Trump Administration Wanted to Use Government Policy to Punish Political Enemies

[fskimospy]

Where should illegal aliens go? They can't be kept out or detained long term and now they can't be sent to areas that are openly accepting to illegal aliens. I guess Democrats can't gerrymander if their future voters are concentrated in the "sanctuary" cities.

If the government chooses not to detain them or deport them then they should release them. There is no logical, valid enforcement reason to expend large amounts of resources busing people hundreds or thousands of miles just to release them somewhere else. You have to buy/hire the buses, you have to provide these people with food and shelter on the trip, you have to provide medical care if there's a problem, you have to provide border patrol agents to provide security as they are still under detention, etc, etc.

Funny how conservatives are all about government waste unless its government waste to accomplish corrupt political goals and to punish brown people. Then you guys are all about the waste.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Where should illegal aliens go?

Trump properties. It's not like they are a stranger to them.

They can't be kept out or detained long term and now they can't be sent to areas that are openly accepting to illegal aliens

That would be mostly on the Republicans and Trumpoids. The solution was and still is to hire enough staff to process all of them in a timely manner. Cheaper than a wall by far and eliminates "catch and release" which exists solely because the Feds won't live up to their obligation which is why sanctuary cities exist as well. So where is that in the budget? Oh it's not, it's worse than ever with a policy of reducing even lawful immigration.

I guess Democrats can't gerrymander if their future voters are concentrated in the "sanctuary" cities.

This sounds like the "witch" sketch in the Holy Grail. Let's do that the right way though. There are sanctuary cities because Trump and others have blocked the resources needed to process immigrants- "ridiculous" I believe was the term Trump used. If the resources aren't given then immigrants are put in camps or cages. If people are put into confinement for open ended imprisonment then the courts step in. If the courts step in then they are going to not support what amounts to illegal detention nor did they violate the idea of having a legal opportunity to immigrate from being voided hence "catch and release".

The ultimate solution is to provide the "ridiculous" number of people needed to do this right in a timely way. Once the backlog is processed then we scale back as appropriate.

Democrats? Please, this is the Republicans as a bloc and whatever Democrats side against the appropriate allocation of resources and "gerrymandering" isn't a place you really want to go at all.

 

[brandonbull]

Illegal aliens should be deported back to their home country, but these are not illegal aliens. These are sanctuary seekers, which is completely legal.

Unless they are coming directly from Mexico, they are not legal asylum seekers.

 

[fskimospy]

Unless they are coming directly from Mexico, they are not legal asylum seekers.

US law disagrees. If you don’t like it, get Congress to pass a new law.

 

[brandonbull]

Decisions on where they should go should be determined based on what's in the best interests of the US and the people concerned, rather than what the president thinks will hurt his political opponents more. Kind of a basis for good government, don't you think? But it's not like this administration likes to make informed decisions, so there shouldn't be any real surprise here.

You aren't really concerned about gerrymandering either, otherwise you would have complained about the Republicans in your post instead, seeing as they are the prime culprits. Especially when there is no statistically significant evidence of illegal immigrants voting.

"Decisions on where they should go should be determined based on what's in the best interests of the US" That is a vague concept. Most rational people would consider uncontrolled flow of people into the US would not be in the best interests of the US, but I guess that depends on what the definition of "best interests" is. Right?

 

[K1052]

"Decisions on where they should go should be determined based on what's in the best interests of the US" That is a vague concept. Most rational people would consider uncontrolled flow of people into the US would not be in the best interests of the US, but I guess that depends on what the definition of "best interests" is. Right?

People being processed for asylum claims are not an uncontrolled flow, notwithstanding the government's staggering incompetence (arguably intentional at this point) at handling it.

 

[fskimospy]

"Decisions on where they should go should be determined based on what's in the best interests of the US" That is a vague concept. Most rational people would consider uncontrolled flow of people into the US would not be in the best interests of the US, but I guess that depends on what the definition of "best interests" is. Right?

Asylum decisions are being made in a systematic way in accordance with longstanding US laws. It is the literal opposite of an uncontrolled flow. This is the same bullshit conservatives always try to pull. If you oppose their irrational restrictionist immigration stance you must be for no restrictions at all.

It’s not just illegal immigration or asylum seekers either, conservatives are also furiously trying to limit legal immigration, something the US instead needs to vastly increase.

We need more more more immigrants.

 

[K1052]

It’s not just illegal immigration or asylum seekers either, conservatives are also furiously trying to limit legal immigration, something the US instead needs to vastly increase.

Trump could have gotten his wall if he didn't try to re-trade the deal and drastically cut legal immigration. Basically their negotiating position is that they have to get everything they want (far lower overall immigration) and give very little or nothing in the bargain, the results speak for themselves since Trump has dramatically failed at every immigration bill or deal he's tried. His preferred solution got the least amount of votes in the senate when they voted on plans.

When people complain the Democrats won't compromise it's really a complaint that the Dems won't just unilaterally capitulate to nativist (and arguably racist) demands.

 

[SMOGZINN]

When people complain the Democrats won't compromise it's really a complaint that the Dems won't just unilaterally capitulate to nativist (and arguably racist) demands.

You give us everything we want and in return we won't burn everything down in a fit of rage, at least for a few weeks. That is their idea of compromise.

 

[fskimospy]

You give us everything we want and in return we won't burn everything down in a fit of rage, at least for a few weeks. That is their idea of compromise.

I think the disconnect mostly comes from the fact that Republicans are lying about their immigration preferences.

What they really want is fewer brown people in America but they can’t say that out loud because it’s racist. Instead they say they want fewer illegal immigrants, which makes it into a law and order issue.

Success, right? No! The problem with this strategy is that Democrats are perfectly willing to trade a crackdown on illegal immigration in exchange for more/easier legal immigration. That means while you get fewer illegal immigrants you still get more brown people, which is the thing they actually cared about from the start.

I think that’s why anti-immigration conservatives never want to make deals on immigration. They can’t say what they actually want and every compromise just makes things browner and therefore worse from their perspective.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think that’s why anti-immigration conservatives never want to make deals on immigration. They can’t say what they actually want and every compromise just makes things browner and therefore worse from their perspective.

I agree. The good news is that they are working on that problem and soon they will feel comfortable just saying what they mean.

 

[cytg111]

Where should illegal aliens go? They can't be kept out or detained long term and now they can't be sent to areas that are openly accepting to illegal aliens. I guess Democrats can't gerrymander if their future voters are concentrated in the "sanctuary" cities.

How many self inflicted gun shot wounds to the head can one person survive? Amazing...

 

[Viper1j]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immi...839bc8-5c68-11e9-9625-01d48d50ef75_story.html



Another day, another preposterous thing out of this White House. Pretty disgusting breech of public trust to try and punish perceived enemies using government policy. "That's a nice sanctuary city you've got there, it would be a shame if some ICE detainees were released into it..."

Let me see if I have this right.. They're offering a free bus ride to where these people were going to most likely go anyway, and that is somehow "punishing" Democrats?

Trump has serious issues. Maybe he was dropped on his head as an infant... Like out of a two story window. I wonder if he's ever heard of Greyhound. If they don't like where they're dropped off, $75.00 will get you anywhere in the country.

 

[K1052]

Per multiple outlets Stephen Miller has been invited to testify in front of House Oversight. I assume he will decline then face a subpoena.

 

[Jhhnn]

Let me see if I have this right.. They're offering a free bus ride to where these people were going to most likely go anyway, and that is somehow "punishing" Democrats?

Trump has serious issues. Maybe he was dropped on his head as an infant... Like out of a two story window. I wonder if he's ever heard of Greyhound. If they don't like where they're dropped off, $75.00 will get you anywhere in the country.

View attachment 5291

It's pandering to the "Fuck you, Libtards!" sentiment among the Trump base. That's all it's supposed to accomplish.