Initial Trump mass deportation plan: 3 million

[First]

You're easily duped if you think Trump will do any of this.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-happens-when-undocumented-immigrant-is-caught.html

 

[K1052]

Once people understand that there is law enforcement actually going on in this country.... the border security situation will largely fix itself.

Just like the drug war fixed the drug problem.

 

[First]

Just like you're easily duped if you think he's going to follow through on trade:

http://arstechnica.com/business/201...-iphone-sales-if-trump-imposes-stiff-tariffs/

 

[JSt0rm]

I can't wait for the court system to have to deal with all of trumps sweeping changes. Lol

 

[imported_tajmahal]

There's nothing difficult about speeding up the deportation of criminal aliens. It's not extreme or even controversial. In some cases they've even made it easier by giving authorities their names and addresses.

 

[soundforbjt]

So where are the massive fines for companies hiring illegals?

Oh that's right there are none. Law, schmaw

There are fines but fines don't matter when you're still saving money over employing Americans. They need to face REAL JAIL TIME before they'd reconsider.

 

[JSt0rm]

Just like you're easily duped if you think he's going to follow through on trade:

http://arstechnica.com/business/201...-iphone-sales-if-trump-imposes-stiff-tariffs/

Honestly I dont really care if china stops using the iPhone. That will affect apple but it will have almost 0 effect on me. Now if they block film and tv consumption then I've got a problem.

 

[First]

There's nothing difficult about speeding up the deportation of criminal aliens. It's not extreme or even controversial. In some cases they've even made it easier by giving authorities their names and addresses.

You're slow; criminal aliens are already being deported. You can't "speed up" criminal deportation without violating constitutional due process laws.

 

[First]

Honestly I dont really care if china stops using the iPhone. That will affect apple but it will have almost 0 effect on me. Now if they block film and tv consumption then I've got a problem.

Yup, but in that scenario China ain't stopping with the iPhone, they'd stop other US exports too.

 

[Chiropteran]

Okay so you don't believe in prosecutorial discretion. Gotcha. That means you are going to need LOTS of additional prisons for the US, just so you know.

You are still wrong.

When I choose to not answer your question, that doesn't give you the ability to decide what my answer is.

I know exactly what deport means, by the way. Do you know how the deportation process works? If you think you won't need lots of additional prisons to do it you're crazy.

Are you now claiming we haven't ever deported anyone?

http://cis.org/ICE-Illegal-Immigrant-Deportations

Looks like you are wrong again. We were deporting over 1 million per year, close to 2 million some years back in the 80's - 90's What happened, did all the infrastructure we were using then fall apart during the Obama administration?

 

[Chiropteran]

So where are the massive fines for companies hiring illegals?

Oh that's right there are none. Law, schmaw

do you need help? are you okay?

The laws are already on the books for that.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/penalties-for-employers-hiring-illegal-immigrants.html

 

[Chiropteran]

Terrifying that you need to ask but then totally expected, A huge sector of the American public has the moral development of rats.

These sort of comments are what got Trump elected. Stupid opponents who couldn't even frame a complaint to his policies, instead resorting to rhetoric like "if you even need to ask it's terrifying!".

What is terrifying to me is that something can apparently be so important to you, yet you are completely unable to explain how or why.

 

[First]

These sort of comments are what got Trump elected. Stupid opponents who couldn't even frame a complaint to his policies, instead resorting to rhetoric like "if you even need to ask it's terrifying!".

What is terrifying to me is that something can apparently be so important to you, yet you are completely unable to explain how or why.

It's pretty easy to explain, it's just terrifying people are so easily duped by a fool like Trump who thinks he can deport millions without violating various laws, chief among them fundamental constitutional rights. The fact this escapes many Trump supporters is, well, just a little terrifying yeah.

 

[fskimospy]

You are still wrong.

When I choose to not answer your question, that doesn't give you the ability to decide what my answer is.

You did answer my question, and singled out immigration. When someone asks you if you support prosecutorial discretion and you single out one thing you don't support it for, that implies you DO support it for other things. This is just normal human communication.

Are you now claiming we haven't ever deported anyone?

http://cis.org/ICE-Illegal-Immigrant-Deportations

Looks like you are wrong again. We were deporting over 1 million per year, close to 2 million some years back in the 80's - 90's What happened, did all the infrastructure we were using then fall apart during the Obama administration?

You don't understand the things you are linking. Trump is talking about deporting people currently in the US and this is what is referred to as a 'removal'. The chart in the link you copied as RETURNS and removals, with returns constituting the vast majority of the immigration enforcement actions, especially in the 80's and 90's so contrary to what you're saying the capacity to do removals is actually much higher now than in the 80's or 90's. Returns are turning people back at the border, so they aren't relevant to this discussion. Trump says that the removals will happen 'immediately', which to me implies at least within the first year or two of his presidency, meaning we need to develop infrastructure capacity for removals that's somewhere around 500% of what we currently have.

That's big bucks right there, fiscal conservative.

 

[buckshot24]

Do you lefties want Trump to back off his campaign claims or follow through with them?

 

[Chiropteran]

It's pretty easy to explain, it's just terrifying people are so easily duped by a fool like Trump who thinks he can deport millions without violating various laws, chief among them fundamental constitutional rights. The fact this escapes many Trump supporters is, well, just a little terrifying yeah.

You do realize that virtually every other modern country has much stricter immigration policies? Where is the "terror" towards Canada or Switzerland?

"chief among them fundamental constitutional rights"

Sorry, those don't apply to non-citizens. Same reasoning as to why terrorists can be killed or held without a trial.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_noncitizens_have_constitutional_rights.html

 

[fskimospy]

Do you lefties want Trump to back off his campaign claims or follow through with them?

What we're saying is that many of the claims he made were outlandish or impossible and now he's having to face up to reality. What's the confusion here?

 

[Chiropteran]

You did answer my question, and singled out immigration. When someone asks you if you support prosecutorial discretion and you single out one thing you don't support it for, that implies you DO support it for other things. This is just normal human communication.

You are trolling, I'm not going to fall for it. Sorry to spoil your fun!

You don't understand the things you are linking. Trump is talking about deporting people currently in the US and this is what is referred to as a 'removal'. The chart in the link you copied as RETURNS and removals, with returns constituting the vast majority of the immigration enforcement actions, especially in the 80's and 90's so contrary to what you're saying the capacity to do removals is actually much higher now than in the 80's or 90's. Returns are turning people back at the border, so they aren't relevant to this discussion. Trump says that the removals will happen 'immediately', which to me implies at least within the first year or two of his presidency, meaning we need to develop infrastructure capacity for removals that's somewhere around 500% of what we currently have.

That's big bucks right there, fiscal conservative.

Sorry, you are not a reputable news source. I don't really believe a word you are spewing. You might have randomly got one or two details right, broken clock being right twice a day sort of thing, but you need to supply an unbiased source if you want your ideas to be accepted.

 

[fskimospy]

You are trolling, I'm not going to fall for it. Sorry to spoil your fun!

Sorry, you are not a reputable news source. I don't really believe a word you are spewing. You might have randomly got one or two details right, broken clock being right twice a day sort of thing, but you need to supply an unbiased source if you want your ideas to be accepted.

So you cite a right wing anti-immigration source for your numbers and then ask for an unbiased source from me? That's pretty funny, don't you think?

If you want an 'unbiased' source (meaning one that tells you what you want to hear), CIS has its own explanation on returns vs. removals. Under Obama they specifically complained that he was including returns as well as removals because they didn't consider them to be real deportations and said he was fudging the numbers. If you agree with them, returns don't count.

 

[soundforbjt]

You do realize that virtually every other modern country has much stricter immigration policies? Where is the "terror" towards Canada or Switzerland?

"chief among them fundamental constitutional rights"

Sorry, those don't apply to non-citizens. Same reasoning as to why terrorists can be killed or held without a trial.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_noncitizens_have_constitutional_rights.html

From your link

Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt")





On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.

I see what Trump will try now, he'll call them alien terrorists!

 

[BoomerD]

.

Finally we have someone who won't treat immigration as a sick joke to be played against both ends. There is no middle ground in this; either you (A) support open borders, (B) think 3MM deportations is a 'good start', or (C) you like the status quo because it allows you to have your cheap vegetables and housekeeper while holding their legal status over their head to keep them in line. Deporting 3 million is far, far, far more ethical than what we're doing now.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-deport-3-million_us_5828ad2be4b0c4b63b0d22f1

<snip>

President-elect Donald Trump plans to deport or imprison somewhere between 2 million and 3 million undocumented immigrants as soon as he takes office.

In an interview with CBS News that will air Sunday night, Trump said he would launch what could be the largest mass deportation effort in modern history, vowing to immediately deport a number of people comparable to the record-setting figure that President Barack Obama carried out over two terms in office.

“What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably 2 million, it could be even 3 million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate,” Trump said in the interview. “But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally.”

In saying that 2 million to 3 million undocumented immigrants with criminal records live in the U.S., Trump was repeating a claim he’d made earlier in the campaign that The Washington Post fact-checked and determined was inaccurate.

The Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, estimates that around 820,000 undocumented immigrants have criminal records ― a figure that includes many people whose only conviction is crossing the border illegally. Under prosecutorial discretion guidelines in place since 2011, undocumented migrants with minor crimes are in some cases able to avoid deportation.

</snip>

I'm in the "3 million is a good start" camp.

So basically, Trump's immigration policy is to copy Obama, down to the numbers

Now, now...don't try to confuse them with actual facts...

O'Bummer did a decent job getting rid of criminal immigrants. He deported more illegal immigrants than previous presidents, but, once again, he didn't go after the main source of the problem...jobs for them once they get in. Time to start requiring ALL employers to verify the status of ALL employees...and hit the ones who hire illegals with stiff fines and jail time. Start holding the management responsible for the actions of their HR decisions.

 

[bshole]

President-elect Donald Trump plans to deport or imprison somewhere between 2 million and 3 million undocumented immigrants as soon as he takes office.

Gee, imprisoning working illegal immigrants, sounds like a great idea. I believe we are number one in the world for imprisonment, this will ensure we keep the crown. Let's work the numbers: 35K per inmate X 3 million new inmates = a cool trillion dollars of new deficit a year. I imagine this is some kind of payout to the privatized prison system.

 

[buckshot24]

What we're saying is that many of the claims he made were outlandish or impossible and now he's having to face up to reality. What's the confusion here?

I'm not confused, it seems you would applaud him not following through with his campaign promises.

 

[buckshot24]

I watched that interview and what is presented in the OP wasn't the gist I was getting. Did anybody else watch it and is that what you got out of it?

 

[First]

You do realize that virtually every other modern country has much stricter immigration policies? Where is the "terror" towards Canada or Switzerland?

Oh so if other countries' laws (which you don't understand) are now the standard, I assume you must believe we should start taking up much larger government programs including but not limited to single payer health care, yes?

"chief among them fundamental constitutional rights"

Sorry, those don't apply to non-citizens. Same reasoning as to why terrorists can be killed or held without a trial.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...o_noncitizens_have_constitutional_rights.html

*facepalm*

Sorry, it is fact that non-citizens (I assume you mean illegal immigrants) have constitutional rights, afforded to them specifically by the 14th amendment.

So again, this is why people honestly just don't take Trump or his voters that seriously. Ruinously ignorant.