Democrat Congressional Bill to Dismantle ICE To Be Introduced in House

a reply to: Phage

Ssssiiigh...

Shy away...
Just be you..😊

You just have to ask yourself, who would benefit the most from dismantling ICE.

Cartels, gangs, human traffickers. . . that's who.

a reply to: DBCowboy


Exactly right. Over 143,000 criminals arrested by ICE in 2017 alone.

Source: www.ice.gov...-survey-target-id

The evil people/groups responsible for disbanding ICE law enforcement, would have a lot of American blood on their hands. But, they probably know that, and don't care.

"No Democrats are advocating for open borders"

RIP that statement.

a reply to: Phage

Its a damn good question phage, and I suspect MSM might be behind it. Only time will tell.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
"No Democrats are advocating for open borders"

RIP that statement.

Even Attorney General Jeff Session weighed in. Citing Hillary Clinton's "secret" meetings with leaders from Corporate, Banking, and Hollywood in 2015/2016, where she promised Open Borders/No Borders after she's elected President.

Source: twitter.com...
or
www.washingtonpost.com... ec-7bd1-11e8-80be-6d32e182a3bc_story.html?utm_term=.67113cb8bf9b

a reply to: toysforadults

ICE wasn't created until 2003, were you, socialists, before?

They have completely lost it.

This may not be that bad of an idea. If this was to pass the House, it would have to go off to the Senate then to the President, so hear me out, "IF" it did get to the President he could pass it. A good reason to do so is that all those ICE agents could be put on the Boarder without having to increase the budget for US Customs. Giving the responsibility of doing ICE's job to the individual states, then if a state starts to have issues with illegals committing crimes then that state could be held responsible for it's own actions.

It's a "Win-Win" situation;
*On one hand states that want a weakened immigration enforcement could be held accountable by the people of those state for allowing crime to spike.

*On the other hand those states can't blame the Federal Government for causing the immigration crimes to spike, since it would be their own duty to keep it in check.

*Trump can wash his hands with the whole issue, while watching those troublesome states have a massive change of leadership by it's own voters.

*Nobody could blame anyone with any reasonable fault since it would have been voted on by the full Congress, and state governments would be at fault for any failings.

*In the off hand chance that a state could make this system work, then that states government could take full credit for getting it to work, while Trump can again sit back and also take credit for allowing states to control their own enforcement measures.

So while it may seem like a stupid stupid idea, it could also be the rope needed to hang the same people that want to overthrow the current sitting President, while the current sitting President could allow those same people to hang themselves on their own rope.

***DISCLOSURE***

Hanging in this manure means getting voted out by the people in your state, for not protecting those same people from their own "virtue signaling".

originally posted by: Guyfriday
This may not be that bad of an idea. If this was to pass the House, it would have to go off to the Senate then to the President, so hear me out, "IF" it did get to the President he could pass it. A good reason to do so is that all those ICE agents could be put on the Boarder without having to increase the budget for US Customs. Giving the responsibility of doing ICE's job to the individual states, then if a state starts to have issues with illegals committing crimes then that state could be held responsible for it's own actions.

It's a "Win-Win" situation;
*On one hand states that want a weakened immigration enforcement could be held accountable by the people of those state for allowing crime to spike.

*On the other hand those states can't blame the Federal Government for causing the immigration crimes to spike, since it would be their own duty to keep it in check.

*Trump can wash his hands with the whole issue, while watching those troublesome states have a massive change of leadership by it's own voters.

*Nobody could blame anyone with any reasonable fault since it would have been voted on by the full Congress, and state governments would be at fault for any failings.

*In the off hand chance that a state could make this system work, then that states government could take full credit for getting it to work, while Trump can again sit back and also take credit for allowing states to control their own enforcement measures.

So while it may seem like a stupid stupid idea, it could also be the rope needed to hang the same people that want to overthrow the current sitting President, while the current sitting President could allow those same people to hang themselves on their own rope.

***DISCLOSURE***

Hanging in this manure means getting voted out by the people in your state, for not protecting those same people from their own "virtue signaling".

Or, hear me out, we brake up ICE back to what it was BEFORE DHS. Like most of the orgs swallowed up by DHS its become a corrupt authoritarian shadow of what they used to be.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Abolishing ICE doesn't mean open borders.

Unless you're a right wing alarmist.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Okay. But Liberal Policy does. Talk is cheap for a foreign islander. But do Appeal to Hypocrisy in telling US how to handle our business / problems / crisis.

Gives the name ICE a whole new meaning, time to go solo.

repeat..

sorry

another repeat

..

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

It’s cheaper when it just gets made up.

a reply to: Chadwickus

And even cheaper when its delusional.

Open Border already is the policy. To remove items that make it more prickly is the enforcement of such policy.

Holy Moses #

it's a double post

sorry

I have no idea why i keep double posting, maybe I'm specially high,on life.