Trump on immigration, 14th amendment: the "Votemaster" strikes again!

[RKMBrown]

Internet myth Ronald Reagan regretted legalization The Daily Caller

The public record shows that Reagan never backed down from his long-held support for legalization.

The claim Ed Meese said Reagan had regrets has been bouncing around for decades. Ed Meese could easily have confirmed it in his 2006 piece.

He didn't.

You will not find anything Ed Meese wrote saying it anywhere.

Why do you keep citing to partial quotes of Ed from left wing blog peckerwoods?
Ed Meese We ve Seen the Effect of Amnesty Before

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Trump just handed the Democrats a very nice gift."

Exactly.

 

[RKMBrown]

"Trump just handed the Democrats a very nice gift."

Exactly.

ROFL.. Hillary's going to jail.

 

[tinydancer]

This guy has a excellent elections site and often posts some very sage commentary, like this one:

ElectoralVote

While Mitt Romney merely asked undocumented immigrants to self deport, Donald Trump is going a step further and would deport all 11 or 12 million of them, as described in a

position paper he released yesterday. In a sense, it doesn't matter what his position on immigration is, since he has no chance at becoming President, but in another sense this announcement is a giant problem for the other candidates. They are all going to be asked if they agree with it. To win the primary, they have to agree with it, but to win the general election they have to reject it. You can count on Democratic trackers recording their words in the coming week and saving the footage to play back during the general election, especially in swing states with large populations of Latino citizens, such as Nevada, Colorado, and Virginia. The other candidates would greatly prefer educating the populace about precisely what an email server is and not talk about immigration at all. But Trump is forcing the issue. For the Democrats, this issue is manna from heaven (well, from New York City, actually). All of them support a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, a position that plays a lot better with Latino citizens than deportation...


...Another contentious point in Trump's immigration platform is his desire to end birthright citizenship. He may or may not be aware that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution begins: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States ..." This means that ending birthright citizenship would require repealing part of the Fourteenth Amendment. That process requires the approval of 2/3 majorities of each chamber of Congress and then 3/4 of the states. The President plays no role in the process, so all he could do as President would be to badger Congress and the states to get to work on it.

And that's it in a big nutshell.

Trump just handed the Democrats a very nice gift.

And we know what at least 2 questions in the coming debates are going to be...

BTW, has anyone noticed how often Trump promises things that he cannot even deliver? Now, THAT'S ego.

EGO? EGO?



Ego is when you point to your winning the nomination and claim that the oceans will slow to rise and the planet will begin to heal.

THAT'S A FUCKING EGO!

 

[Kondor3]

As to 'short-sighted'... how so?

You want to all but guarantee an increase in crime and the spread of disease in this country? Not smart. The solution is to control our border, not to try and make our country less safe.

Creating conditions designed to force Illegal Aliens to self-deport is not only 'smart' but also the only practical way to attain that highly desirable outcome.

If they leave then their medical issues and criminal inclinations will no longer be our problem.

Controlling the border is only part of the problem.

The other part is to deal with the 12,000,000 who have already leaked through.

And sending a clear message, using those 12,000,000, that fresh waves of invaders will fare no better, and be obliged to turn around, thus discouraging them from even trying.

We need to not only flush the present gaggle of invaders from our soil but we need to teach a lesson - demonstrating that they and their successors are no longer welcome here.

We don't accomplish that by allowing them to stay.

 

[Kondor3]

Short-sighted, and unconstitutional.

Well, 'constitutionality' can be fixed easily enough...

Not really.

Please continue to believe that.

 

[g5000]

Internet myth Ronald Reagan regretted legalization The Daily Caller

The public record shows that Reagan never backed down from his long-held support for legalization.

The claim Ed Meese said Reagan had regrets has been bouncing around for decades. Ed Meese could easily have confirmed it in his 2006 piece.

He didn't.

You will not find anything Ed Meese wrote saying it anywhere.

Why do you keep citing to partial quotes of Ed from left wing blog peckerwoods?
Ed Meese We ve Seen the Effect of Amnesty Before

Why do you fail to provide evidence Reagan said he regretted the amnesty bill?

Because it's a lie, that's why.

 

[g5000]

Ed Meese We ve Seen the Effect of Amnesty Before

So now we have TWO articles penned by Ed Meese in which he is talking about amnesty AND Reagan. And yet he does not claim Reagan told him he regretted the amnesty bill.

If ever the time was to mention it, it would have been in his articles about amnesty and Reagan.

Your lie falls.

 

[g5000]

Now where were we?

Oh yeah. 80 percent of Americans want legal status or citizenship for illegals. Evidence provided.

A super majority of conservatives want legal status or citizenship for illegals. Evidence provided.

Reagan supported amnesty for illegals, and always did, and thus probably would have been run out of town on a rail by the minority of maniacs who now control the Republican party. And he never said he regretted the 1986 amnesty bill.

Supporting stronger borders AND amnesty are not mutually exclusive. Reagan supported both.

The Republican Party is completely ignoring the Will of the People, including a majority of their own party.

 

[Vigilante]

All you subversive scumbags can get to keep one illegal and pay for him under Trump! ROTFLMFAO!!!!

Democrats Freak Out in Response to Trump’s Immigration Plan That Puts Americans Before Foreigners

Gateway Pundit ^
Democrats Freak Out in Response to Trump’s Immigration Plan That Puts Americans Before Foreigners Jim Hoft Aug 16th, 2015 5:06 pm 151 Comments pablo Pablo Manriquez, DNC Director of Hispanic Media, with Michelle and Barack Obama The Democratic Party freaked out today after businessman Donald Trump released his immigration plan that included deportations and wall paid for by Mexico. Breitbart reported: The Democratic National Committee (DNC) is panicking in response to billionaire and 2016 GOP frontrunner Donald Trump’s immigration reform plan, which is designed to get Americans back to work instead of putting foreigners and special interests ahead of Americans...

 

[Vigilante]

Or perhaps THIS for the 2 digit IQ crowd.....

Why Donald Trump is the only GOP presidential hopeful who can talk straight on immigration

The Week ^ | August 17, 2015 |
Four years ago, deep within a process of convincing Republican primary voters that he was "severely conservative," Mitt Romney declared that his solution for dealing with the millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States was "self-deportation" — in other words, making life so miserable for them that they'd prefer to return to the countries they fled from rather than stay here. The chairman of the Republican Party later called Romney's words "horrific," not so much out of some moral revulsion, but because they sent a clear message of hostility to Hispanic voters, the country's largest minority group and one...

 

[Unkotare]

As to 'short-sighted'... how so?

You want to all but guarantee an increase in crime and the spread of disease in this country? Not smart. The solution is to control our border, not to try and make our country less safe.

Creating conditions designed to force Illegal Aliens to self-deport is not only 'smart' but also the only practical way to attain that highly desirable outcome......

Oh really? Then you would support a law that made it perfectly legal for any US citizen to demand papers of anyone he or she suspected of being illegal and then shooting on sight anyone who couldn't produce said papers? Including women and children? You think that would be "smart"? You need to get your emotions under control and start thinking realistically.

 

[Unkotare]

Short-sighted, and unconstitutional.

Well, 'constitutionality' can be fixed easily enough...

Not really.

Please continue to believe that.

I will. Let me know when the 14th Amendment is repealed "easily enough."

 

[Kondor3]

...Oh really?...

Yep.

...Then you would support a law that made it perfectly legal for any US citizen to demand papers of anyone he or she suspected of being illegal...

Nope.

Citizenship or Legal-Immigrant Status -verifying systems need to be established; allowing realtors and landlords and car-dealers and bank-managers and school districts and medical facilities, etc., to be able to (1) demand identification prior to providing services and (2) verifying status electronically in real-time at little or no cost to those offering the services.

...and then shooting on sight anyone who couldn't produce said papers? Including women and children?...

Pure Hyper-Liberal / Pro-Illegals hyperbole.

...You think that would be "smart"? You need to get your emotions under control and start thinking realistically.

You put words into other peoples' mouths and try (and fail) to ginn-up emotions on the part of fence-sitters and you accuse ME of eotionalism?

Yer a funny guy.

 

[Kondor3]

Short-sighted, and unconstitutional.

Well, 'constitutionality' can be fixed easily enough...

Not really.

Please continue to believe that.

I will. Let me know when the 14th Amendment is repealed "easily enough."

Solution 1: a fresh interpretation of the 14th to construe that it was not intended to cover Anchor Babies.

Solution 2: a fresh Amendment, created and ratified by a more Conservative America, clarifying the idea conveyed in (1).

Solution 3: a fresh Amendment, repealing the 14th in toto, and re-defining Citizenship Birthrights in such a manner so as to exclude future Anchor Babies.

(1) requires a more sympathetic SCOTUS.

(2) and (3) bypass SCOTUS altogether and prevent it from engaging in Judicial Activism forevermore in this matter.

Three (3) equal branches of government.

And when the Judiciary gets out of control - as it has - it is up to the other two to check (block) its actions, just as the Judiciary has blocked its counterparts so many times.

What's good for the goose...

 

[frigidweirdo]

what kind of idiot thinks the Left is on the right side of the ILLEGAL immigration issue?

What idiot thinks the left is on the right of any issue? They're clearly on the left of issues.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

None of the nonsense Trump proposes will come to pass, of course – the 14th Amendment won't be 'repealed,' citizens won't be 'deported – but this does provide interesting insight into the ignorance and hate that manifests on the right, the type of ignorance and hate that supports Trump's stupidity.

 

[Unkotare]

...
... school districts and medical facilities, etc., to be able to (1) demand identification prior to providing services ....

The Supreme Court has already decided that cannot be. It is NOT going to be overturned by future courts.

 

[Unkotare]

Solution 1: a fresh interpretation of the 14th to construe that it was not intended to cover Anchor Babies.

Solution 2: a fresh Amendment, created and ratified by a more Conservative America, clarifying the idea conveyed in (1).

Solution 3: a fresh Amendment, repealing the 14th in toto, and re-defining Citizenship Birthrights in such a manner so as to exclude future Anchor Babies....

None of that's going to happen. Hold your breath.

 

[Unkotare]

Pure Hyper-Liberal / Pro-Illegals hyperbole....

You'll have to find a "pro-illegal liberal" to ask about that.