Deal with Mexico Paves Way for Asylum Overhaul at US Border

time.com...

Decent article on the mexican migration over the years.

Shows the need for mexico to have a southern wall and larger coast guard.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: underwerks

How does one simply screw up when making direct quotes or citing primary sources?

Who the hell does that kind of thing and why? Oh wait...

# man. We're screwed. Someone is trying to poison a well somewhere and I think it starts with Joshua Partlow and
Nick Miroff who are the authors of the article.

It could also be that the Interior Minister is lying.

Maybe they made a mistake. No one is infallible, the media included. What’s important is whether or not they own up to the mistake.

Or, it may be the sources they used. Politicians in Mexico aren’t exactly known for being paragons of truth, so they may have made a false statement. Or maybe they changed their mind.

Whatever happened, it’ll be interesting to see how the WaPo explains this.

a reply to: TheOne7

Oh that would be great if mexico held all those refugees for us but it aint gonna happen and any deal or treaty does have to be voted on in the usa in order for the border guards to start to turn away legal refugee applicants to wait in mexico.

So... Mexico has to run everything they do through our Senate?

Te logical step if i were potus would be to remove the unconstitutional deployment of our troops from our border and simply deploy them into mexico to perform the same action that you all get wet dreams about now. Potus could do that without wiping his ass with the constitution.

So... you would invade Mexico with the military?

I honestly don't know how to respond to that...

TheRedneck

It's nice to see, all be it slowly, that nation's around the globe are gaining back their cajones and looking out for their country...

The "no borders" Globalists seem to be losing ground.. which is a positive move....

a reply to: underwerks

I think the Washington Post screwed up in this instance.

Ya think?



TheRedneck

Hey I got lightning strike through me ok, Bzzzz.

Why don't Mexico and USA form a international residential made of trailer stacks or train cargo containers made of metal. Then have a center like Methodist Outreach Ministry in Phoenix AZ for families to live and educate themselves on immigration and correct processing documentation with case workers included!

Makes Sense...Why does it have to be so hard! I mean wow, I'm dying here- totally solar electric PV and Wind Turbines too for beauty alongside wonderful and aesthetically pleasing obelisks. I mean we don't have to be brutal folks!
We just have to be smart!

Hey I got lightning strike through me ok, Bzzzz.

Why don't Mexico and USA form a international residential made of trailer stacks or train cargo containers made of metal. Then have a center like Methodist Outreach Ministry in Phoenix AZ for families to live and educate themselves on immigration and correct processing documentation with case workers included!

Makes Sense...Why does it have to be so hard! I mean wow, I'm dying here- totally solar electric PV and Wind Turbines too for beauty alongside wonderful and aesthetically pleasing obelisks. I mean we don't have to be brutal folks!
We just have to be smart!

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: projectvxn

Drama.

Intrigue.



Or just a negotiating tactic. Mexico wants more (money, concessions, better trade deals. . . etc)

Just watch a 1976 movie called "the network " it's on Netflix and does a good job of explaining why news isn't really news...

originally posted by: TheOne7
a reply to: TheRedneck


Te logical step if i were potus would be to remove the unconstitutional deployment of our troops from our border and simply deploy them into mexico to perform the same action that you all get wet dreams about now. Potus could do that without wiping his ass with the constitution.

Just deploy the troops? Into a sovereign country?

a reply to: snowspirit

No problem there.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: TheOne7

Oh that would be great if mexico held all those refugees for us but it aint gonna happen and any deal or treaty does have to be voted on in the usa in order for the border guards to start to turn away legal refugee applicants to wait in mexico.

So... Mexico has to run everything they do through our Senate?

Te logical step if i were potus would be to remove the unconstitutional deployment of our troops from our border and simply deploy them into mexico to perform the same action that you all get wet dreams about now. Potus could do that without wiping his ass with the constitution.

So... you would invade Mexico with the military?

I honestly don't know how to respond to that...

TheRedneck

I can see that you do not know how to respond because i do not believe you understood the post. If we change the policies of our border guards or create some type of legal treaty or the like with mexico then it has to be approved by our government. However mexico could request help from our military to aid with their immigrant problem and that would not be the same as invading mexico. Hyperbole much? Yes. The only change that could happen without our gov. approval would be if mexico detained all people in their country and those people never reached our border. We can not tell our border guards to direct refugees or asylum seekers to turn around and wait in mexico unless congress approves the changes.

What we can do is to get our current border guards to follow the guidelines more closely when on site determination of temporary asylum status is givin when they come into contact with an agent. Recently i seen someone being interviewed on tv about his claim of asylum and he told that he had been caught crossing before and that this time he approached a guard in order to make an asylum request and the reason he stated was because his niece had been abducted. Perhaps there is more to that story but on face value it does not sound like it meets the origional intent that the asylum process was created. That is just my opinion though. I do feel that the process should be for those directly in immediate danger danger.

My current understanding is that when an asylum seeker request asylum status from a border guard they have to state their case and the guard has the ability to accept or deny status and that imo is the point where we could tighten up the guidelines and weed out some of the false claims. If you are from south of mexico and you pass up a job in mexico simply because your goal is the usa then perhaps you are not qualified to be an asylum claimant in the usa.

What we do not want is someone approaching a border agent and being turned away only to be killed soon after of put into some type of slavery. No agent wants that on their conscious. There is a major difference in an asylum claimant and someone just crossing the border for a better life. A better life should be done through the immigrant line. So many lump all aliens into the same category and it creates great ignorance in our media and everyday lives and that turns into a vicious type of hatred that in the long run is unhealthy for our citizens and our political divide.

On top of that it is also my opinion that if someone is seeking asylum then they should leave their pride at the door and embrace our nation as a whole. That imo is where our naturalization process is failing us. Now i believe that ice is totally dropping the ball and should be done away with and the duties that ice should be carrying out today would then fall to the states where it belongs. If everyone is so damn in love with a failing government bureau then they should educate themselves as to the current failures the agency is going through in the name of partisan politics. If we have to have a national agency that patrols our borders then congress should expand the authority of the coast guard. Allow counties and states the legality to deport true illegal aliens that they deem unfit for their region. Imagine that the feds covering naturalization and the states regulating immigration. If only the founders had thought of that.

originally posted by: snowspirit

originally posted by: TheOne7
a reply to: TheRedneck


Te logical step if i were potus would be to remove the unconstitutional deployment of our troops from our border and simply deploy them into mexico to perform the same action that you all get wet dreams about now. Potus could do that without wiping his ass with the constitution.

Just deploy the troops? Into a sovereign country?

Just as is currently happening in other countries it would only happen at the request of help from that country. It is obvious that mexico does not want help from our military. It would be a damn site better than deploying the military into our so called sovereign country. I can imagine you are also outraged by that current unconstitutional action by our potus in an attempt to flex muscles against the findings of the special counsel by deploying inside the usa. We are one step away from martial law but that attempt would fail miserably and backfire.

a reply to: TheOne7

I can see that you do not know how to respond because i do not believe you understood the post. If we change the policies of our border guards or create some type of legal treaty or the like with mexico then it has to be approved by our government. However mexico could request help from our military to aid with their immigrant problem and that would not be the same as invading mexico. Hyperbole much? Yes. The only change that could happen without our gov. approval would be if mexico detained all people in their country and those people never reached our border. We can not tell our border guards to direct refugees or asylum seekers to turn around and wait in mexico unless congress approves the changes.

No, I did not understand the post. That's why I pointed out what appeared to be some incredible statements.

Firstly, yes we can tell our border patrol how to respond to asylum requests, as long as that response does not violate Federal law. Federal law is very broad (and somewhat contradictory sometimes) in granting the President leniency in dealing with border issues. The President has full authority under Federal law and the Constitution to set standards by which to determine asylum status, deploy the military, and even to close the border if he feels it is necessary. Federal law actually expressly charges the border guards with the ability to consider or deny an asylum request. Since the law is already in place, no Congressional approval is needed. Congress can pass legislation that changes the immigration laws, but until they do the present laws apply.

Secondly, this agreement (if it still exists) is not a treaty and therefore is not subject to Senate approval. It is an action taken by Mexico that happens to align with US goals for the border. Cooperation does not require Senate approval.

Thirdly, you failed to mention anything about a request from Mexico to have our military assist them. I am a firm believer in non-interference with other countries, and without that request we would be invading another sovereign country. Such a request would also not require approval from Congress, as it would not be a declaration of war.

My current understanding is that when an asylum seeker request asylum status from a border guard they have to state their case and the guard has the ability to accept or deny status and that imo is the point where we could tighten up the guidelines and weed out some of the false claims. If you are from south of mexico and you pass up a job in mexico simply because your goal is the usa then perhaps you are not qualified to be an asylum claimant in the usa.

That is what President Trump has already done. His last Executive Order changed the "catch and release" policy. Under that policy, anyone who claimed asylum had to be given a court docket (which due to the numbers was typically months or years away) and were allowed to remain in the country without supervision even until their court date. That meant all one needed to do was say certain words and fill out a form, and they became quasi-legal for an extended period of time.

Under the new Executive Order, illegal crossings meant that the application was not considered as valid. All crossings had to be at ports of entry, which is perfectly legal in order to apply for asylum. Also, those who applied were still denied entry until such time as their case could be heard. Judge Tigar of California has declared that asylum applications must be accepted at any point along the border, a decision that I believe is in direct violation of existing law and will likely be struck down soon.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's a bunch of bs.

So many inaccuracies it is pitiful and would be a waste of time to address. Clearly you are beyond rational thinking and have a one sided view and illegal opinion of the rule of law. I believe i just viewed the potus wish list to santa clause!

It was nice chat for a moment but ...Have a nice day.

Since it is the holiday season i will throw you a bone..........

tyr·an·ny
/ˈtirənē/Submit
noun
cruel and oppressive government or rule.
"people who survive war and escape tyranny"
synonyms: despotism, absolute power, autocracy, dictatorship, totalitarianism, Fascism; More
a nation under cruel and oppressive government.
cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Trump would have told him "no" just because of some election?

Yes.

Do you think he's going to change his mind since a few hours ago?

If changing his words on the wall help him gain more power then yes. He will change. Trump wants power and nothing more.

About time Mexico dealt with their share of this. The US has already absorbed 1/3 of Mexico's population since 1980. 1/3 - 25 million. That is a lot of people - just the legal ones. If we don't have borders we don't have a country. It's easy to tell who the globalists are by their beliefs about the border. Screw the UN, sick of them trying to run the affairs of sovereign countries.

Deal....lol
...this is an organized mob to invade the u.s..

They ain't staying in Mexico

They have a mission and are being pushed by their organizers.

Its costs a lot of money to round up these people, feed and clothe them hem along the way.

They are not going to stop until they goal is reached

Each of these people will help change the demographics of the country

Each of these people will need lots of money spent on them. Any time money is spent elsewhere it weakens the country

Traditional weapons are not weakling America fast enough.
Mobs of migrants do way more damage