congress’s power over immigration.”
When the Supreme Court can’t even keep its own lies straight, you know it’s all smoke and mirrors..
That is not a decision any originalist can agree with.
In any case, as I wrote above, it didn’t actually say that. It just vaguely attributed this brand new authority to Congress’s “foreign policy role”, which it derived from a bunch of clauses including the international commerce one.
Naturalization is a process. You don’t naturalize strangers outside of the country.
If one has the power to define naturalization then that same body has the power to deny naturalization – i.e. not even let someone in the country. Otherwise, you would be claiming that the Founders thought that no one had any power to eject anyone from this country and, effectively, made a country with no borders. But that is, obviously, ridiculous, as the Founders considered borders to be one of the fundamental pillars of the nation-state (as they obviously are).
The power to define and carry out naturalization includes (and REQUIRES) the contra-power to deny it, and that extends to the entire process of naturalization, not just the one technical act at the end.
That is ridiculous.
No, they didn’t. And for over a century the US borders were in fact open. That didn’t seem to bother anyone.
“If one has the power to define naturalization then that same body has the power to deny naturalization – i.e. not even let someone in the country.”
I.E.????
Your continued misunderstanding of the subject is glaring.
“Letting someone in the country” is IMMIGRATION.
“Making someone a citizen” is NATURALIZATION.
People can immigrate indefinitely without naturalizing, as long as they retain legal visas.
Sovereign nations have borders defined by laws. Congress makes law, not the Executive.
Aliens coming into the country is most certainly “importation”.
No, it is not. Importation means bring in goods. Anyone moving of his own free will is by definition not being imported. “Importation of persons” was a euphemism for importing slaves.
Anything coming in through the border is being imported.
We most certainly import people. They might be moving under their own will but they are only allowed to come here if we invite them. It is not their choice to come here, it is ours to allow them in.
Your English is pretty sketchy … but it’s still orders of magnitude better than your logic.
According to you, no one has the power to eject any alien from the United States. I mean … really. Get a grip.
Immigration law is part of the naturalization process and it is part of everything is allowed to be imported through the border. All of this falls under the purview of Congress to make laws regulating it.
And once again, you are an idiot. Either that or a liar. People crossing a border are not being imported, unless they are slaves being brought against their will. And immigration has no connection whatsoever with naturalization.
As far as I can tell nothing in the constitution authorizes congress to regulate immigration. This is a problem only for originalists.
States have borders defined by their constitutions also. Your argument is equivocal.
Make them uncomfortable…let them know you do not welcome them. Tell them “Vamanos” at every opportunity.
Being nice loses territory.
“
Expanded the pathwayOpened the gates tocitizenshipthe unlawful invasion by military age males from all parts of the world to act as future Brown Shirts for the destruction of the Constitution and the United States…”FIFY
I’ll take it a bit further by adding severe penalties for violation of your excellent ideas with no plea deals for lesser offenses:
1) Make E-Verify mandatory. $5,000 fine and 5 year’s imprisonment for each violation for failing to use it
2) Double or triple fines for employers caught hiring illegal aliens. Loss of business license and $5,000 fine and 5 years imprisonment for each violation
3) Triple the number of immigration judges to start processing asylum claims. No asylum claims will be processed in the US. All claims for asylum will be processed at the first neutral country adjacent to the refugee escape
4) Immediate deportation of illegal aliens convicted of any felony or violent misdemeanor upon completion of sentence.
5) Five years in federal prison for anyone caught smuggling illegal aliens into the USA. 5 years and $5,000 fine for each violation
6) Any illegal alien caught in the USA after being deported= 15 years in prison.
7) Special immigration prisons. To round up all illegal immigrants who cannot produce a valid birth certificate, or in lieu of a BC, other federal documentation showing legal entrance into the US
Additionally, all requests for social services, or any federal monetary or housing assistance will require proof of citizenship, and any bureaucrat who illegally approves aid without these documents gets $5,000 fine and 5 year’s imprisonment for each violation
If the J6 prisoners can be treated as they are, we should offer the same harsh penalties for immigration violations.
“Make E-Verify mandatory. $5,000 fine and 5 year’s imprisonment for each violation for failing to use it
Double or triple fines for employers caught hiring illegal aliens. Loss of business license and $5,000 fine and 5 years imprisonment for each violation”
Penalizing corporations and private citizens is nothing but a Catch-22. They’re not t fault for this invasion.
They’re persecuting Musk because THEIR laws say he cannot hire non-citizens, but THEIR regulations say he must hire non-citizens. Why give them more of the same power?
You want to pass laws to throw people in jail, throw the government saboteurs who are ignoring immigration law in jail. Best part: you already have those laws passed..
Letting the mask slip explains much. I found it hard to believe anyone could actually look so dumb.
What I want to know is who thought it was a great idea to invite Karinge to attend any of the meetings where they talk about the silent parts of things that they won’t say out loud.
Funny, I thought the civics class I took forty years ago taught me that the legislative branch had the power to define the ‘pathway to citizenship’. I’m grateful that the affirmative action hire Karine has taught me that is the executive after all!
Didn’t I hear Pelosi bitching something about our ‘precious democracy’?
$500 per illegal alien with no bag limit. I’m rich!!!
What would be refreshing would be this regime expanding the enforcement of Title 8.
When the Nazi leadership adopted the “big lie theory” as an ongoing practice, even they would find this moron’s lies laughable.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/joseph-goebbels-on-the-quot-big-lie-quot
Then of course, Jeff Bezo’s rag WAPO is trying to spin their big lies into even bigger lies:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/05/21/many-are-worried-about-the-return-of-the-big-lie-theyre-worried-about-the-wrong-thing/