Tag Archives: DACA

Amnesty Is A Faceplant, by Ol’ Remus

It’s never different this time. From Ol’ Remus at theburningplatform.com:

Once again the citizenry is being swindled. It’s official. Amnesty is on offer. No matter how many conditions are attached, putting amnesty on the table is a faceplant. Immigration law hasn’t been enforced since the amnesty of the 1986 and, without enforcement, electing representatives and passing laws mean nothing. Why should anyone believe it’s different this time? It’s never different this time.

Don Surber is an astute Appalachian whose opinions I generally rate with rare earths and natural pearls, but he goes all Scott Adams about this:

One has to understand President Trump’s plan to rid the nation of two bills that were never introduced as legislation, but which the media treats as law. DACA and DREAMers would reward 1.8 million illegal aliens with citizenship—despite their being here illegally. Trump wants to end these Fake Laws, and gave Congress until March to enact legislation, or his administration would enforce the real law.

And here’s the Machiavellian calculation according to Bill Mitchell:

If Democrats accept Trump’s DACA deal they alienate their far left base by caving on the wall. If they reject the deal, they alienate everyone else by being #AmericaLast. By sweetening a deal Democrat leadership CANNOT accept, he completely marginalizes them for 11/18. Get it?

Good ol’ 3D chess, tell me more, it all sounds so clever and exciting. Except liberal judges would strike down all the conditions for amnesty and they know it. They’ll get a pass and a tearful apology, just as they did the last time, because immigration law is never the law, it’s a suggestion, a humble supplication to the court, meaning those worthies slavering to be stroked at Georgetown cocktail parties for their brave service to humanity.

To continue reading: Amnesty Is A Faceplant

Please Don‘t Shut Down The Government, Democrats, Because That Would Be Awful (Not), by Kurt Schlichter

Shutting down the government for a while over the “Dreamers” controversy isn’t really going to upset too many Trump voters. From Kurt Schlichter at theburningplatform.com:

What a tragedy it would be if Democrats made good on their threat and decided DACA was so important that they must shut down the federal government over it. Please don’t! Why, I’d be heartbroken if the government did less and a bunch of foreigners didn’t get rewarded for ignoring our laws. I think this is just the right hill for the Democrats to choose to fight to the death on, and I encourage them to do so. Throw us right in that briar patch, because you are smart and savvy and there’s no way a big dummy like Trump could beat you and make you look like fools.

You remember DACA? It’s an acronym that stands for “That Thing Democrats Want To Use To Fill The Voter Rolls With Foreigners And GOP Donors Want To Use To Get More Serfs To Work For Peanuts While Actual Americans Get Shafted And Called ‘Racist’ If They Dare Complain.” The Democrats desperately want DACA because you Normal people have let them down and voted for your own interests rather than in the way Nancy Pelosi instructed you. Bad, bad electorate! You definitely need to be replaced.

The GOP wants it because its big money donors want it because you actual Americans demand to be treated with respect by your employers and, well, paying Americans what they’re worth is bad for business. And the Senate GOP Sissy Caucus of sanctimonious twits wants it because it gives them a chance to pose and preen and pretend to have the moral high ground over those wicked evil bad bad bad Republicans who want to do what actual Republican voters want done instead of being guided by the eccentric moral compass that Jeff Flake keeps inside himself right next to his head.

The “Schumerhole” controversy arose because Donald Trump indicated that giving Big Amnesty everything it wanted, and in return allowing him to totally alienate his base, was a bad deal. “Perhaps creating a controversy wherein a bunch of liberals and simpering Republican Fredocons would go into full fake high-dudgeon mode might coerce Trump into doing something he was not inclined to do,” thought some dummy who had apparently not paid any attention to how Trump operates for a single second in the last two-and-a-half years.

 

Dreamers Dreaming Dreams, by James Howard Kunstler

The DACA “dreamer” issue should rightly be resolved by Congress. From James Howard Kunstler at kunstler.com:

Hurricanes Harvey and Irma are so out of the news now that people not listening to the mold grow in their sweltering bedrooms probably think these events had something to do with the Confederate defeat. Both The New York Times and the WashPo are much more concerned this morning with doings on the planet Saturn, and the career moves of fashion icon Chelsea Manning, which is perhaps how things should be in Attention Deficit Nation. Standing by on developments there….

In the meantime, personally, I think it would be cruel to deport fully acculturated and Americanized young adults to Mexico and Central America. But there should be no question that it’s up to congress to figure out what to do about the DACA kids, and put it into coherent law. The Golden Golem of Greatness was correct to serve the ball into congress’s court. The suave and charming Mr. Obama only punted the action on that problem, and rather cynically too, I suspect, since he knew the next president would be stuck with it.

It’s hard to overcome the sentimental demagoguery this quandary fetches up. The so-called Dreamers are lately portrayed in the media as a monoculture of spectacularly earnest high-achievers, all potential Harvard grads, and future Silicon Valley millionaires working tirelessly to add value to the US economy. This, again personally, I doubt , and there’s also room to doubt that they are uniformly acculturated and Americanized as claimed by the journalists cherry-picking their stories to support the narrative that national borders and immigration laws are themselves cruel anachronisms that need to be opposed.

That Dem / Prog narrative has been suspiciously hypocritical for years — the insistence on referring to anybody here illegally as “undocumented,” as if their citizenship status was due to a mere clerical error, and also the obvious pandering for votes among the fast-growing Hispanic demographic by pretending that boundaries shouldn’t matter. Trump’s infamous “wall” is actually just a metaphor for a political faction that believes boundaries do matter, especially in law, where ambiguity is a vice.

To continue reading: Dreamers Dreaming Dreams

A ‘Read-My-Lips’ Moment for Trump? by Patrick J. Buchanan

Much of Trump’s base is angry at his recent machinations on immigration. From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

“Having cut a deal with Democrats for help with the debt ceiling, will Trump seek a deal with Democrats on amnesty for the ‘Dreamers’ in return for funding for border security?”

The answer to that question, raised in my column a week ago, is in. Last night, President Donald Trump cut a deal with “Chuck and Nancy” for amnesty for 800,000 recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program who came here illegally as youngsters, in return for Democratic votes for more money for border security.

According to preening Minority Leader Pelosi, the agreement contains not a dime for Trump’s Wall, and the “Dreamers” are to be put on a long glide “path to U.S. citizenship.”

Trump denies this is amnesty, and says the Wall comes later.

Fallout? Among the most enthusiastic of Trump backers, disbelief, disillusionment and wonderment at where we go from here.

Trump’s debt-ceiling deal cut the legs out from under the GOP budget hawks. But amnesty would pull the rug out from under all the folks at those rallies who cheered Trump’s promise to preserve the country they grew up in from this endless Third World invasion.

For make no mistake. If amnesty is granted for the 800,000, that will be but the first wave. “There are reasons no country has a rule that if you sneak in as a minor you’re a citizen,” writes Mickey Kaus, author of “The End of Equality,” in The Washington Post.

“We’d be inviting the world. … (An amnesty) would have a knock-on effect. Under ‘chain migration’ rules established in 1965 … new citizens can bring in their siblings and adult children, who can bring in their siblings and in-laws until whole villages have moved to the United States.

“(T)oday’s 690,000 dreamers would quickly become millions of newcomers who may well be low-skilled and who would almost certainly include the parents who brought them — the ones who in theory are at fault.”

To continue reading: A ‘Read-My-Lips’ Moment for Trump?

 

 

Immigrant Children and the Rule of Law, by Andrew J. Napolitano

Andrew J. Napolitano looks dispassionately at the laws involving immigrant children. From Napolitano at lewrockwell.com:

Earlier this week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that in six months, the Department of Justice will begin the long process for deportation proceedings against 800,000 young people who came to America as babies and young children in the care of their parents and others because those entries into this country were and remain unlawful.

When President Barack Obama signed numerous executive orders attempting to set forth the conditions under which illegally immigrated adults whose children were born here could lawfully remain here, he was challenged in federal court and he lost. Sessions believes that the government would lose again if it declined to deport those who came here illegally as babies and young children.

Here is the back story.

Shortly after President Obama formalized two programs, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (commonly known as DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (commonly, DAPA), in a series of executive orders, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled that DAPA — the orders protecting undocumented immigrants who are the parents of children born here — was unconstitutional.

Before signing his executive orders, Obama tried to persuade Congress to amend federal immigration laws so as to permit those who came here illegally and bore children here and those who came here illegally as infants to remain here with work permits, high school diplomas, Social Security numbers, jobs and other indicia of stability and permanence. After Congress declined to vote on the Obama proposals, he authored his now-famous DACA and DAPA executive orders. He basically decided to do on his own what Congress had declined to do legislatively.

But Obama’s executive orders were not novel; they merely formalized what every president since Ronald Reagan — including President Donald Trump — has effectively done. Each has declined to deport undocumented immigrants who bore children here or who were brought here as young children. President Obama alone showed the courage to put this in writing, thereby giving immigrants notice of what they need to do to avoid deportation and the government notice of whose deportations should not occur.

To continue reading: Immigrant Children and the Rule of Law

DACA Repeal Predictably Results in Empty Leftist Outrage, by Ben Isaac

President Obama thought he could wave a wand and change immigration law. President Trump thinks differently and is putting immigration law where it belongs…with the US Congress. From Ben Isaac at fmshooter.com:

In a time where many of the nation’s thoughts and resources are consumed by the ongoing natural disaster crisis in Houston, President Trump’s administration charged forward in pushing through some critical campaign agenda policies, one of which was the rescinding of former President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in an announcement Tuesday morningdescribed Obama’s 2012 order as “an unconstitutional exercise of authority by the Executive Branch”.

The details of the order to rescind have been laid out as a delayed cancellation of the Obama executive order, in order to put pressure on Congress to author a law that addresses immigration reform as a whole. President Trump has vowed to take matters into his own hands if such a task is not completed in 6 months. If Trump had not issued the order, the law was likely to be struck down in federal court later this month, as a hearing was scheduled to respond to a challenge made by 10 states.

Despite the fact that President Trump’s only action was to reverse an unconstitutional law and order a return to enforcing laws already on the books, this did not stop vocal leftists from losing their collective mind about the issue, as usual. With echoed screams of familiar liberal “arguments” like “Trump hates minorities” and “Make America Great Again is code for Make America White Again”, Twitter and other forms of social media predictably lit up with the same manufactured outrage from the same pathetic souls who have expressed contempt and despair at practically every turn the President and his staff have made.