Trump is not a fascist

[Kishkumen]

Here is the truest summation of the US immigration problem I have ever seen:



An updated version would have goons hauling the brown guy away while the white construction guy cheers and the plutocrat cuts the white construction guy's cookie in half right under his nose.

[canpakes]

I see no plan in the bill.

I don’t see a plan from the Trump Administration either, except to aim for grabbing people who look like they might be ‘foreign’, and then deport them without consideration for due process and regardless of their legal status, with little thought given to their intended destination.

Can you not explain Trump’s plan or why whatever this is is the plan that you believe America needs? Your apparent ‘success story’ is the deportation of a fellow with knuckle tattoos that a couple of judges said might be related to MS-13. And this establishment of a precedent to remove your own civil rights is your preferred side effect.

No wonder the folks at CATO deemed Trump’s focus as relatively ineffective.

[Doctor Steuss]

Steuss, so are you saying that federal judges don't judicate immigration hearings in federal immigration courts, let alone their being apart of the Dept. of Justice?

No. Lol. One of us was having a creative brain moment. Either me while writing, so that you could interpret what I wrote this way. Or you while reading.

My comment is about while Trump is being aggressive, and getting flack by many for that, and yet you are saying that your plan is to hire more folks to get aggressive.

No, that is not "my plan." That was the plan of Democrats through bipartisan work with Republicans, before Trump tanked it.

In regard to the bill, Trump basically shut down the border in a month or two, without the bill. Why didn't the Biden do what Trump has done and is doing without a Bill? Why didn't Biden go hard and aggressively at these gang members. He could have, and instead of deporting them via the AEA, he could have just detained them for years and let them go through the system.

Why didn't Biden resort to vile abject cruelty, arresting American citizens, harassing Native Americans, and sending people off to a foreign prison to be kept indefinitely without anything resembling due process?

I don't know. I'm guessing because he's a Christian who loves American ideals.

So I guess you have no problem with Trump being aggressive, and that he is doing a great job finding and arresting these gang members, but that you are just upset with him declaring them Terrorists and invoking the AEA?

Why are you like this?

Can you at least give credit to Trump for shutting down the border to a manageable number, without a muddy bill?

He did indeed achieve that. I once saw a man, in a rage, shoot a horse that had been getting out of his coral. I could credit him with solving the problem of the horse getting out of the coral.

Trump failed at the border wall?

You think he succeeded?

OOkay, so are you supporting Trump building the Border wall now?

If he doesn't go about it in a moronic way, and invests in technology, monitoring, and agents to respond like the bipartisan bill would have done. Absolutely. I'd much prefer the technology route though as much as possible in unpopulated areas, as it's just as effective (likely more-so), and doesn't impact wildlife as much.

Even after Biden sold already paid for materials when he stopped Trump's wall, and before he left office.

Yes, even after Biden followed the legislation that mandated the sell-off of the unused materials. I'm kind of a fan of Presidents following the law. I've even gone so far in that, by having never voted for a felon for President. It's a weird quirk of mine. I've also never voted for someone with a history of purposefully walking in on children getting dressed. Sometimes it's good to have something to differentiate oneself from millions of other Americans.

Are you implying that the democrats supported Trump's Border Wall?

Trump's version of a border wall? I don't know. I guess it would depend on if Mexico pays for it.

They do support a border wall though, as evidenced by the bipartisan legislation that they voted overwhelmingly in support of. It was Democrats who voted for the border wall, more border agents, increased border security funding, etc. It was Republicans that unanimously voted against it. For whatever that may be worth.

[Markk]

Kish, What is backwards about shutting down the border? Again what are your alternatives Kish. Biden just let millions flow across the border; so much so even blue cites and states could not handle the influx.

It is impossible to literally "shut down" crossings between two nations. People did escape East Germany to reach West Germany by way of the Berlin WALL. All you can do is limit and direct traffic. I find your catastrophizing amusing. It affirms to me that you will not get off this hobby horse as long as you think it is useful.

Here is what is happening. I grant that you may be genuinely afraid of millions of undocumented immigrants in this country, but you are not really interested in realistic efforts to tackle the complex issues surrounding this. My guess is that you can't even faintly grasp the complexity of the issues, so you get worked up by visions of millions of non-English-speaking brown people flooding over the border. You are fed such visions by people who don't genuinely care about the problem but use it to concentrate POWER in their own hands. They are USING YOU to do that.

We could address this problem with normal legislative tools, but Trump, his puppet masters, and his lackeys don't want that. They want to see how much power they can grab in the name of illegal immigration without effectively helping anyone. You are being duped.

A realistic plan that COULD be passed in Congress by functional parties seeking to govern might include:

1. A reasonable path to citizenship
2. An increase in the number of judges to process cases
3. Sane and humane policies regarding visas, residence, and asylum
4. Reform of law enforcement procedures surrounding immigration

My guess is that no one would be perfectly satisfied with the outcome of this legislation. Extremists would continue to complain about it because they would be robbed of the juice they need to fuel their own agendas. But, many of the current problems would be ameliorated. What needs to happen to see such improvement is that the middle needs to tamp down the extremes on the ideological spectrum. Right now, the extreme right is using the bogeyman of the extreme left to amass power and turn this nation into an authoritarian hellhole.

Trump has shown that it is possible to shut down illegal border crossing to a manageable number. He has done so, in short order.

1. That has been a talking point for as long as I can remember. What is this reasonable path? Are you speaking of those already here, or amending the current requirements to become a citizen by legal application? Or both? Can you expound on what this plan/s might look like, do you have examples?

2. The judges under the current system are a drain on taxpayer monies, why do we need more of that? It is just growing an ineffective government, that tax payers, that do not already draw a check from the government, fund.

in my opinion we need to modify the system. A reasonable path to citizenship, should also include a reasonable path to deportation.

If we amend the current system to stream line the system for both citizenship and deportation....then it would allow judges to hear and process more cases without it being a burden on the taxpayer and allow folks to get lost in the system more efficiently. Currently we are draining taxpayer resources, and in all honesty making immigrations lawyers rich and allowing human trafficking to be profitable. With technologies we can speed things up, at least I would think we could. What do you think?

3. What is not sane or humane about our current laws in regard to visas, residence, and asylum? Yours is not a plan, it is just a statement without any context.

I would agree the visa laws are insanely complicated and should be simplified for both application and revoking. But I am not sure how the visas are insane in the way you framed your words, along with residence and asylum.

4. Reform of law enforcement procedures surrounding immigration. How? What would be some of these reformations to the plan?

This a good start to a conversation and in tackling these complex issues. I look forward doing so with you Kish, thanks.

[Markk]

I see no plan in the bill.

I don’t see a plan from the Trump Administration either, except to aim for grabbing people who look like they might be ‘foreign’, and then deport them without consideration for due process and regardless of their legal status, with little thought given to their intended destination.

Can you not explain Trump’s plan or why whatever this is is the plan that you believe America needs? Your apparent ‘success story’ is the deportation of a fellow with knuckle tattoos that a couple of judges said might be related to MS-13. And this establishment of a precedent to remove your own civil rights is your preferred side effect.

No wonder the folks at CATO deemed Trump’s focus as relatively ineffective.

LOl well then you are not looking very hard.

Also, I am a bit confused why you keep bringing up a CATO article written before Trump's second term, about his first term....and some how comparing it to what is currently happening in his current term. My guess is you did not read the date on the article, and take into account title 42 and covid, and how it affected the reporting data.

If you do no see the plan that Trump has developed, and executed, I am confident you are not looking.

Please do compare the Cato report, with what is happening today in regard to Immigration.

Thanks

[Markk]

Steuss, so are you saying that federal judges don't judicate immigration hearings in federal immigration courts, let alone their being apart of the Dept. of Justice?

No. Lol. One of us was having a creative brain moment. Either me while writing, so that you could interpret what I wrote this way. Or you while reading.

My comment is about while Trump is being aggressive, and getting flack by many for that, and yet you are saying that your plan is to hire more folks to get aggressive.

No, that is not "my plan." That was the plan of Democrats through bipartisan work with Republicans, before Trump tanked it.

In regard to the bill, Trump basically shut down the border in a month or two, without the bill. Why didn't the Biden do what Trump has done and is doing without a Bill? Why didn't Biden go hard and aggressively at these gang members. He could have, and instead of deporting them via the AEA, he could have just detained them for years and let them go through the system.

Why didn't Biden resort to vile abject cruelty, arresting American citizens, harassing Native Americans, and sending people off to a foreign prison to be kept indefinitely without anything resembling due process?

I don't know. I'm guessing because he's a Christian who loves American ideals.

So I guess you have no problem with Trump being aggressive, and that he is doing a great job finding and arresting these gang members, but that you are just upset with him declaring them Terrorists and invoking the AEA?

Why are you like this?

Can you at least give credit to Trump for shutting down the border to a manageable number, without a muddy bill?

He did indeed achieve that. I once saw a man, in a rage, shoot a horse that had been getting out of his coral. I could credit him with solving the problem of the horse getting out of the coral.

Trump failed at the border wall?

You think he succeeded?

OOkay, so are you supporting Trump building the Border wall now?

If he doesn't go about it in a moronic way, and invests in technology, monitoring, and agents to respond like the bipartisan bill would have done. Absolutely. I'd much prefer the technology route though as much as possible in unpopulated areas, as it's just as effective (likely more-so), and doesn't impact wildlife as much.

Even after Biden sold already paid for materials when he stopped Trump's wall, and before he left office.

Yes, even after Biden followed the legislation that mandated the sell-off of the unused materials. I'm kind of a fan of Presidents following the law. I've even gone so far in that, by having never voted for a felon for President. It's a weird quirk of mine. I've also never voted for someone with a history of purposefully walking in on children getting dressed. Sometimes it's good to have something to differentiate oneself from millions of other Americans.

Are you implying that the democrats supported Trump's Border Wall?

Trump's version of a border wall? I don't know. I guess it would depend on if Mexico pays for it.

They do support a border wall though, as evidenced by the bipartisan legislation that they voted overwhelmingly in support of. It was Democrats who voted for the border wall, more border agents, increased border security funding, etc. It was Republicans that unanimously voted against it. For whatever that may be worth.

It is easy to just say Trump did not want the Bill, which is true, but the question is why was the bill rejected.

Biden could have completed or at least put into motion two things you mentioned both the wall and the expansion of detention centers. A bill was not required.

There is no way Biden could have done this, for several reasons apart from we are not even sure who was calling the shots in the White House. But the progressive Democrats would never let that happen, or even the moderates in that he shut down the wall and there is no way they would allow the re-building of the wall by executive order. I think you would acknowledge that. The wall was added to the bill in order to take a talking point away from Trump running on re-building the wall. Again, Biden and the left opposed the wall, tore down the wall, and even sold materials for the wall, after the bill was turned down....enforces that.

In regard to the rest of the bill, what were some the negatives of the bill according to those that opposed it?

[Kishkumen]

Trump has shown that it is possible to shut down illegal border crossing to a manageable number. He has done so, in short order.

You actually have no idea how this will pan out. Right now, the fact that the Trump administration is terrorizing everyone is making everyone but his fans wish they could be in a saner environment. So, if his plan is the enshittification of the USA as a border strategy, I guess it is seeing some measure of success, at the expense of our Constitution and the rule of law.

I don't see how anyone finds such a tradeoff acceptable, but then there is the MAGA mob.

1. That has been a talking point for as long as I can remember. What is this reasonable path? Are you speaking of those already here, or amending the current requirements to become a citizen by legal application? Or both? Can you expound on what this plan/s might look like, do you have examples?

Does this look unreasonable?

2. Eligibility Requirements for Naturalization:
Age: You must be at least 18 years old.
Good moral character: This means having a clean criminal record and demonstrating good character throughout your application process.
English Language Skills: You must be able to read, write, and speak basic English.
US History and Government Knowledge: You must pass the civics test, demonstrating knowledge of US history and government.
Continuous Residence: You must have lived continuously in the US as a permanent resident for the required period (5 or 3 years).
Physical Presence: You must have been physically present in the US for a certain amount of time during the residency period.
Willingness to serve in the military or civilian service: You must be willing to serve in the US military or perform civilian service if called upon.

3. Applying for Citizenship (Form N-400):
Download and complete Form N-400: This is the official application for naturalization.
Submit the application with required documentation: You'll need to provide proof of your permanent resident status, residency, and other relevant information.
Pay the filing fee: There is a fee associated with the application process.

4. Naturalization Process:
Interview and Tests: You'll be interviewed by a USCIS officer and take both the English language test and the civics test.
Biometrics Appointment: You may be required to attend a biometrics appointment for fingerprinting.
Oath Ceremony: Once your application is approved, you'll attend a naturalization ceremony to take the Oath of Allegiance and officially become a US citizen.

Important Notes:
You cannot become a citizen by birth if you are born in a foreign country, unless you meet specific requirements for citizenship by birth or acquisition.
Citizenship through military service is another path, and those who serve in the US armed forces may be eligible for naturalization under special provisions.

2. The judges under the current system are a drain on taxpayer monies, why do we need more of that? It is just growing an ineffective government, that tax payers, that do not already draw a check from the government, fund.

I don't subscribe to the fantasy that we can have a humane society without human labor to achieve it. If that is your starting position, you are living in a dystopian fantasy. Human judges are necessary for just human judgment. I don't believe in the automation of justice. No robocop for me.

in my opinion we need to modify the system. A reasonable path to citizenship, should also include a reasonable path to deportation.

What was it about the pre-Trump path to deportation that was unreasonable?

If we amend the current system to stream line the system for both citizenship and deportation....then it would allow judges to hear and process more cases without it being a burden on the taxpayer and allow folks to get lost in the system more efficiently. Currently we are draining taxpayer resources, and in all honesty making immigrations lawyers rich and allowing human trafficking to be profitable. With technologies we can speed things up, at least I would think we could. What do you think?

I think you want to shortcut and thus undermine for convenience and to save money. You think people don't deserve to be paid for work unless you personally value it (and you are frankly not farsighted enough to make those decisions). You don't want to pay to have civilization. You want to undermine civilization so you can pay lower taxes. Libertarian fantasies are fantasies. They do not work. On our current path, the US is turning into something like an unregulated prison environment. Force and violence rule, and there effectively no actual law unless the strong decree it to be so.

How? What would be some of these reformations to the plan?

Only treat undocumented people as dangerous criminals if they are in fact dangerous criminals. Due process for every person who is in the US, as the Constitution guarantees. You can't claim to follow the Constitution and then flagrantly violate it as a matter of regular policy.

[canpakes]

I don’t see a plan from the Trump Administration either, except to aim for grabbing people who look like they might be ‘foreign’, and then deport them without consideration for due process and regardless of their legal status, with little thought given to their intended destination.

Can you not explain Trump’s plan or why whatever this is is the plan that you believe America needs? Your apparent ‘success story’ is the deportation of a fellow with knuckle tattoos that a couple of judges said might be related to MS-13. And this establishment of a precedent to remove your own civil rights is your preferred side effect.

No wonder the folks at CATO deemed Trump’s focus as relatively ineffective.

LOl well then you are not looking very hard.

Also, I am a bit confused why you keep bringing up a CATO article written before Trump's second term, about his first term....and some how comparing it to what is currently happening in his current term.

That was given as evidence of the effectiveness of the Biden Administration approach. You kept saying that you were unaware of any plan or action by that Administration. You can rightly criticize Biden for not doing ‘enough’ to stem the tide of border crossers, but it turns out that they were more on the ball when it came to removing the criminal element of that population.

My guess is you did not read the date on the article, and take into account title 42 and covid, and how it affected the reporting data.

You guessed wrong. See above.

If you do no see the plan that Trump has developed, and executed, I am confident you are not looking.

Can you compare it to my brief description of Trump’s ‘bad guy removal’ plan given above, and add those parts in that I’ve not already included?

Also, please comment on how many civil rights the general population should be prepared to surrender so that Trump can indiscriminately scoop up brown folks while looking for reasons to deport them. Yesterday it was revealed that ICE can now enter your home without a warrant to search for folks. Combined with ignoring due process, this is looking problematic from a Constitutional standpoint.



https://dailyboulder.com/ice-can-now-en ... memo-says/

[Kishkumen]

It keeps getting worse and worse. Why anyone wants to live in this way is beyond me.

[Gadianton]

You can rightly criticize Biden for not doing ‘enough’ to stem the tide of border crossers, but it turns out that they were more on the ball when it came to removing the criminal element of that population.

Other than civil and human rights abuses as often as possible, show, fear mongering, chaos, and appealing to the most dim-witted and low-moral reprobates of the land, one theory I've picked up on is that the present administration isn't actually doing anything. Now, to be fair, if all these norm violations successfully work towards a coup, then the outlandish tactics served their purpose. But if this final last wager fails, then it's all for nothing.

Right now, all 3 branches of government are blood red. There is no excuse for not completely reforming the immigration process into whatever Republicans know in their hearts it should be, which probably amounts to stopping immigration altogether or as close to it as possible. So why don't they? Why not implement draconian laws that make deportation easier and make it more dangerous for anyone to interfere with the removal process? Why not step up the pressure on employers?

Instead, it's been nothing but executive orders, overstepping boundaries, and pissing everyone in the world off except the most devout MAGA clowns. For instance, instead of using their time to push draconian immigration bills through into laws, it's all executive orders. The next president can simply rescind every order Trump has implemented. Same for tariffs. And then there's pushing every button save a hot war all at once. If you want to wreck immigration, why crush the economy at the same time? Billionaires don't care about ruining people's lives, but they do care about their own bottom line. Elon is hyperventilating about tariffs and apparently is shocked that Trump isn't backing down from it? The tariff levels are world-crushing if they are actually implemented. The damage in the mean time is building up and a recession is near certain, even if Trump completely backs down on Monday morning and drops it all to zero. Their chances of winning midterms are reduced mainly by the totally unnecessary economic mayhem that nobody wants. Finally, the shock and awe has gone too far for even those sympathetic to get behind. Sending people directly to foreign prisons? That's just the icing.

The point is, if God fearing republicans really wanted to purify the country by speedily removing illegals and changing laws to make it harder to immigrate here, they would have 1) let the economy continue to boom and not f with it 2) not drawn attention to themselves by outright defying rule of law 3) gone full force writing a series of Handmaid's bills that could speed up deportation and make it even harder to get in legally and stay. keeping a lower profile and not f-ing the economy would have ensured control of the house and Senate post 2026, that's 4 years straight of pushing through anti-immigration and anti-DEI bills into laws that the next president can't overturn with a pen stroke.

And so in this way of looking at things, by any standard, the present administration is an abysmal failure, even if you are a conservative Christian who actively wants to live in an evangelical version of 1984. The only way the present mayhem can be said to be in MAGA's interest is if it really can pull of a coup; undermine the next election and secure DT the presidency until he dies. Short of that, it's a failure.