Trump now says he plans to legalize some undocumented immigrants [disputed]

[CPUd]

Trump now says he plans to legalize some undocumented immigrants

Sources tell Univision that Trump plans to announce a major shift on immigration policy next week. The Republican candidate met Saturday with Hispanic leaders who said he told them he regrets prior comments about Mexicans.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump plans to present an immigration plan in Colorado Thursday that will include finding a way to legalize millions of undocumented immigrants, according to three people who attended a meeting between the candidate and Hispanic leaders on Saturday at Trump Tower in New York.

"I really liked that Trump acknowledged that there is a big problem with the 11 million [undocumented] people who are here, and that deporting them is neither possible nor humane,” said Jacob Monty, a Texas immigration lawyer who attended the meeting.

If true, Trump's plan would stand in sharp contrast to his previous statements about immigrants during the campaign. During the primaries, the New York property tycoon promised to build a wall along the border with Mexico and to deport all undocumented immigrants.

The possible reversal over immigration policy by the Republican candidate would not be without precedent after Trump has shifted his position on a variety of issues during his campaign from banning Muslims to taxes, minimum wages and and abortion.

Polls show Trump has alienated many minority voters and Republican party strategists have urged him to tone down his rhetoric about immigrants, especially Hispanics who make up a growing share of registered voters - about 10% in November.

...

http://www.univision.com/univision-news/politics/trump-now-says-he-plans-to-legalize-some-undocumented-immigrants

[afwjam]

Nah he would not change his mind on this, he said he was going to kick them all out, build the wall and Mexico would pay for it.

[CPUd]

He now understands that pandering to the alt-whiters keeps him from building a winning coalition.

[r3volution 3.0]

March 1 2016

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/29/politics/ted-cruz-new-york-times-immigration-tape/


Donald Trump on Monday did not refute a report claiming he told The New York Times editorial board in an off-the-record meeting that his immigration views are in fact more flexible than he has made them seem throughout his presidential campaign.
"Everything is negotiable," Trump said Monday on Fox News, responding to a question about whether the report, which undermines Trump's hardline stance on immigration, was accurate.

BuzzFeed News reported Monday (http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/trump-tape?utm_term=.ceLkB09P2B#.gsq67Vo0J7) that Trump's remarks to the Times "called into question whether he would stand by his own immigration views."

The story offers no evidence about what Trump actually said, but Trump told Fox News, "We had a board meeting. It was off the record. All of a sudden they leak it, it's all over the place."

"Everything -- by the way, it is negotiable. Things are negotiable, I'll be honest with you, you know I make the wall two feet shorter or something. I mean everything is negotiable," Trump said of building the wall on the U.S. border with Mexico, a key plank of his campaign.

Trump clarified that "building it (the wall)," however, is not negotiable.

Asked on Fox News whether his plan to deport all estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. was negotiable, Trump also suggested some leeway on that position.

[Occam's Banana]

Donald Trump has the best clarifications. The best. The greatest clarifications.

His clarifications are so clear, you won't believe how much clarity they have ...



"Everything is negotiable," Trump said [...]

"Everything [...] is negotiable. Things are negotiable [...]. I mean everything is negotiable," Trump said [...]

Trump clarified that [something] is not negotiable.

Asked [...] whether [something else] was negotiable, Trump also suggested some leeway on that position.

(... umm ... never mind ...)

[dannno]

I'd like to start off questioning this fine piece of BSMSM anti-Trump propaganda with - which statements about Mexicans did he 'regret'?

I see a lot of editorializing and not a lot of quotes from Trump himself, which automatically becomes very suspect. Of course the one classic quote they provided again misspelled their as they're.

[CPUd]

I'd like to start off questioning this fine piece of BSMSM anti-Trump propaganda with - which statements about Mexicans did he 'regret'?


Most of them. All of them?

[dannno]

Most of them. All of them?

He may regret how the MSM portrayed his statements. For example, he said they are sending "their rapists" and the MSM always says 'they're rapists" like they did again in this article. So that was simply an observation he made, which turns out to be provably accurate. Then again, the media attention really propelled his candidacy so maybe he is glad they made such a big deal about it. Either way it would be amazing if they actually quoted what Trump actually said to them, although he may be doing some pandering here, I don't personally put pandering beneath Trump.

[CPUd]

Trump was not specific about his regerts.

https://i.imgur.com/B7i8nL0.jpg

[dannno]

Trump was not specific about his regerts.

https://i.imgur.com/B7i8nL0.jpg

Do you have a quote from Trump?

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5BNzXd6080

[dannno]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5BNzXd6080

Absolutely no substance in that video, everything was chopped up, you can make a speech given by Bush about how the government was behind 9/11 if you chop up his words enough.

And they misspelled "their" again.

[Suzanimal]

Donald Trump has the best clarifications. The best. The greatest clarifications.

His clarifications are so clear, you won't believe how much clarity they have ...



(... umm ... never mind ...)

It's the art of the deal.

[Chester Copperpot]

I'd like to start off questioning this fine piece of BSMSM anti-Trump propaganda with - which statements about Mexicans did he 'regret'?

I see a lot of editorializing and not a lot of quotes from Trump himself, which automatically becomes very suspect. Of course the one classic quote they provided again misspelled their as they're.

hey look,man,, CPUd doesnt go after trump.. he said so.... of course all his actions show otherwise so youd think CPUd would pull the plank out of his eye own first before trying to pull the plank out of Trump's eye.

[kahless]

I do not think most Trump supporters have an issue with legalizing those who have been here working and contributing for a long time. The issue is ending the dangerous and economic liability of open borders. That means ending immigration of questionable individuals (terrorist regions), ending benefits for illegals aside life threatening situations, ending sanctuary cities, ending in-state tuition for illegals and sending back recent immigrants here illegally.

[r3volution 3.0]

I do not think most Trump supporters have an issue with legalizing those who have been here working and contributing for a long time.

http://rorygregg.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/shifting_goals2.jpg

...be sure to stay limber and eat your wheaties, you're going to be doing a lot more of that in coming weeks.

[Brian4Liberty]

So, does this amnesty only apply to Mexican immigrants, or does it include other nations south of the border? How about China, India and other areas? What about Muslim nations? North Africa, Middle East? Seems discriminatory.

[kahless]

http://rorygregg.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/shifting_goals2.jpg

...be sure to stay limber and eat your wheaties, you're going to be doing a lot more of that in coming weeks.

Sounds you spend too much time being brainwashed by what the media tells you about Trump. Never thought I would see the day here of Paul supporters taking the word of the media verbatim as fact.

[William Tell]

I do not think most Trump supporters have an issue with legalizing those who have been here working and contributing for a long time.

LOL, you're for amnesty now if Trump is?

[kahless]

LOL, you're for amnesty now if Trump is?

If someone has been here for 10 years and paying taxes, I never had a problem with that. There is mass delusion in a segment of RPF concerning Trump and those here deciding to vote for him for strategic or whatever reasons.

There is a thread I posted a little while ago "http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/". I would say that also applies to the credibility of a segment of the irrational anti-Trump crowd that posts. I think that is really a shame since those kinds of posts and anti-Trump spam somewhat lowered the credibility of the forum over the least year.

[spudea]

Legalize meaning temporary work visas.

this isn't new. he's proposed multiple steps as a comprehensive solution. Such as e-verify for the employers, and if the employers still wish to employ undocumented immigrants, there will be a procedure to avoid deportation, provided they are cleared of other criminal acts, it will be possible to obtain a work visa, they will then pay taxes like all legal american workers. And in order to become a legal US citizen, they go to the back of the line to go through the big beautiful door in the wall.

[spudea]

http://www.univision.com/univision-news/politics/trump-now-says-he-plans-to-legalize-some-undocumented-immigrants

Confirmed as false report.....


RNC Official at Trump’s Hispanic Meeting Debunks False BuzzFeed, Univision Reports that Donald Succumbed to Amnesty Activists

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/21/exclusive-rnc-official-says-trumps-hispanic-meeting-says-never-said-open-amnesty/

[twomp]

Sounds you spend too much time being brainwashed by what the media tells you about Trump. Never thought I would see the day here of Paul supporters taking the word of the media verbatim as fact.

It doesn't sound like you think much at all. Never thought I would see a Ron Paul supporter openly worshiping an authoritarian. But then again, I doubt you were ever a Ron Paul supporter. Probably got lost here on your way to Ilovetyrants.com and too stupid to realize it.

[twomp]

If someone has been here for 10 years and paying taxes, I never had a problem with that. There is mass delusion in a segment of RPF concerning Trump and those here deciding to vote for him for strategic or whatever reasons.

There is a thread I posted a little while ago "http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/". I would say that also applies to the credibility of a segment of the irrational anti-Trump crowd that posts. I think that is really a shame since those kinds of posts and anti-Trump spam somewhat lowered the credibility of the forum over the least year.

You are on a liberty oriented forum. Trump trolls supporting an authoritarian lowers the credibility of these forums.

[kahless]

Legalize meaning temporary work visas.

this isn't new. he's proposed multiple steps as a comprehensive solution. Such as e-verify for the employers, and if the employers still wish to employ undocumented immigrants, there will be a procedure to avoid deportation, provided they are cleared of other criminal acts, it will be possible to obtain a work visa, they will then pay taxes like all legal american workers. And in order to become a legal US citizen, they go to the back of the line to go through the big beautiful door in the wall.

One thing the media and the anti-Trump people have been successful at is presenting Trump as some sort of hard liner against illegals and immigration when reality it is really simply about enforcing our laws. This certainly prevented a real hardliner from emerging in the race which this cycle was ripe for.

If the establishment really wanted to stop Trump they could have simply propped up a real hardliner to make Trump look like a moderate like the rest of the field and then take that candidate out playing the race card.

[kahless]

It doesn't sound like you think much at all. Never thought I would see a Ron Paul supporter openly worshiping an authoritarian. But then again, I doubt you were ever a Ron Paul supporter. Probably got lost here on your way to Ilovetyrants.com and too stupid to realize it.

You imagine things in my postings. You clearly suffer from delusions.

[Chester Copperpot]

http://www.univision.com/univision-news/politics/trump-now-says-he-plans-to-legalize-some-undocumented-immigrants

are you going to delete this thread or change the title now that the story has been debunked as a lie??

In the future will you make sure stories are true instead of posting falsehoods so you can go after trump? I know you say you dont go after anybody but thats clearly a lie so why dont you just do everybody a favor and GTFO this website.


If you hate trump thats fine.. Theres plenty for a libertarian not to like.. but 10 new anti-trump threads a day a fuckin ridiculous and only out you for the insincerity you have.

Again I ask you, who pays you to blog this bullshit, how much do you get paid, and can the rest of us all get jobs there with you????

[spudea]

You are on a liberty oriented forum. Trump trolls supporting an authoritarian lowers the credibility of these forums.

resorting to name calling lowers your own credibility. Posting false stories lowers the credibility of this forum.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUt-1M5KuF8

The only difference I see in Trump's plan is the ability to deport. I say yes to deporting criminals, and non-tax paying welfare queens. They have to abide by the same rules as legal workers, and pay the same taxes, otherwise we don't have a real border and we don't have a country.

[r3volution 3.0]

Sounds you spend too much time being brainwashed by what the media tells you about Trump.

Never thought I would see the day here of Paul supporters taking the word of the media verbatim as fact.

Do you believe that all the quotes/videos of him calling for deportation are forgeries?

...he never really held that position?

Or you saying you don't believe the latest report that he's now going to come out for amnesty?

[jmdrake]

I do not think most Trump supporters have an issue with legalizing those who have been here working and contributing for a long time. The issue is ending the dangerous and economic liability of open borders. That means ending immigration of questionable individuals (terrorist regions), ending benefits for illegals aside life threatening situations, ending sanctuary cities, ending in-state tuition for illegals and sending back recent immigrants here illegally.


http://rorygregg.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/shifting_goals2.jpg

...be sure to stay limber and eat your wheaties, you're going to be doing a lot more of that in coming weeks.

http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/1/1d/Pwned_by_whale.jpg

Of course the truth is, Trump said all along he planned to legalize some undocumented immigrants. It's called "touchback amnesty." Kay "bailout" Bailey Hutchinson first proposed it. You send everybody home then put the "good" illegal immigrants at the front of the line, ahead of those who never came here illegally, to get back in. Donald Trump said he would bring back the "good" illegal immigrants he deported "rapidly" and the only way to do that is to put them at the front of the line. So spend $400 billion to deport everybody then bring back most of them as opposed to just finding and deporting the "bad" ones because...well...that would be amnesty. :rolleyes: It's kind of like how Obama paid $400 million to Iran contingent on the hostages being released but it wasn't a ransom because....well because Obama said it wasn't.

[jmdrake]

resorting to name calling lowers your own credibility. Posting false stories lowers the credibility of this forum.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUt-1M5KuF8

The only difference I see in Trump's plan is the ability to deport. I say yes to deporting criminals, and non-tax paying welfare queens. They have to abide by the same rules as legal workers, and pay the same taxes, otherwise we don't have a real border and we don't have a country.

:rolleyes: Oh come on! Enough with the stupidity! Under any immigration plan there is the ability to deport. Hell under the system we have now people get deported! And yes, Rand's plan would have legalized some undocumented immigrants. And Rand got attacked by Trump supporters for including that in his plan! Now Trump admits (again) that his plan includes legalizing some undocumented immigrants. Just admit it. You've been had. You've been totally had.

[jmdrake]

If someone has been here for 10 years and paying taxes, I never had a problem with that.

You know that's basically the argument the pro amnesty politicians make right? There are supposedly undocumented immigrants who have been here for 10 years and have been paying taxes and obeying laws (other than immigration laws) and those undocumented immigrants should have a chance at the American dream? Seriously, if that is what you believe then you could have supported Marco Rubio's position on immigration.

[Zippyjuan]

Ron Paul: http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Immigration.htm


Sending 12M illegals home won't & shouldn't happen

Even with a healthy economy and stricter border controls, the issue of what to do with twelve-million-plus illegals already here would persist. One side says use the U.S. Army, round them up, and ship them home. The other side says give them amnesty, make them full-fledged citizens, and reward the lawbreakers, thus insulting and unfairly penalizing those who have patiently waited and obeyed our immigration laws. The first choice--sending twelve to fifteen million illegals home--isn't going to happen and should not happen. Neither the determination or the ability to accomplish it exists. Besides, if each case is looked at separately, we would find ourselves splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades, if not their entire life, and who never lived for any length of time in Mexico.
Source: Liberty Defined, by Rep. Ron Paul, p.153 , Apr 19, 2011


Give illegals limbo status: a green card with an asterisk

Immigrants who can't be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem should not be given citizenship--no amnesty should be granted. Maybe a "green card" with an asterisk could be issued. This in-between status, keeping illegal immigrants in limbo, will be said that it will create a class of 2nd-class citizens. Yet it could be argued that it may well allow some immigrants who come here illegally a beneficial status without automatic citizenship--a much better option than deportation.
Source: Liberty Defined, by Rep. Ron Paul, p.156 , Apr 19, 2011

[CPUd]

are you going to delete this thread or change the title now that the story has been debunked as a lie??

In the future will you make sure stories are true instead of posting falsehoods so you can go after trump? I know you say you dont go after anybody but thats clearly a lie so why dont you just do everybody a favor and GTFO this website.


If you hate trump thats fine.. Theres plenty for a libertarian not to like.. but 10 new anti-trump threads a day a fuckin ridiculous and only out you for the insincerity you have.

Again I ask you, who pays you to blog this bullshit, how much do you get paid, and can the rest of us all get jobs there with you????

You seem a bit emotional to be posting in the election forums. I don't go after anyone, who are you going after?

I don't hate Trump, and I'm not really anti-Trump. Since Rand dropped out, I don't care who wins.

[Ender]

hey look,man,, CPUd doesnt go after trump.. he said so.... of course all his actions show otherwise so youd think CPUd would pull the plank out of his eye own first before trying to pull the plank out of Trump's eye.

Huh........ the Law is to pull the plank out of your OWN eye first- so you can see clearly enough to pull the speck of sawdust out your neighbor's.

[CPUd]

https://i.imgur.com/i5f0aUx.jpg

[Leaning Libertarian]

If someone has been here for 10 years and paying taxes, I never had a problem with that. There is mass delusion in a segment of RPF concerning Trump and those here deciding to vote for him for strategic or whatever reasons.

I think this guy's take on the issue of "looking past Trump," makes a bit of sense to me. I dislike both Trump and Clinton. I am relatively sure I dislike Clinton more. I question if my choosing not to vote for Trump, because of my principles, is paving the way for a Clinton presidency.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyqLsQZmBMw

[spudea]

Ron Paul: http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Ron_Paul_Immigration.htm

I wish to emphasize other keywords Ron Paul used:


Neither the determination or the ability to accomplish it exists.
...
...
Immigrants who can't be sent back due to the magnitude of the problem

Deportation can and does happen currently. We need a leader with determination and a compassionate approach to the problem. A leader that won't back down to people that say "OH NOES WE CAN'T DEPORT ANYONE".....

Rand Paul says enforce the law and state and local law enforcement must turn over illegal immigrants to the federal government.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg6ttpadUoo

[spudea]

https://i.imgur.com/i5f0aUx.jpg

Holy shit, didn't you already see this was a false report from univision. Go back and look at post #21.... let it go if you wish to be viewed as unbiased and not attacking any candidates, as you continually claim.

[CPUd]

What Would It Take for Donald Trump to Deport 11 Million and Build a Wall?

Big promises are to be expected from presidential candidates, but reality often intrudes. The elder George Bush broke the “no new taxes” pledge that helped lead to his election. And Barack Obama’s administration has yet to live up to his prediction that his nomination would go down in history as the moment “when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

Donald J. Trump’s vow to restore what he says is America’s lost luster, while perhaps not as flowery, comes with campaign promises that are equally grandiose. But Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, has typically provided scant details on how he might make good on his promises — and ambitious ideas, even the concrete kind, do not always add up.

Central to Mr. Trump’s campaign, and to his national security strategy, is his intent to clamp down on illegal immigration, using a vast deportation “force” to relocate people to the other side of a wall, funded by Mexico, that would stretch nearly the length of the southern border.

Mr. Trump has suggested he will flesh out his ideas in a forthcoming speech. But experts across many fields who have analyzed his plans so far warn that they would come at astronomical costs — whoever paid — and would in many ways defy the logic of science, engineering and law.

Mr. Trump has a simple plan to reduce the population of 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States: Deport them.

How? He says he would follow the example of the military-style roundups authorized by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1954. The initiative, known as Operation Wetback, expelled hundreds of thousands of Mexicans.

Mr. Trump contends that the start of deportations would show immigrants he meant business and prompt many to leave on their own, and that it would take about two years to finish the job. There, the specifics end.

Former senior immigration and border officials are skeptical, to put it mildly. Deportations have peaked recently at about 400,000 a year, so the increase in scale to reach Mr. Trump’s goal would be exponential. And many legal procedures and constitutional constraints on the police did not exist in the Eisenhower era.

“I can’t even begin to picture how we would deport 11 million people in a few years where we don’t have a police state, where the police can’t break down your door at will and take you away without a warrant,” said Michael Chertoff, who led a significant increase in immigration enforcement as the secretary of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush.

Finding those immigrants would be difficult, experts said. Police officers across the country would need to ask people for proof of residency or citizenship during traffic stops and street encounters. The Border Patrol would need highway checkpoints across the Southwest and near the Canadian border. To avoid racial profiling, any American could expect to be stopped and asked for papers.

To achieve millions of deportations, the Obama administration’s focus on deporting serious criminals would have to be scrapped, said Julie Myers Wood, a director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE, under Mr. Bush. “You would not care if the person had a criminal record,” she said.

Large-scale raids, rare under Mr. Obama, would resume at farms, factories, restaurants and construction sites, with agents arresting hundreds of workers and poring over company records. And prosecutors would bring criminal charges against employers hiring unauthorized immigrants.

Mr. Trump has said he would triple ICE’s deportation officers, to 15,000 from about 5,000. But even if that could be accomplished quickly — difficult given the vetting and training required — it would still be insufficient, experts said. The F.B.I. and other agencies would have to set aside some of their missions to help.

John Sandweg, who led ICE for seven months under Mr. Obama, said wholesale deportations could make it easier for immigrant gang members and drug traffickers to escape detection. “If the agents are looking for volume, they won’t spend the time to do the detective work tracking down the high-value bad guy who has fake documents, the hardened criminals in the shadows,” he said.

To prevent flight after arrest, the authorities would have to detain most immigrants awaiting deportation. Existing facilities, with about 34,000 beds, would have to be expanded to hold at least 300,000, Mr. Sandweg estimated, perhaps with tens of thousands of people in detention camps, similar to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

Most deportations must be approved by judges. But backlogs in the 57 immigration courts are already severe, with waits as long as two years for a first hearing. The federal government would have to open dozens of emergency courts and hire hundreds of judges, shortcutting the painstaking selection process.

...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/politics/donald-trump-immigration.html

[CPUd]

March 1 2016

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/29/politics/ted-cruz-new-york-times-immigration-tape/

Related:
Top Trump Surrogate Says Border Wall and Mass Deportation Will Be "Virtual" (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?495531-Top-Trump-Surrogate-Says-Border-Wall-and-Mass-Deportation-Will-Be-quot-Virtual-quot)
Rick Perry: Trump's Mexico wall will be a 'digital wall' (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?497793-Rick-Perry-Trump-s-Mexico-wall-will-be-a-digital-wall)

[r3volution 3.0]

He can use his virtual intelligence and virtual wealth to build the virtual wall.

[nikcers]

He can use his virtual intelligence and virtual wealth to build the virtual wall.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPCzjHPS--U

[CPUd]

Trump ‘wrestling’ with how — and whether — to deport 11 million people

Aides to Donald Trump suggested Sunday that the Republican presidential nominee may be reconsidering his campaign promise to round up and deport 11 million people who are in the United States illegally.

His new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, was asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” if Trump still wants a “deportation force” to remove everyone in the country illegally.

“To be determined,” she said.

Trump is “wrestling” with how to remove those in the country illegally, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., an adviser to Trump on immigration matters, said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

The aides’ comments appeared to be the latest sign that Trump’s newly installed management team may be trying to broaden his appeal to stem his steady fall in the polls with less than three months until Election Day.

Trump has never explained how he intended to find, detain and deport millions of people, many of whom have built businesses and started families in the U.S., or how he would pay for it even if it passed judicial scrutiny.

He has compared his proposal to “Operation Wetback,” a controversial program carried out in 1954 under President Dwight D. Eisenhower. More than 1 million people were apprehended, mostly from border areas in Texas and California, and sent back to Mexico.

Any easing of Trump’s hard-line stance on immigration — which also includes building a wall along the border with Mexico and temporarily banning Muslim immigrants — could alienate some of his most ardent supporters.

After a year of using harsh rhetoric against Latinos, such as calling Mexican migrants rapists and repeatedly attacking a federal judge as unfair because his family was from Mexico, polls show he faces intense opposition among Latinos.

His campaign thus has moved in recent days to soften his edges and to try to shift attention past the turmoil caused by the shake-up of his top management team last week.

In Charlotte, N.C., Trump announced “regret” that some of his heated comments — he didn’t say which — may have caused personal pain. In Fredericksburg, Va., he said the Republican Party must “do better” to reach out to African American voters.

And in New York City Saturday, Trump told his campaign’s newly named Latino advisory council that he wants to find a “humane and efficient” solution to deal with illegal immigration.

He “did not make a firm commitment” to the group on how deportations would work, Sessions said.

Trump is expected to speak about immigration policy Thursday in Colorado. Conway said he will be more specific on his immigration plan “as the weeks unfold.”

“What he supports is to make sure that we enforce the law, that we are respectful of those Americans who are looking for well-paying jobs and that we are fair and humane for those who live among us in this country,” Conway said.

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, has called for providing a path to legal status for some of the people in the country illegally.

A bipartisan immigration reform bill that would have boosted border security while providing a path for citizenship passed the Senate in 2013 but died in the Republican-led House.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-%e2%80%98wrestling%e2%80%99-with-how-%e2%80%94-and-whether-%e2%80%94-to-deport-11-million-people/ar-BBvSY89

[Brian4Liberty]

Interesting quote here. The article includes the standard scare tactics such as "break down your door", checking everyone's "papers", and roadblock checkpoints everywhere, but then adds that Obama has stopped previous enforcement activities that did not effect the general population.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/politics/donald-trump-immigration.html

Large-scale raids, rare under Mr. Obama, would resume at farms, factories, restaurants and construction sites, with agents arresting hundreds of workers and poring over company records. And prosecutors would bring criminal charges against employers hiring unauthorized immigrants.


There will always be some rules or laws. How they are enforced and by whom will always be a debate. What rules to have will always be controversial. The fewer the better.

But to argue that any given law will necessarily result in horrors such as "break down your door", checking everyone's "papers", and roadblock checkpoints everywhere could be applied to almost any law, thus are not valid against any law. Rather, how they are enforced and by whom is a question for any law.

There are laws against murder. Reasonable enforcement of that law does not include continuous questioning of the entire population to look for murderers. But for every law, this must be guarded against. For example, in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, it can and should be argued that excessive and unreasonable tactics were used (city-wide lockdowns and military door to door searches). But this does not make a case for ignoring murder.

It is reasonable to agree with a given law, but also agree on limiting enforcement tactics and by whom.

[Brian4Liberty]

Nah he would not change his mind on this, he said he was going to kick them all out, build the wall and Mexico would pay for it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyaQy52AFOo

[CaptUSA]

Trump is expected to speak about immigration policy Thursday in Colorado. Conway said he will be more specific on his immigration plan “as the weeks unfold.”


As the weeks unfold?! Wasn't this "plan" the basis for his entire primary run?

No matter what he finally comes up with, you can be guaranteed of this: If he would have ran on his final plan during the primary, he would have never had gained such a staunch following. This is the bait and switch con game.

[CaptUSA]

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/113/470/8a1.gif

[silverhandorder]

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/149321013966/the-direct-democracy-president

I started to read Dilbert. I dont agree with Scot Adams philosophically but as far as Trump goes he is 100% right.

[nikcers]

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/113/470/8a1.gif

You never know what you are going to get with Trump, he is actually both. All I know is the establishment hates him, and is getting fucked so I should just close my mouth sit down and shut up. We weren't good enough to fuck the establishment so we are just being jealous, gosh why do we have to be such cucks.

[CPUd]

Interesting quote here. The article includes the standard scare tactics such as "break down your door", checking everyone's "papers", and roadblock checkpoints everywhere, but then adds that Obama has stopped previous enforcement activities that did not effect the general population.



There will always be some rules or laws. How they are enforced and by whom will always be a debate. What rules to have will always be controversial. The fewer the better.

But to argue that any given law will necessarily result in horrors such as "break down your door", checking everyone's "papers", and roadblock checkpoints everywhere could be applied to almost any law, thus are not valid against any law. Rather, how they are enforced and by whom is a question for any law.

There are laws against murder. Reasonable enforcement of that law does not include continuous questioning of the entire population to look for murderers. But for every law, this must be guarded against. For example, in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing, it can and should be argued that excessive and unreasonable tactics were used (city-wide lockdowns and military door to door searches). But this does not make a case for ignoring murder.

It is reasonable to agree with a given law, but also agree on limiting enforcement tactics and by whom.




 The Deportation Machine Obama Built for President Trump

When Barack Obama took office after his 2008 election, he inherited a budding deportation apparatus with its roots in the imagination of the “War on Terror” reactionaries who created the Office of Homeland Security in 2001 (later the Department of Homeland Security). When he leaves office he will leave behind to his successor the most sophisticated and well-funded human-expulsion machine in the history of the country.
...

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-deportation-machine-obama-built-for-president-trump/




I liked the port-a-potty idea better.

[silverhandorder]

I liked the port-a-potty idea better.

I liked it when you went missing for a day.

[CPUd]

I liked it when you went missing for a day.

Did you have something to contribute, or are you just doing personal attacks now?

[silverhandorder]

Did you have something to contribute, or are you just doing personal attacks now?

Quality wise my post is much better than what I quoted.

[CPUd]

+1 for trial balloons:



Trump vows 'fair, but firm' on illegal immigration

NEW YORK (AP) — Republican Donald Trump promised on Monday to be "fair, but firm" toward the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally, a shift in tone that raised questions on whether he's backtracking from previous pledges to push for mass deportations.

The billionaire businessman, whose hard-line approach to immigration and fierce rhetoric propelled him to the GOP presidential nomination, insisted that he's not "flip-flopping" on the divisive issue as he works to broaden his support two and half months to the general election. Polls show him trailing Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in both national polls and battleground states.

But in a meeting with Hispanic activists on Saturday, Trump indicated that he was open to considering allowing those who have not committed crimes, beyond their immigration offenses, to obtain some form of legal status — though attendees made clear Trump has yet to make up his mind.

"The impression I got was that the campaign is working on substantive policy to help the undocumented that are here, including some type of status so they would not be deported," said Pastor Mario Bramnick, president of the Hispanic Israel Leadership Coalition, who was in attendance.

Bramnick said he'd left the meeting "very encouraged" and "hopeful in anticipating the policy and language" Trump's campaign is expected to release in the coming weeks.

Any walk-back would mark a dramatic reversal for Trump, whose tough stand on immigration has been the driving issue of his campaign. During the GOP primary, Trump vowed to use a "deportation force" to round up and deport the millions of people living in the country illegally — a proposal that excited many of his core supporters, but alienated Hispanic voters who could be pivotal in key states.

Trump said in an interview with "Fox & Friends" on Monday that he was "working with a lot of people in the Hispanic community to try and come up with an answer."

"We want to come up with a really fair, but firm answer. It has to be very firm. But we want to come up with something fair," he said.

...

https://www.apnews.com/014bfff472c3426abeb0d461ac96e0f0/Trump-vows-'fair,-but-firm'-on-illegal-immigration

[CPUd]

Trump open to 'softening' some immigration laws

Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he’s open to a “softening” of laws affecting undocumented immigrants, further distancing himself from his previous hardline proposals.

Trump’s latest explanation of his immigration views came during a town hall with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, who asked the nominee, "Is there any part of the law that you might be able to change that would accommodate those people that contribute to society, have been law-abiding, have kids here? … Would there be any rule in your mind?"

"There certainly can be a softening because we're not looking to hurt people," Trump replied, according to reporters who saw video of the town hall. "We want people — we have some great people in this country."

But Trump also told Hannity that he’s not backing off some of his more controversial proposals, including a plan to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“It's going to happen, 100 percent,” Trump said.

Donald Trump's running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, echoed the apparent softening on immigration. In an interview with CBS's Major Garrett, Pence said that the wall will be built, but details about Trump's plan "will continue to be worked out in the days ahead."

Trump has appeared to wobble on his most incendiary immigration proposals since his campaign shakeup last week that included the promotion of Kellyanne Conway, a respected Republican pollster, as his campaign manager.

BuzzFeed reported on Saturday that Trump had told Hispanic leaders that he had indicated an openness to legalization for undocumented immigrants — a report that Trump’s campaign pushed back on — and Conway on Sunday said Trump’s plan for a mass deportation force was “to be determined.”

Trump was also due to give a major immigration speech on Thursday in Colorado, but that event was scrapped without explanation.

During the town hall on Tuesday, Trump offered a few more clues about his latest thinking on the issue that has fueled much of his campaign, mentioning the idea of having a “merit system” for immigrants.

He also said more has to be done about the people who have spent “years and years” in line waiting to become citizens.

"They’re great people in some cases, and I guess in some cases, maybe not,” he said. “But you have really great people wanting and so proudly wanting to come into our country and now what you’re doing is you take people away from that line."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-border-wall-227335

[silverhandorder]

Politico. You always lie.

[r3volution 3.0]

http://i.imgur.com/AdKdjiel.jpg

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again....

...but already it was impossible to say which was which.

[CPUd]

...
6:30 p.m. update: Cameras were rolling inside downtown’s ACL Live at the Moody Theater for a special to air over two nights on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show.

Trump told Hannity — who has emerged as a leading supporter of the Republican nominee — that he will stop illegal immigration.

“We’re going to build a wall. It’s 100 percent. It’s so simple,” Trump said during the town hall, rejecting speculation that he was backing away from his campaign promise to erect a barrier between Mexico and the United States.

Asked by Hannity if there was room to accommodate immigrants who have been law abiding and “contribute to society,” Trump indicated that there could be a “softening because we’re not looking to hurt (such) people.”

The remarks follow contradictory signals from the Trump campaign this week on whether the candidate is abandoning his earlier pledge to deport 11 million people living in the country illegally.

“You’re reversing yourself!” shouted one person in the audience.

“That’s a flip-flop, Donald!” shouted a second.

“It’s called evolution!” another audience member replied.

...

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/donald-trump-in-texas-to-raise-money-rally-in-aust/nsKh4/

[r3volution 3.0]

“You’re reversing yourself!” shouted one person in the audience.

“That’s a flip-flop, Donald!” shouted a second.

“It’s called evolution!” another audience member replied.

ROFL

That third guy must post on RPF.

[Antischism]

Trump's Deportation Plan: 'Do the Same Thing' as Obama But 'With a Lot More Energy'


... Trump then added that "everybody else" will go through an existing process already being used by the Obama administration, although the GOP nominee said he would enforce the law "perhaps with a lot more energy."

"As far as everybody else, we're going to go through the process," Trump said. "What people don't know is that Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country. Bush, the same thing. Lots of people were brought out of the country with the existing laws. Well, I'm going to do the same thing."

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/trumps-deportation-plan-do-same-thing-obama-lot-more-energy-n636376

[jmdrake]

The title of this thread needs to be changed. This is no longer "disputed." Today Trump endorsed amnesty. He said Obama is getting "tremendous numbers of people out of the country" and he (Trump) is "gonna do the same" but of course "with more energy." Trump wants to get the "criminals" out (what republican doesn't?) but he said there needed to be a "process" for everybody else. :rolleyes:

[jmdrake]

http://i.imgur.com/AdKdjiel.jpg

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again....

...but already it was impossible to say which was which.

You owe me a new keyboard. I'm never going to get the vomit smell out.

[TheTexan]

Maria Ramirez and David Adams contributed to this article.

Ya ok, go back to Univision

[RandallFan]

Trump:I will not deport this particular token illegal you put before me on this stage; Jose Gomez, the one legged LGBT illegal living in the suburbs of Phoenix who has an IQ of 200 & performs pro bono ear surgery"

CPUD: Cuck! Cuck! Cuck!

What Republicans were doing in 2013 was actually trying to help Obama deport less people, which was totally retarded.

Maintaining the same laws is a good line.

Rand was willing to legalize 12 million illegals in 24 hours if Chuck Schumer promised to not let them vote.


http://cis.org/OpedsandArticles/Rand-Paul-Immigration-Compromise



That could happen tomorrow," Paul said on ABC's "This Week."


Ted Cruz has never seen a 'Hispanic panhandler;' no comment on African-Americans


http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/Ted-Cruz-has-never-seen-a-Hispanic-panhandler-6233768.php


I don't think I've ever seen a Hispanic panhandler. And the reason is in our community it would be shameful to be begging on the streets.


The title of this thread needs to be changed. This is no longer "disputed." Today Trump endorsed amnesty. He said Obama is getting "tremendous numbers of people out of the country" and he (Trump) is "gonna do the same" but of course "with more energy." Trump wants to get the "criminals" out (what republican doesn't?) but he said there needed to be a "process" for everybody else. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif


The process might be. Go back to Mexico. Go study Brain surgery in Mexico's University. Don't let the US taxpayer subsidize you and then apply again. If you are just a deadbeat ebt waving slob you dont get back in.