What's sad is you ignoring the fact that Trump was able to control illegal immigration much more than Biden - because Biden doesn't even try.
If you can't admit that, then the term 'hack' does apply to you. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.
Ukraine and NATO(US) Are Done.
- Thread starter Mas-sa-suta
- Start date
If you can't admit that, then the term 'hack' does apply to you. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.
True, dems and the dempiblicans, uniparty!!!! Want this. **** their constituents . Trump proved there are ways to stop it, IF you want. They don’t, and never have wanted it stopped!! Never!
Or the aloha pub’s would have fixed this shit the right way DECADEs ago..
but no they didn’t.
Uni party, share all wealth, let everyone in at my tax dollar expense. The golden garden for all, until the concept makes everyone beg for crumbs.
Mega people know this story and are trying to save you…
Meanwhile, you are well dressed, stepping into the cattle car, doing your democratic duty.
The acid bath doesn’t hurt, for very long.
The Remain in Mexico policy was very legally questionable. It never made it's way through the court system so we don't know how it would have played out. But there was at least a decent argument that it violated current asylum law. That's why I want to see the current law improved.
I'm coming from a position that I want immigration greatly curtailed. I strongly disagree with Biden's immigration policy. RIMX policy was something I fully support, but it was on tenuous legal footing and would always be at the whim of whatever admin is in office.
The way to fix bad policy is legislation and you can only move the ball very incrementally, but you can't fumble the ball
Trump tried things and had policies that worked.... Policies that could either be overturned by the next President or more likely were going be shot down in the courts, long term.
He relied heavily on Title 42 / emergency health executive action via Covid. Something that definitely wasn't going to hold for long.
It hadn't been though the courts yet, so you are making a judgement you're not qualified to make. It was in effect and it was effective. You should let the courts decide what is 'legal footing'.
You think Biden would enforce any new legislation when he doesn't enforce existing laws and policies? Trump did it and was effective, but Joe won't because..... well, Trump did it.
Republicans wanted some sign from Biden that he'd actually enforce laws before they sign off on any new legislation. Nothing wrong with that. And the levels of illegals coming into the US before Biden would be required to act was ridiculous - a joke.
I have no confidence Biden would enforce any legislation that tries to reduce illegal immigration.
Not at all likely they would be shot down by the courts.
The President, as CiC, has authority to defend the US against invasion. And make no mistake - the number of illegals crossing the border today constitutes an invasion.
That’s no meaningful change. Coyotes and NGO sympathizers tell the migrants what to say.
Real change would require enforcement of the public charge rules, would require entry only at authorized check points, would deny conditional entry to any asylum seeker who left the alleged dangerous circumstances for the safety of a third country before seeking US entry. That’s just for openers.
I've already stated I oppose Biden's immigration policy. So you have no argument from me.
But Republicans didn't oppose the legislation because they needed some sign from Biden. We all know why they opposed it, lets not be naive. And that's incredible short term thinking based upon who is President right now. Not 5 or 10 years from now. Again you fix problems with current legislation by passing fixes. You, by specific law, eliminate catch and release. If a future admin isn't following, there is at least legal standing to challenge them. Something that doesn't exist now when all you rely upon is exec action.
Sinema said the bill would end the policy of allowing migrants who are detained to live in U.S. communities while they await having their asylum cases heard by an immigration judge, known colloquially as “catch and release.”
Instead of that practice, Sinema said those migrants would be taken to a short-term detention center, where a quick asylum interview would determine whether that migrant meets the asylum requirements or should be swiftly removed.
Sinema said that those migrants who cannot be detained, such as families, would have a three-month asylum review.
“For folks that we can’t detain, like families, for instance, (we) will ensure that we’re supervising them over the course of just three months and conduct that interview with that new higher standard, requiring them to show more proof early on about whether or not they qualify for asylum and to return them to their country if they do not have the evidence or the proof that they qualify for asylum,” Sinema said.
Backlogs of asylum cases is a serious problem. Lack of immigration judges cause cases to be 2 years out. $500m for new immigration judges would have been nice.
So 90-180 day decisions on asylum cases isn't a meaningful change when current policy is more like 2 to 3 years
Again, there's no way Republicans should have passed a law, knowing it would never be enforced by Biden. And, the fact that it required a large number of illegals to cross before any action was required.
Challenging Biden after he's out of office does nothing. 'Challenging' anything after the fact is only a useless exercise. Ever hear of 'the horses are already out of the barn'?
No, not when you can't track down the illegals after they're in the country. No effective change at all.
Biden is going to President for max of another 4 years. Congress hasn't passed any significant immigration bill since Reagan.
GOP could have used the very minimal leverage they had to move the ball in the right direction. Instead they passed the Ukraine spending and got nothing for the vote. So the status quo is better? It makes no sense. Other than just politics
They'll have a chance at much better legislation when they win in November. Anything they pass now has to go through the Senate, so Republicans basically have no leverage in any legislation.
The status quo will remain as is, even with new legislation, which Biden will ignore as he does current legislation.
I think that's what people think. But the reality is you cannot move immigration legislation through the Senate without 60 votes to overcome a cloture motion
Unless you think the GOP is going to get 60 Senate seats anytime soon.... Zero immigration legislation will ever pass the Senate in a Trump admin.
LOL Do the Dems have 60 votes in the Senate now?
You have no idea what will happen in a Trump Presidency, except that Trump will control immigration much like he did in his first Presidency.
The bill only got over 60 votes because it was attached to Ukraine $.
I'd literally bet $500k that no significant immigration legislation would pass under a Trump admin. The Dems go immediately into defense/attack mode.
Everything in DC is about leverage and Trump will have very little, particularly as a lame duck President.
I have posted the law repeatedly, when anyone steps one foot in the US and says, "asylum", a hearing is required.
(4) Claim of asylum or fear of persecution or torture. If an alien subject to the expedited removal provisions indicates an intention to apply for asylum, or expresses a fear of persecution or torture, or a fear of return to his or her country, the inspecting officer shall not proceed further with removal of the alien until the alien has been referred for an interview by an asylum officer in accordance with 8 CFR 208.30. The examining immigration officer shall record sufficient information...
8 CFR § 235.3 - Inadmissible aliens and expedited removal.
Playing a famous Neil Young PROTEST SONG..while coughing up more $Borrowed Billions to kill more people.
One just cannot make this shit up!
Wait...@All4You says Russia is too militarily weak to project power beyond their borders. Gilligan has claimed that the Russian military are inept, criminals, untrained conscripts using old weapons...yet here we are.
Which one is it?
Strong enough to roll over any country, or weak?
Where do I find corroboration that Russian citizens consider themselves slaves?
Sometimes your posts are entertaining...
Other times, mostly bullshit
If you don't want to come across as a Russian shill, you need to change your communicative approach. The only thing your original post was missing was Khrushchev banging his shoe.
I question the blank check and even the approach of adding Ukraine to NATO. There are questions there about the nature of the NATO relationship in general, but Russia sucks. This is all their fault. All of it. They have no redeemable qualities as a partner (other than being a pain in the ass to the West and a cheap resource provider for the asshole aligned countries of the world) and they are a bully. The reason the majority of Europe and many of their former satellite states want under the NATO umbrella is, despite some faults, we are better than them in almost every conceivable fashion. You rail against the "globalist war mongers" yet run to the defense of the aggressor in this case who is seeking, by force, to reconstitute as much of their former empire as possible. An empire partially built on the idea of global communism. It is nonsensical.
If the Russians were so great, people would be lining up to do business with them. We have all sorts of warts but the only alliances you tend to see against us are the ones pissed that we stand in their way of regional hegemony. The line to be true friends (not just partners of convenience) with countries like Russia is pretty short.
No. Speeding up a bad process is not an improvement. Codifying a bad administrative process isn’t a meaningful change.
How do you think we should apply that law to a Venezuelan who crosses into the US from Mexico?I have posted the law repeatedly, when anyone steps one foot in the US and says, "asylum", a hearing is required.
(4) Claim of asylum or fear of persecution or torture. If an alien subject to the expedited removal provisions indicates an intention to apply for asylum, or expresses a fear of persecution or torture, or a fear of return to his or her country, the inspecting officer shall not proceed further with removal of the alien until the alien has been referred for an interview by an asylum officer in accordance with 8 CFR 208.30. The examining immigration officer shall record sufficient information...
8 CFR § 235.3 - Inadmissible aliens and expedited removal.
www.law.cornell.edu
Fine, so you admit the Democrats aren't interested in passing anything to stop illegal immigration because..... TRUMP.
Don't blame Repbulicans when the Senate wouldn't even address HR2.
I know you've posted it but they're breaking the law when they don't come through an authorized entry point. That's grounds for expulsion, which is what Obama did more than Trump.I have posted the law repeatedly, when anyone steps one foot in the US and says, "asylum", a hearing is required.
(4) Claim of asylum or fear of persecution or torture. If an alien subject to the expedited removal provisions indicates an intention to apply for asylum, or expresses a fear of persecution or torture, or a fear of return to his or her country, the inspecting officer shall not proceed further with removal of the alien until the alien has been referred for an interview by an asylum officer in accordance with 8 CFR 208.30. The examining immigration officer shall record sufficient information...
8 CFR § 235.3 - Inadmissible aliens and expedited removal.
They can apply for asylum in Mexico, which is what Trump had them do.
I have posted the law, is there one thing in it that says to treat a Venezuelan ANY different than a Mexican? Show me the wording.
The law says specifically that they are eligible for expedited removal and say asylum, the rest kicks in. Trump wasn't following the law. If you look up "expedited removal" it includes people who are in the country illegally. I don't see any exceptions that allow for "if subject to expedited removal unless it is for being in the country illegally".
Why don't they apply for asylum to Mexico when that's the first country they get to?
I know you don't see any exceptions, but you're not a Federal judge or Supreme Court Justice.
The executive is authorized to protect the US. The immigration laws are not suicide pacts. It's obvious the people have been coached on what to say and are not entering for asylum. If you watch Fox News - and I'm sure you don't - they interview illegals all the time who have just crossed the border and they all claim they're there for jobs - none of them claim political prosecution.
Trump was well within his authority of chief executive to protect the US.
Good question, I agree they should. That isn't in the actual law. The Administration made an interpretation of the law, you know, the same thing all conservatives hate Biden and Obama for.
I have suggested an asylum points system and applying in a 3rd country gains one points.
In reading, it appears the US spent the post 1945 world brow beating allies to take refugees, especially from communist countries. I suspect our laws are modeled after what we wanted them to do. If that isn't what we want any longer, change the laws. Or let Trump revert to his interpretation next year and let the courts decide. I am not arguing Trump was wrong, every president stretches the law. I am arguing he wasn't following the letter of the law. Again, every president does that. We only get our underwear bunched when they are of the other party.
Points for applying from 3rd countries. I could see why some who are legitimately afraid of narco gangs wouldn't trust Mexico, would you? It is basically a narco gang state. There are some people that may want to risk getting all the way here. But then they lose the extra points. That's how we do it on Mars, your astronauts better stop at the moon and apply before coming on.
Nah, that'll never happen. Makes too much sense.
Marvin, I honestly think this board could put together a sane immigration policy/laws better than the US Congress. Of course, we're not worried about getting re-elected, so we can use common sense.
I was never much of a terms limit guy, but I'm warming up to it quickly.s
Nah, that'll never happen. Makes too much sense.
Marvin, I honestly think this board could put together a sane immigration policy/laws better than the US Congress. Of course, we're not worried about getting re-elected, so we can use common sense.
I was never much of a terms limit guy, but I'm warming up to it quickly.
Plus Russia hasn’t sustained enough population to do what they used to do. They used to just send in bodies. Well…they are like the rest of the world. Not enough kids and babies.
Yessss. The “ attack on oil and gas” was to appease his base. He picked very low hanging fruit to do that. This is typical of both parties. What Biden did was pick Anwar and the keystone section 4 to do that. Nobody was ever going to develop ANWAR oil. Keystone on the other hand….So production will drop precipitously in the Trump administration as Biden's policies take effect?
And again, how is this impacting Ukraine?
Submitted for your consideration:
Another factor is the Inflation Reduction Act.
Patrick Jelinek, leader of Americas oil and gas with Ernst & Young, said it has spurned significant investment in the industry — including through enhanced oil recovery incentives — even though former President Donald Trump and other Republicans have pointed to the law as a waste of government resources that could hurt oil and gas.
4 oil and gas issues to watch in 2024
Industry production is surging as the Biden administration is pushing for emission curbs.www.eenews.net
The law speaks for itself.
Once the Venezuelan is out of Venezuela, he is out of danger and doesn’t qualify for asylum. If Mexico won’t accept the Venezuelan, why does that become Uncle Sam’s problem? At that point, the Venezuelan becomes an ordinary immigrant seeking legal status.
The notion that the United States is the only safe haven in the planet is the Democrat policy and that is wrong, unsustainable, and is not consistent with any reasonable interpretation of the law.
Point system for asylum? How would that work. One is either in danger or not.
I can see a point system for legal status for any immigrant. I think that is workable and is sorta kinda what we have now.
OK, read the law again and tell me where danger comes in. My reading, once someone says "asylum" they are guaranteed a hearing. No reference to danger. Tell me the words of the law that tell me I am wrong.
Everyone is in degrees of danger across the world. We need to have a point that says, "That is enough danger to warrant asylum". Pretty much anyone in Central America is at risk from Narco gangs. Pretty much anyone in Venezuela is in danger from an unstable leadership. Basically, what causes one case to rise to a clear and present danger.
Credibility.
No hearing is guaranteed with a one word utterance of “asylum.”
How do lawyers read this:
If an alien subject to the expedited removal provisions indicates an intention to apply for asylum, or expresses a fear of persecution or torture, or a fear of return to his or her country, the inspecting officer shall not proceed further with removal of the alien until the alien has been referred for an interview by an asylum officer in accordance with 8 CFR 208.30. The examining immigration officer shall record sufficient information..
Pointing out the abject failure of the NATO(US) misadventures in Ukraine over the past two decades does not constitute any form of defense of Rus or it's leadership. Not a difficult concept to grasp, but you seem to have swallowed the neocon propaganda in it's entirety.
Keep in mind; Zsky has canceled the election to stay in power, has jailed Christian clergy, has closed Christian churches, $Billions of American taxpayer dollars (borrowed/stolen) are missing, print and broadcast media have been censored and the Azov neo-nazi organization is flourishing.
This is what you are supporting.
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
Big Ten Coaches Talk Anonymously About Conference Foes for 2024
- Latest: TominDallas
-
-
-
-
