It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If moving asylum seekers is illegal for the government

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   
By this point, we have all heard President Trump talk about moving illegals to sanctuary cities.

www.politico.com...

Some think it would not be legal for ICE, or DHS to do so, and any attempt would immediately be blocked by a liberal court.

I happen to agree, that it is probably not within Trump's authority to do so, but what if it were a "private" operation?

I'm thinking, for example, if there was a gofundme to move illegals to San Francisco, or wherever, buses could be chartered to take any who wanted to go. I'm positive many would jump at the opportunity.

I suppose a private citizen could just load up his motor home, but surely there would be insurance, and liability issues there.

Would there be legal obstacles with something along these lines?

How would it be any different than a gambling junket to Vegas?




posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

Didn't the government under Carter move tens of thousands of Cubans to specific areas under the Muriel Boatlift in 1980?



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

dont get me started with FDR and the west coast japanese



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: DBCowboy

dont get me started with FDR and the west coast japanese


And those were American citizens!


+3 more 
posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Funny how things under Trump are illegal, but weren't so for Obama.

Nebraska.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mach2

Didn't the government under Carter move tens of thousands of Cubans to specific areas under the Muriel Boatlift in 1980?



I don't recall that, but I moved to S. FL in the mid eighties, after the boatlift had already occured.

I doubt that was necessary though, as there was already a large anti Castro Cuban population in Miami, who, for the most part "sponsored" them upon arrival.

One thing that happened though, is that many of them (not a huge percentage) were criminals that Fidal released from jails, and it took some time to get them under control.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: DBCowboy

dont get me started with FDR and the west coast japanese


I do think that was so wrong, but i can understand it, given the circumstances. I've sometimes wondered, had that not been the case, if they would have been victimized by angry mobs.

I've also recently read that there was, actually, no such internment in Hawaii.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

We got a great movie out of it. Scarface.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:27 PM
link   
This is like everything Trump does. They run in circles and blame him for their tantrums.

1. He wants a wall
2. left says no
3. He wants to now allow asylum seekers in but go to sanctuary cities
4. left says no
5. Trump says DACA is ok
6. Democrats never showed up for the meeting

Every elected democrat and some republicans stating Trump has no plan and is not helping.

Smart voter in 2020 - Vote Trump. At this rate he is even going to have a chance to take Cali...



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Except Dems are for more border security, just not a literal wall, Dems don't want to use humans as political pawns, and Dems don't want to deal with a manchild who always wants to 'win'. See how there is always another side to the story?

When you can come down to reality and stop listening to the BS that comes from biased sources and Trumps mouth, you can see the Dems and Republicans are simply just playing tit for tat. There needs to be a compromise between the two, not just one sided.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp




Except Dems are for more border security, just not a literal wall, Dems don't want to use humans as political pawns


But the Dems passed a bill to fund a section of the wall in 2006. Among those that voted for it?

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
Then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE)
Then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

They only disapproved when Trump wants to do it.

Its also arguable about who really uses people as "poltical pawns". The Dems do it all the time. Infact its one of their primary political tools. How many times have we seen the media (largly and openly bias to the Dems, btw) use pictures and stories about migrant children to tug at the ole' heart strings. Dems extolling the evils of Trump, meanwhile showing pictures of kids in cages taken during the Obama presidency... How to you reconcile that with what you typed?

edit on 15-4-2019 by timequake because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-4-2019 by timequake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: matafuchs

Except Dems are for more border security, just not a literal wall, Dems don't want to use humans as political pawns, and Dems don't want to deal with a manchild who always wants to 'win'. See how there is always another side to the story?

When you can come down to reality and stop listening to the BS that comes from biased sources and Trumps mouth, you can see the Dems and Republicans are simply just playing tit for tat. There needs to be a compromise between the two, not just one sided.


Dems have used humans as political pawns since they owned them in the USA.

Once you understand that, you can begin to evolve, both politically and intellectually.

Until then keep slinging around words like "manchild" and see how seriously you are taken.

See you in 2020.




posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:49 PM
link   
I say pack them in C-130's with chutes and every now and then push 100 or so out. Few here few there. But not Chitcongo I'm a hundred miles away and we already have too many non workers.




posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

You can say the same thing about the republicans. But we are talking about literally right here, and right now. Trump wants to flood sanctuary cities with migrants. He's literally using them as political pawns.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: mikell
I say pack them in C-130's with chutes and every now and then push 100 or so out. Few here few there. But not Chitcongo I'm a hundred miles away and we already have too many non workers.



Maybe, but the per capita murder rate will.probably go down, unless you get a dozen serial killers by accident.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Lumenari

You can say the same thing about the republicans. But we are talking about literally right here, and right now. Trump wants to flood sanctuary cities with migrants. He's literally using them as political pawns.


If by "pawns", you mean he's using them to point out hypocrisy, then so be it.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: timequake

Exactly. The dems want border security, where did this whole thing that they want completely open borders come from?

You do know the political parties of the US are coolitions right? This is why you have multiple tiers of government to stop crazies that want complete open borders. But it just seems people only focus on those crazies, AOC comes to mind.

If Trump had it his way, he's build a literal wall from coast to coast, 20ft high, with phalanx cannons atop every 50ft.



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Lumenari

You can say the same thing about the republicans. But we are talking about literally right here, and right now. Trump wants to flood sanctuary cities with migrants. He's literally using them as political pawns.


If by "pawns", you mean he's using them to point out hypocrisy, then so be it.


Where is the hypocrisy?



posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

Already being done, by the left...

AP Article

If you wade past the anti-Trump rhetoric, you can find things like...


At the San Diego shelter, asylum-seeking families, largely from Guatemala and Honduras, are asked about their health at the front door. A mobile clinic in the parking lot tends to people with sore throats, dehydration, vomiting, fevers and other ailments.

Once inside, a large room manned by volunteers resembles a busy travel agency. Families lined up at rows of tables tell shelter workers their plans and get help calling family to pay for travel. A whiteboard in the corner marks progress buying tickets to New York, Nashville, Austin, Texas, and other cities across the U.S. Volunteers shuttle as many as they can to a bus station or airport to make room for the next night’s arrivals.

Shelter organizers say it costs $350,000 a month to operate the facility, which provides food, showers, cots, clothing and sometimes travel expenses. The state of California has donated $500,000 for administrative costs, and the city of San Diego may turn a former juvenile detention camp into a shelter.

We can’t do everything ourselves, but I know we’re capable of doing more,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said after visiting the shelter in November as governor-elect, calling it “a humanitarian crisis.


I found it odd that to the Democratic Governor of California, it is indeed a "Humanitarian crisis" but yet it isn't at all to the Democratic party.




posted on Apr, 15 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: matafuchs

Except Dems are for more border security, just not a literal wall, Dems don't want to use humans as political pawns, and Dems don't want to deal with a manchild who always wants to 'win'. See how there is always another side to the story?

When you can come down to reality and stop listening to the BS that comes from biased sources and Trumps mouth, you can see the Dems and Republicans are simply just playing tit for tat. There needs to be a compromise between the two, not just one sided.


WTF are you on? The dems want border walk ins, they want to give them everyone else's money so the walk ins will vote for them, to get more other people's money. The dems want illegal walk ins, to increase criminality, to make government even more costly, bigger and more authoritarian. In the end, they'll keep huge government and normalize criminality. Anything with liberals is not going to end well.

Cheers - Dave







 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join