Immigration is completely out of control (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SystemShock

    Uh yu ka t'ann
    Joined
    May 17, 2019
    Messages
    2,760
    Reaction score
    2,724
    Location
    Xibalba
    Offline
    A couple of days ago, one of the main US-MX border points of entry was blocked by 1000's of migrants demanding entry into the country, which caused chaos for those who lawfully cross the border on business, for work, or for delivery of goods, both ways.

    Lawful border crossings are getting progressively worse across the border, and drug cartels are finding it easier to move product, as the CBP has to transfer personnel and efforts to the processing of migrants.

    It's not different on MX's South border. Yesterday, ~5000 migrants stormed into Chiapas all the way to the INM building (INM is immigration) running over fences, barricades, and elements of the National Guard. They are now taking over an ecological park in Tapachula, Chiapas, which it's going to be severely affected, as it's been the case with just about everywhere migrants squat.

    Unfortunately, Juan Trump (that's Donald Trump's pet name for the President of México) was bamboozled by his "friend" Donald into making MX a "lobby" for migrants trying to reach the U.S.

    Many people would argue that migrants are "good for the economy", but that is not always the case. Billions of dollars leave the U.S. economy every year, because migrants send money from the U.S. to other countries to support families there. The biggest destinations are India and MX, to the tune of 100 billion dollars in 2023 alone, according to the Bank of México (kind of like the MX version of the Fed). These billions of dollars do not circulate in the U.S. economy.

    Speaking of inflation, the past year, the U.S. dollar has lost ~20% of its value against the MX peso. One of the main reasons for it, is the amount of money being sent to MX from the U.S. And MX is the U.S. 2nd largest trading partner.

    Gregg Abbott is a lot of things, but I don't blame him for his attempts at curbing the hordes of people demanding entry into the U.S., even the busing of migrants to other States, making some put their money where their mouth is, like the Mayor of NYC, who was so welcoming of migrants, until he he got a taste, then went crying to the federal government for more money, while the shelters were at full capacity; shelters which BTW serve the NYC poor as well.

    And please, no one mention a wall. There is a wall. A wall can be climbed; a wall can be dug under.; holes can be punched through walls.
     
    Many of Biden’s executive orders on the border were undoing Trumps executive orders on the border. Biden's order didn't make it hard for people to get into the country. They made it easier. See parole for an example.


    I understand about asylum laws, but why would he tell them to surge to the border? That's much more of an advertisement than what you claim of Republicans.

    That bill was a joke and it wouldn't have done much to fix the border. It was mainly window dressing to get the money for Ukraine, Isreal, Yemen, etc. It also gave more money to the NGOs who are helping facilitate all the migrants.

    The House passed an Immigration bill a while back. The Senate ignored it.

    The Democrats want amnesty for all the illegal immigrants. That's the endgame for them in regards to immigration. They only recently claimed to want to fix the border when they realized they couldn't get the Ukraine money without it.

    What type of parole is Biden giving that wasn't available before?

    I've heard people start saying "parole" lately like it is a new cool catchphrase, but i am not sure they really understand what they are talking about.

    When Trump was president, they were paroled in under 212d5 or INA 236 depending on what country they were from.

    212d5 is a humanitarian parole that people from Cuba, or a country that has an active registration for TPS.

    236 is a release from custody, for someone who is pending a hearing before the immigration court.

    These are the same two types of parole being used now.

    So what exactly do people mean when they say Biden changed "parole"? Surely you know, since you said it.

    I don't need a link to an article that you don't understand, just explain to me in your own words what you mean when you say it.
     
    What type of parole is Biden giving that wasn't available before?

    I've heard people start saying "parole" lately like it is a new cool catchphrase, but i am not sure they really understand what they are talking about.

    When Trump was president, they were paroled in under 212d5 or INA 236 depending on what country they were from.

    212d5 is a humanitarian parole that people from Cuba, or a country that has an active registration for TPS.

    236 is a release from custody, for someone who is pending a hearing before the immigration court.

    These are the same two types of parole being used now.

    So what exactly do people mean when they say Biden changed "parole"? Surely you know, since you said it.

    I don't need a link to an article that you don't understand, just explain to me in your own words what you mean when you say it.
    The number of migrants allowed into our nation through immigration parole averaged 5,623 per year under the Obama and Trump administrations. That number increased to 1.2 million in 2023 under the Biden administration.
     
    The number of migrants allowed into our nation through immigration parole averaged 5,623 per year under the Obama and Trump administrations. That number increased to 1.2 million in 2023 under the Biden administration.

    immigration parole isn't a thing.
     
    The House passed an Immigration bill a while back. The Senate ignored it.

    You referring to H.R.2? The bill without a single democrat co-sponsor? Were democrats even invited to participate in the creation of that? The democrats in the Senate worked with Republicans to craft a bill that gave both sides things that they wanted. THAT is how you get legislation done. Why won't the republicans in the House do the same.

    The Democrats want amnesty for all the illegal immigrants. That's the endgame for them in regards to immigration.

    Can you point out the part of the senate border bill that grants amnesty to all illegal immigrants?

    They only recently claimed to want to fix the border when they realized they couldn't get the Ukraine money without it.

    Really? And what happened? Republicans negotiated with them a bill that gave republicans much of what they wanted, and gave the democrats the Ukraine aide they wanted, and then after the Golden Cow told them not to pass it, they voted against the bill that they negotiated....and then turned around, and advanced a stand-alone Ukraine aid bill. So, the Senate is likely to pass a stand-alone Ukraine aid bill, and the republicans get none of the border stuff they wanted in return, because of Trump being unwilling to let them have something to campaign on. It will be interesting to see if any of the republicans who refused to pass this bill that THEY negotiated because of Trump end up losing their seats. It would be karma for them to give up something that they could campaign on, something that the republicans love to scream about, and end up losing their jobs because of it.
     

    Seems like that article is talking about TPS, but it is hard to tell because the author has no idea what they are talking about.

    Biden hasn't changed anything about parole, or how we parole people into the country.

    He has added a few countries to TPS, but they don't want to talk about what has actually happened, because then they have to discuss what TPS is and what the legal standards are. If they do that, then it becomes clear what he has done is what the programs require.
     
    It’s the Rs who have demonstrated dereliction of duty. I thought it was fairly obvious.
    Your projection use to frustrate me, now it has just become comical. You will literally believe whatever your party tells you and then when it is proven to be wrong (we could name a few) you act like it never happened and then just project on the Rep.

    Granted, most of the time the Rep are too blame as well since they are really just working for the same people and for the same money.
     
    Come on Jim. Do you think we are talking about literally closing the border so nobody comes across?

    What we mean is controling the flow of all the people coming into the country now. All the executive order that Trump had used for Immigration Biden got rid of immediately.

    Republicans are the reason why we have a surge of people coming to the border? That's hilarious


    and actually, yeah, the POTUS can 'just shut down the border' if it holds up in court. With both sides calling it an 'invasion' it might hold up this time. They won't though, too much money.

    https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/feb/02/ask-politifact-can-joe-biden-shut-down-the-border/

    • An immigration law provision allows presidents to stop people from entering the U.S. if their entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
    • Presidents have used that power to varying success.
    • Courts blocked former President Donald Trump when he invoked that provision to block people from applying for asylum at U.S. borders. But he was eventually successful when he used it to order a travel ban.
     
    if the president can close the border, why didn't Trump? He pretended to build a wall, but why didn't he just straight up close the border?
    He tried, the courts blocked him but he was able to use the same law for the travel ban that was upheld by the courts.
     
    and actually, yeah, the POTUS can 'just shut down the border' if it holds up in court. With both sides calling it an 'invasion' it might hold up this time. They won't though, too much money.

    https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/feb/02/ask-politifact-can-joe-biden-shut-down-the-border/

    • An immigration law provision allows presidents to stop people from entering the U.S. if their entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
    • Presidents have used that power to varying success.
    • Courts blocked former President Donald Trump when he invoked that provision to block people from applying for asylum at U.S. borders. But he was eventually successful when he used it to order a travel ban.
    No it won’t hold up in court. Which is why Trump didn’t do it.
     
    and actually, yeah, the POTUS can 'just shut down the border' if it holds up in court. With both sides calling it an 'invasion' it might hold up this time. They won't though, too much money.

    https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/feb/02/ask-politifact-can-joe-biden-shut-down-the-border/

    • An immigration law provision allows presidents to stop people from entering the U.S. if their entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
    • Presidents have used that power to varying success.
    • Courts blocked former President Donald Trump when he invoked that provision to block people from applying for asylum at U.S. borders. But he was eventually successful when he used it to order a travel ban.

    Do you think this authority is talking about people entering the country illegally? lol

    It is talking about at ports of entry.

    It is already illegal for people to enter the country outside of ports of entry.
     
    Do you think this authority is talking about people entering the country illegally? lol

    It is talking about at ports of entry.

    It is already illegal for people to enter the country outside of ports of entry.
    So all laws that can be broken are not valid? Interesting take. Did you need to stretch before that mental summersault or just wing it like we did when we were young?
     
    Your projection use to frustrate me,
    You can indicate what part of what I said was projection. We are talking about the GOP asking for a border deal, being given the chance to do a meaningful bi-partisan bill that gives them almost everything they want without any of the Dem stuff that they don’t want. It was negotiated by one of the most conservative R senators, with input from McConnell and Graham (and probably others I just read those for sure). And when the bill is ready, Trump tells them to abandon it because he doesn’t want Biden to get credit for it. And the entire Congressional GOP rolls over and shows their bellies.

    That is a dereliction of duty. Putting party before country. No projection at all.
     
    No it won’t hold up in court. Which is why Trump didn’t do it.
    So, it can be done as long as the burden of proof is met? You all just told me that it was impossible because it was against the law? Sounds like it can be done if the burden of proof is met that immigration is detrimental to the US.
     
    So all laws that can be broken are not valid? Interesting take. Did you need to stretch before that mental summersault or just wing it like we did when we were young?

    I was just pointing out that you didn't know what you were talking about.
     
    You can indicate what part of what I said was projection. We are talking about the GOP asking for a border deal, being given the chance to do a meaningful bi-partisan bill that gives them almost everything they want without any of the Dem stuff that they don’t want. It was negotiated by one of the most conservative R senators, with input from McConnell and Graham (and probably others I just read those for sure). And when the bill is ready, Trump tells them to abandon it because he doesn’t want Biden to get credit for it. And the entire Congressional GOP rolls over and shows their bellies.

    That is a dereliction of duty. Putting party before country. No projection at all.
    Why does it have to be tied in with proxy war funding? Is the congress unable to pass single line bills? They are but I wonder why?
     
    So, it can be done as long as the burden of proof is met? You all just told me that it was impossible because it was against the law? Sounds like it can be done if the burden of proof is met that immigration is detrimental to the US.
    How are you going to prove that immigration is detrimental to the US?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom