Trump: Deport Illegal Immigrants Immediately Without Court Hearings

as much as i disagree with trump and his policies i have to say i like this idea. if the united states is going to be tough on illegal immigration would be immigrants have to know we mean business. the word has to get out that if anyone wants to come to this country it will have to be through a legal process whether an asylum seeker or economic migrant. why should we clutter up our legal system housing them, it all costs money.

i am all for striking a deal where there is a pathway to citizenship (for a limited but increased number)as long as they are coming in through legal channels so we can vet and document them. this is imo a fair and humane way to deal with the crisis at hand.

at the end of the day i am divided because i want to give hard working immigrants a chance but if i also wish those people could have the opportunity for success in their own countries. it is unfortunate that crime, patronage and corruption have such a stranglehold on the third world.

a reply to: links234

Americans have rights,the guy that sneaks in through bedroom window has no rights,he is breaking the law,why spend taxpayer dollars to prove something obvious,the liberal way

The Liberal Democrat Party before the Conservatives woke back up.



I'm having a fun night don't ruin it.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You are not a core authoritarian, and you respect the Constitution as much as anyone. No, my comments weren’t referring to you. Even when I don’t agree with the particulars of your comments you are consistent and logical.

Rejecting the entry through Customs with a VISA issue still requires that the laws, rules and regulations be followed. They can be rejected entry into the United States but they aren’t simply found guilty of a crime without a trial and summarily punished.

No, folks should not be able to enter for any reason they choose.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I don’t disagree with many aspects of your presentation, but I do disagree that Mr Trump is some kind of Restorer of the Republic.

He doesn’t even exhibit that he understands most of the Constitution, and further, he’s glad to ignore it if he wants to, as in his suggestion under discussion here.

a reply to: BotheLumberJack

You seem very caught up by the Democrats and Republicans.

Both are core authoritarian; neither generally respect the Constitution.

If you are a history buff, research the Dixiecrats, the Southern Strategy, and Reagan’s so-called “Big Tent.”

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

...Democrats and Republicans.... Both are core authoritarian; neither generally respect the Constitution.

After what I've learned the last couple weeks, if anyone considering crossing the border asked me, I'd tell them to run as fast and as far in the other direction as they can... this is the LAST place they want to be. And they sure as hell don't want their children in our custody!!! It pains me to say it -- to even think it! -- but our officials have done nothing but make a bad situation exponentially worse. It's shameful and unconscionable.

And to that end, since we have become so damn... what? It's far worse than simply irresponsible. But since we are what we are now, and our system has become so abusive and out-of-control, I do believe it is in the best interests of everyone to simply turn away as many as possible. If only to give them a fighting chance. They won't get it here.

If you are a history buff, research the Dixiecrats, the Southern Strategy, and Reagan’s so-called “Big Tent.”

Excellent recommendations.

a reply to: Boadicea

Well, the reality is that illegal immigration has been declining for the most part for the last decade.

It's still an issue. Yes, we need the immigration laws massively updated and refurbished.

No, we don't need to have open borders and "just let anybody come in."

Yes, we need to enforce the laws.

No, we don't need to unneccessarily separate families and imprison children.

As far as coming to the US? Like you, I think that problem is going to solve itself.

We are in the midst of a transformation. Parts of it will be violent. It will not turn out like anyone imagines.

Thanks for your words, Bo. You're one of the lights!

There is precedent. . .

The U.S. Coast Guard should not turn back all Haitians who flee the growing violence in Haiti and attempt to reach the United States, Human Rights Watch said today. The United States is obligated by the 1951 Refugee Convention and related international laws not to return refugees to a place where their lives or freedom are threatened.
Speaking on the deteriorating situation in Haiti, U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday stated, “We will turn back any refugee that attempts to reach our shore, and that message needs to be very clear as well to the Haitian people.”
“Bush’s policy should respect the commitments the U.S. has made toward people fleeing persecution,” said Alison Parker, Senior Researcher in Human Rights Watch’s U.S. Program. “The administration should not return refugees to a place where their lives are in danger.”

www.hrw.org...

In an attempt to stem a recent surge in Haitian refugees at the U.S.-Mexico border, the Obama administration has announced a change in immigration policy to allow border officials to turn away Haitians without visas.
Before the new policy, Haitians had been entering the United States under a humanitarian parole provision – as a result of the devastating 2010 earthquake – that allowed Haitians to stay in the U.S. for up to three years. In 2011, officials tightened this policy to focus on Haitian criminals or those posing a threat to national security.
Now, the U.S. government considers the situation in Haiti to have improved sufficiently enough “to remove Haitian nationals on a more regular basis, consistent with the practice for nationals from other nations,” according to a statement released Thursday by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson. The policy change is effective immediately.

www.humanosphere.org...


For those who don't want to read, Bush and Obama did the same with Haitians.

a reply to: Gryphon66

You are not a core authoritarian, and you respect the Constitution as much as anyone. No, my comments weren’t referring to you. Even when I don’t agree with the particulars of your comments you are consistent and logical.

Thank you Gryph. It's good to know you feel that way.

Rejecting the entry through Customs with a VISA issue still requires that the laws, rules and regulations be followed. They can be rejected entry into the United States but they aren’t simply found guilty of a crime without a trial and summarily punished.

The concept of illegal entry across the border is illegal because that is a necessity for deportation, not necessarily for punishment. In other countries, such as Mexico itself, illegal border crossers are not just caught, but often spend years in Mexican jails. Their system calls illegal entry a felony. We simply want to send them back (or in the case of a wall, stop them from entering in the first place). The detention we use is only because that is the only way we can comply with the cries about legal protection.

Asylum after crossing the border illegally should be granted only in the most extreme circumstances. Asylum seekers are instructed to seek asylum at a US embassy in their country of origin, where the US will offer protection if appropriate.

No, folks should not be able to enter for any reason they choose.

Thank you! That is all I am saying.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Gryphon66

As far as coming to the US? Like you, I think that problem is going to solve itself.

You're still missing the bigger picture:

This isnt just about the happy go lucky immigrants. Its about blocking the cartels. The same ones disintegrating Latin America. And compelling people to drag kids thru the desert to get here. Compelling the US Government to maintain the War on Drugs / Police State posturing, etc, etc.

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: links234

Americans have rights,the guy that sneaks in through bedroom window has no rights,he is breaking the law,why spend taxpayer dollars to prove something obvious,the liberal way

tell that to the people who wrote the Constitution.

they must have known something you didn't on human rights

a reply to: odzeandennz

Due process sure, but if they're not a citizen does it really takes however long of incarceration and all this other drama to send them back?

a reply to: TheRedneck

Good argument.

We do have the concept of the severity of a crime. The crime that many if not most of these folks are being charged with is a misdemeanor offense. Yes, We the People are technically harmed by the illegal actions of crossing the border because of additional costs etc., but, I would argue, in many cases there is just no signficant harm to any individuals done by someone trying to jump the border.

No, we can't let them do it. Yes, we have to have laws which control it.

You point out that in Mexico illegal entry is a felony offense. That's fine, I don't want to emulate Mexico, LOL.

Now, if they're serial offenders, or if they have criminal records, or whatnot, the level of the crime increases in severity and then to a felony with appropriate treatment.

I don't think anyone has a problem with any of that. The problem is treating even first time offenders as if they are repeat offenders.

I'm very much in favor of streamlining the laws.

I'm in favor of enforcing the laws and keeping strong borders.

I am aesthetically and philosophically opposed to a 50-foot "Great Wall."

I am opposed to the way we are treating families and children, even if it is technically legal ... we can do better than this.

I read that immigration courts are in such bad conditions that you have to wait a long time, only to face a judge who often won't care if you're fleeing for your safety from gangs/cartels or what not.

We should at least help mexico's journalists, politicians, and activists against cartels... I'm not well informed, but sending back activists to their brutal cartel death seems wrong.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: Gryphon66

As far as coming to the US? Like you, I think that problem is going to solve itself.

You're still missing the bigger picture:

This isnt just about the happy go lucky immigrants. Its about blocking the cartels. The same ones disintegrating Latin America. And compelling people to drag kids thru the desert to get here. Compelling the US Government to maintain the War on Drugs / Police State posturing, etc, etc.

I don't think I am missing the bigger picture. Blocking the cartels is fine, particularly as we have helped create the cartels. (Absolutely agre with your comment on War on Drugs, etc.)

If we made the process to get into the US more accessible (like for work permits) no one would have to "drag kids through the dessert." The cost for a VISA is about a month's average salary in Mexico, probabably more in the rest of CA.

Add that to the fact that many of these people have a subsistence lifestyle. They work and manage to make just enough in their home countries to keep themselves and their families alive.

I keep hearing about the immigrants who took the legal route to citizenship. That's great and all, but that can cost up to $200,000 by the time it's all said and done. That is simply out of reach for many of these people who would come to the US and be good hard workers.

I'll say this (as I prepare from blowback from all sides):

Perhaps we need to pull back our forces from all around the world and go into Mexico and Central America and restore the peace and orderly government.

I view whats going on south of the border with much more trepidation than I ever did Iraq or Afghanistan (or Somalia or Libya or etc. etc).

I'd much rather see us use $25bn to help clean the place up and solve the problems at the source.

Call me a warmonger.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

When people came to North America, as little as 75 years ago, they didn't get welfare, free money, phones, medical insurance, etc.

I don't think anyone did, 75 years ago. Not phones or medical insurance anyway. You can talk to FDR about that other stuff.

But I think you might be misleading yourself about what illegal and/or undocumented residents are able to receive in the way of public assistance.
econofact.org...

I just checked out econofact, it appears to be a liberal biased site funded by the Edward r murrow center in that liberal bastion of colleges and universities. It appears they have the usual liberal bias peppered with some truth, but not enough. Their articles seem to have a distinct liberal bias.

On one of your other comments, I disagree, a wall will help, so let's build one :-) On a different users comment about shooting traffickers on sight, that's a little harsh. We used to kill terrorists on sight, but all the evidence was right there, like guns, bomb making components, actual pipe bombs, etc. You really have to have the burden of proof on your side before taking extreme measures.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: Gothmog

Actually, the Constitution does apply to anyone on American soil, here legally or not.

I'm uncertain as to where you get your evidence that it's not. Care to share?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Arent there enough here already?

I cant even get a days work in freaking Florida (thousands of miles from that stinking border).

Its been opens season, open house party for decades.

The party is over.

America is going down, the bus already flying over the cliff and everyone arguing about seating positions and trying to get more into the bus.