He also rage-tweeted about Obama's comments about him, saying it should be illegal to speak against former presidents. The lack of self-awareness is astounding - although that's not really what that is. What he means of course, is it should be a one-way street. And he'll no doubt try to make it so if he's elected again.

If she is legal and (obviously) not a gang member, why worry?

Trump rallies in Aurora -- a city he has demonized as overrun by migrant crime : NPR

There WERE good Jews in Germany.

I’m glad you trust a Trump admin to round these minorities and immigrants up in a manner that won’t infringe on anyone’s rights that is here legally but might look they are from somewhere else.

I’m mean the guy always has the best plans and implements them flawlessly. Why would this be any different, right?

Explain to me how these mass detentions and deportations are going to happen in a way that ensures people review of citizenship/criminal status? The whole point of the Alien Enemies Act is that the President is given the authority without judicial review. He can just order detentions of people from nation X.

dola

And don't sleep on the change from illegal to migrant. Trump isn't just talking about people here illegally.

double dola

And we'll go through the typical Trump news cycle on this.

Trump: I'm going to lock up people in camps like in WW2.

Supporter: He doesn't really mean that. Don't be absurd.

Trump: Of course I mean that. In fact I mean double that.

Supporter: Sure he means it, but it probably won't be that bad.

Trump: It will be way worse.

Supporter: MAGA!

On a scale of 1-10, where 10 is when most/all legal naturalized citizens need to worry about being imprisoned, tossed out of the country, rights removed etc. IMO we are at a 2-3.

The 2-3 is for ... I can definitely see where Trump is "infringing on the rights" (debatable) on some legal/pending immigrants like Dreamers; there may be a fight on foreign student pro-Palestinian demonstrators kicked out; there may be a fight on temporary asylum foreigners; there may be a fight on some Permanent Residents from undesirable countries etc.

A 10 is when most/all legally adopted foreign kids are threatened. A 9 or 10 is when most/all legal, naturalized citizens are threatened. But that won't happen because they can vote.

So yeah, no doubt there'll be fights and SCOTUS will rule on what is legal or not. Just like what Trump wanted to do was challenged, just like what Joe wanted to do was challenged. But no, there is no way in hell a legally adopted foreign kid are tossed out unless there is a special unique situation (e.g. parents are illegal?).

Again, what's the process for mass detention camps that Trump has promised to establish?

Let's say Trump decides that Chinese illegal immigrants need to be detained and deported. How does the process work so that my daughter is guaranteed not to be detained?

Specific to foreign born, naturalized citizens ... explain to me how SCOTUS, Congress and voting naturalized citizens will let this happen? Same to your point, how will Trump round up all the legal naturalized citizens and detain them?

Sure, he can order detentions and kick out illegal immigrants. Doing that to legal, naturalized citizens is a whole different matter in this day and age.

Much better talking about illegals and not conflating it with legal (especially naturalized) immigrants.

Specific to your daughter ...

INS: You have 90 says to send the necessary documents showing your daughter was legally adopted and is naturalized citizen
JPhilips: Sure, here they are
INS: Okay, we'll put it into our new fancy consolidated database.

re: detained. I've seen enough YT police videos to know that being "detained" when stopped for a valid/legal reason is NOT illegal. There are many reasons why people can be stopped and asked for IDs, and if not provided, they can be "detained".

Or do you really mean to say "detention, like internment camps"

Trump isn't saying illegal anymore, he's saying migrant. He's specifically said that Haitians here legally should be deported.

As I've said previously, most people don't carry proof of citizenship. What happens if they are asked and can't provide it? Are they sent to a camp? Are they sent home with a summons?

Huh? See my orig NPR quote below, it's pretty clear he's talking about illegal, gang members.


I didn't listen to the speech in its entirety, but going by the NPR quotes, its pretty clear to me what he meant.

We're hoping SCOTUS says no and that Trump listens to them. The Alien Enemies Act allows the president to declare people from country X to be detained and/or deported. There isn't a vote that needs to happen.

As I've stated previously, there will be some contentious issues


But let's get back to your original worry about your legally adopted, naturalized daughter. Explain to me how she will be threatened with expulsion, imprisonment/internment etc.

Your original statement was concern for your daughter. Let's stay specifically with that. I'll repeat my question

Why would the AEA need to be invoked if it's just for illegal immigrant criminals? Those people can already be deported or imprisoned.

He's said people legally here under temporary protective staus need to be deported. He's said people here legally as asylum seekers need to be deported. He's said people need to be re-migrated to other countries. Trump has been very clear his policies won't be limited to illegal immigrants.

I'll ask a third time ...

She's asked to provide prof of citizenship. Doesn't have it on her. Is detained.

Now maybe she has the chance to prove citizenship at a later date, but I'd rather her not be detained. Worst case, she isn't given the opportunity to prove citizenship before she's deported to a country that she has no memory of.

ANd don't tell me it can't happen because that's exactly what happened to the Japanese and that's exactly what Trump and Stephen Miller are threatening.

Dutch started giving me crap when I said I was going to make my daughter carry he passport. Doesn't sound at all crazy to me.

And if she doesn't have it on her and is detained, so what? People are legally temporarily detained all the time when they don't have identification (e.g. drunk drivers, sovcits etc.). What's the big deal with providing documentation? Well worth the hassle to greatly reduce illegals.

If your argument is there is no "documentation" yet that a person can carry that will prove citizenship, this is true. It's pretty obvious to me that one/database will need to be created.

I don't want my daughter sent to a camp even temporarily.

There won't be a national ID card before day 1, when Trump is saying detentions will start.

If you really believe your underage, foreign born, legal, naturalized daughter will be sent to an internment camp right away without any reasonable recourse, then this discussion (as always) won't get anywhere.

If you want to discuss Haitians, Dreamers etc. I can definitely see more of your POV. But your daughter, not so much.

Holy shit, Edward.

Edit: in response to this:

My daughter is an adult. She's in a different city 8 months of the year.

Well, you and I still have a date in the next 4-5 years. This is the same as our bet.

This isn't just about illegal immigrants.

Oh sorry. I assumed she was younger as I thought you the adoption occurred in the past several years. My apologies.

I'm an adult. I'm a legal, naturalized citizen. I have no problems providing documentation as needed. They'll need to state what identification will suffice, give us time to get/receive it. And if asked, I'll gladly provided it.

Not about illegal immigrants.

Edward is OK with someone being stopped for an expired license tag, the cop asking person for proof of citizenship, the person not being able to provide it, the cop dragging them out of their car and putting them in cuffs, the person being taken to a police station and booked, and then the person being temporarily transferred to a "transition camp" unless said person's family finally figures out what's going on and manages to go through official channels, possibly taking days or weeks, to provide documentation to release said individual, with all the attendant trauma to the "arrested" person, their family, and possible loss of income. So as to "reduce illegals".

You're arguing that there's a way to do things that wouldn't infringe on rights and I agree, but what Trump is promising has no connection to that fantasy. There are no details other than there will be mass detentions and camps starting on day one.

This from the Trump "feel free to go rough on them" Administration?

Exactly how naive are you?

I googled on the statement. See below at approx. 35 sec on what Stephen Miller said.

x.com

As I've said before, we need to stop conflating between illegal and legals, and just using "immigrants" or "migrants". Admittedly, Trump & Co. don't always specifically state the difference, but this speech is not one of them.

Well, you shouldn't be. Everything you've posted on this page is about as unAmerican as one can be.

What invasion? What occupation? Does he have proof? Take your mouth off Stephen Miller's dick for a moment and think with the brain god gave you, moron.

It is amazing that people want to go to such extremes to prevent something that is a minor civil offense. People act like being an illegal immigrant is a serious felony, when according to the law, it is the same level as a speeding ticket, a civil violation not a criminal violation.

It's almost like there was another motive at play, cartman.

I'm not the one mixing the two. Trump and Miller are. I'm just quoting what they are saying.

Nope. That only happens when the driver cops an attitude, doesn't follow orders, start spouting sovcit BS etc.

Using my example of a car stop ...

Cop: you were driving erratically. Provide license/proof of citizenship, registration and insurance
Perp: I'm sorry, I don't have license/proof of citizenship. Here's the registration and insurance
Cop: okay, your name and birthdate
Perp: my name is X and birth date is Y
Cop: (goes and checks database, in addition to registration and birthdate)
Cop: okay, looks good. Here's a citation for not providing your ID

or

Cop: you are not in the database. Here's a summons to appear on X date with the proper Id

Simple.

Papers please for thee, not for me

So if we're all meek little people and follow orders to head to the ghetto everything will be OK, Mr. Rumkowski?


Do you look like one of the migrants that Stephen Miller is attempting to eradicate from the earth?

You are mixing the two. You may have quoted what they said, but you did not provide full context. Again, see the X link starting at about :35. He was clearly alluding to illegals.

I am specifically responding to JPhillips statement that Miller, in his specific, quote was talking also about legals. The full X link shows he is incorrect. You want to talk about other stuff, fine.

If you don't think we are being invaded by illegals, then you and I live in different worlds. But yeah, occupation probably goes too far.

We'll agree to disagree. I'm willing to undergo some inconvenience to reduce illegal invasion.

"some inconvenience"

No, I do not agree to disagree. You're a trash human being, Edward. Your shocking naivete, enabled by your obious (and oblivious) privilege, makes you the modern-day equivalent of a Nazi sympathizer from 1939. I hope you rot in hell.

It's actually the other way around. I'm willing to provide papers and undergo the inconvenience.

Go look at Miller's thoughts on de-naturalization. Or Vance talking about legal status doesn't mean they should be here. Or Trump talking about re-migration.

Okay then, that's very progressive of you. Just ignore me until 4-5 years when we see where we are on the bet.

This has nothing in common with what Trump has said. He's calling for camps and mass detentions on day one.

I would be interested in reading more. Can you provide some links?

As stated previously, I do believe the rights of some groups will be infringed. But getting back to your original concern re: your adult, foreign born, legally naturalized daughter, not so much.

That was a scenario that I tossed out because you had not tossed out a scenario specific to your daughter.

Please provide a scenario that you believe your daughter may encounter that will take away her rights because some cop will think she is illegal?

What inconveniences you enough about illegal immigration that you're willing to stomach the thought of checkpoints and camps? Is it their proclivity towards committing less crime? The taxation without representation? Their strain on our nation's lowest personal tax rates ever? Providing cheap labor for the service industries & lower prices for you?

You've already provided a scenario where she is detained for an undetermined amount of time. That's pretty fucking bad given that she's done nothing wrong.

You asked a similar question and I answered in the other thread. Start from post #307 and read down.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - Biden's Immigration Reform

Oh, before there is a cry that I'm messing up this thread, no problem in going into immigration thread if you want. Just let me know.

If you are referring to the car stopping one, watch police YT videos. It's happening now and pretty normal for citizens.

So if you want to discuss other scenarios that you think your daughter's rights will be infringed, share it.

Sometimes the police shoot innocent people, so it's no big deal if they do that to someone.

Let's not deflect and go back to your original statement that I reacted to


I'll ask for a fourth time ...

I've done this several times.

She's asked for proof of citizenship.

She doesn't have it on her, she does have her license but that doesn't prove citizenship.

She's detained.

After that I don't know what might happen. There are no details other than mass detention and deportation.

Tell me in what situation you see where she is asked for proof of citizenship? Layout the scenario.

Could be a traffic stop could be like stop and frisk. Could be other people call her in as suspicious. Again, there are no details so we don't know what might happen.

I need her to be ready for whatever might happen.

Mass detention camps on day 1.

Okay, specific to police car stop scenario. I've provided how I think it'll be most likely played out per police YT videos I've seen. I don't see anything wrong with it as asking for identification is what's happening now to white, black, brown, yellow etc. regardless of national origin or religion etc.

For other people reporting her because she is suspicious, happens all the time right now also. Again, see police car stop, shoplifting, public nuisance etc. scenarios. Most of the time, resolved without a big deal.

I think the main difference is you don't believe police should be asking for proof of citizenship?

There's no fucking plan!

That's the problem. You assume people will have legal remedies, but Trump hasn't said that. He's just said he's going to have the power to detain and deport and he's going to open camps on day 1. Trump hasn't said anything about a legal process playing out.

And ID isn't, for most people, proof of citizenship. A regular driver's license isn't good enough. Most people don't carry proof of citizenship on them.

You clearly did not answer the question.

EDIT: I guess you answered that it doesn't effect you in any way, but you still have strong opinions about it. That's a pretty weak answer in terms of justification for camps and checkpoints.

How can you so confidently argue something that zero details have been provided. At some point you need to listen to what is being said and stop filling in the blanks.

Trumps says mass detainment and deportation he means it. Mass.

Trump says the election is stolen and his people are going to go to Congress and make that point be heard. He means it. Stop filling the blanks with how you feel. Thats how we get things like Jan. 6. Listen. Don’t talk over.

Per #317, I didn't say it "doesn't effect me in any way". I said it doesn't impact by daily life (which was your orig question) but I did answer how it did impact me indirectly (e.g. not my daily life).

Honestly, I've never been convinced he's not sitting offshore in some troll farm. From DAY 1 here his posts have been "asking questions" about potentially divisive issues.

And if he's not, he certainly acts like he thinks like one.

(Whatever the response, have at it. This ain't gonna change: This user is on your Ignore List.)

True. As stated, to make this work, there needs to be a citizenship database. And if we can get a gun/background check database done, we can get a citizenship database done. But it won't happen in Day 1.

Ditto.

Do you think he means for illegals or also for foreign born, naturalized citizens? Because my response was specific to JPhillips comment re: his foreign born, naturalized daughter.

No doubt he's wrong here.

The point was people took what he was saying and twisted it to a way that made sense to themselves when he said exactly what he was going to do. You are doing the same thing here. It doesn’t matter what I think. It only matters what he thinks and if you listen to him he will tell you what he thinks.

This is the same way we get good people, church going people who have spent their lives helping others able to justify being a Trumper. “Oh he didn’t mean that he means this…”

He means what he says. You don’t know him so stop talking for him.

Take it FWIW.

I am saying that Trump wants to get rid of illegal immigrants. He has definitely said this.

The debate is whether Trump wants to get rid of legal immigrants.

Based on some stuff he has said, he does for specific groups. Haitians have legal status, asylum seekers have legal status and cases like that. He has said this so no doubt he wants to do something here.

The real question, which is from JPhillips original comment concerning his daughter, does he need to worry about Trump doing something to legal, foreign born, naturalized citizens. I see little evidence of this. I don't think he has to worry about his daughter.

Serious question? Why are you so weirdly worried about his daughter. To the point you are arguing with him about what you think he heard and about what someone you don’t know meant to say.

I'm not worried about his daughter's legal, naturalized status at all. All my responses were towards his original statement below because I disagreed with it. The discussion broadened even though I was trying to keep it specific to his worry for his daughter.

Edward would have 100% reported his neighbors in Nazi Germany then let the system work itself out while they were shipped to concentration camps.

I remember this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope.

The only source (not meant to be convincing to you but just a data point) I can give you is I didn’t report the migrants (likely illegal) that built houses in our subdivision. On multiple occasions, I found their family sheltered in my basement while my and neighbors house was being built.

You blaming immigrants, who presumably were not paid well enough to afford (or be given) housing, rather than the builders who employed them is not the flex you think it is. I’m sure you got a good price on the house (certainly cheaper than if you had hired red white and blue Americans who were tragically forced out of their jobs by the illegals) and it’s cool that they can be discarded now, though.

In my personal example, I’m certainly not blaming the illegal immigrants for using my basement.

If you read my other discussions, I acknowledge we need migrant labor. I just want to use legal guest worker program (no path to citizenship). Also, in my other discussions, you’ll see that I’ve said we need to address supply and the demand side.

I don’t know how anyone could vote for the two candidates we have. One is a felon who has ties to the Middle East through his son’s business. The other is an idiot who will say anything to get elected and is a DEI puppet.

Both are threats to democracy as far as I’m concerned. Trump speaks for himself. Harris was selected as VP based on being a woman, was the first to drop out of the primaries in 2020, and was handed the nomination by the democratic elite.

I would ask what qualifications a Black woman might need to not be an “idiot DEI hire” but I feel like anything less than minor deity might fall short…

Vance is the ultimate DEI. His qualifications were being a white guy who sucked up to Trump.

She was not the 1st to drop out in 2020. She dropped out before the primaries but 13 people actually dropped out before. That's a Trump talking point you're repeating.

And she was the Attorney General of a state larger than most countries, a 2 time Senator, and current Vice President. Trump had zero experience, Obama had less experience, Bush Jr. had less experience, Carter had less experience, and so on.

As long as you're willing to employ migrant workers without a clear path to citizenship you're going to have an illegal migrant problem.

What's wrong with a path to citizenship?

Don't we have one already called "legal immigration"?

I really don't know why, can you elaborate?

Come over illegally, work illegally and be taken advantage of etc. Or come through a renewable guest worker program. Neither path will provide a path to citizenship but the latter has clear benefits.

I'll refer you to Biden's Immigration Reform - Page 7 - Front Office Football Central and post #307 and down. I think #317 and #325 will answer your question from my POV.

Legislatively, I want a grand bargain on immigration reform (see same thread #82). Dems want pathway to citizenship, GOP do not. This seems to be the main sticking point. So, my happy compromise is grant legal status to illegals through renewable guest worker programs.

Question to you: Do you support citizenship for the approx 11M+ illegals? And if so, why?

Would they pay taxes because taxation without representation is pretty unAmerican.

It would be similar to what Permanent Residents who do not become citizens. They work, they pay taxes, and they can collect on social security and (I believe) medicare after X years worked. But they can't vote.

So yes, it'll be "taxation without representation" but there is recent precedence. And it'll be voluntary, they can chose to apply for the guest worker program or not and accept the positives and negatives.

I have never once in my life cared if anyone else had a chance to become a citizen. This is some Starship Troopers level crap here. If they live here, work here, and aren’t criminals why not just give them some way to belong. And no I’m not referring to anything. I don’t care what you think, honestly. I think you are insane.

Okay. You and I have different belief systems & POVs. We'll agree to disagree.

I’m currently reading The Known World. Much of it is set in pre-Civil War Virginia. As such, there is a lot of “show me your papers.” Basically, everywhere they go, Black folk - free or slave, because you can’t tell which is which - has sto stop for the patrollers and show their papers when encountered. Because it’s “the law”. Of course the patrollers can harass the free men any way they please, even if they have valid papers (and have stopped them any number of times over YEARS).

They can also make the papers disappear.

Good to know there are folks who are itching to go back to that.

(Well, it could be argued we never really stopped, but that’s another thread.)

Don't forget the usual answer to replacing the immigrant labor has been to have 14-16 year old teenagers work full time. 1850's America was *awesome*

Today Trump said that the left is the biggest problem in America and he'll handle it with the National Guard or the military.

Archimedes would like a word.

How many times does Trump have to do this stuff before people get the message? Oh, that's right. They already know, they just don't care.




I never thought the leopards would eat my face.

It sure sounds like, when you had the opportunity to be principled and consistent and ethical about your views on the usage of illegal immigrants, you chose to do what was most beneficial to you by using a builder that skirts the rules/law so that you could get your house more cheaply. There are plenty of contractors that do not use illegal immigrants, why not put your money where your mouth is when you have the opportunity to do so?

Huh, I’m not sure what you are thinking?

I bought a house under construction in a subdivision by a big home builder. I had no idea who was actually doing the hands on work at that time. I visited the house several times under construction to see how things were going.

What are you thinking I should have done? Report the illegals to the big home builder corporate office or to INS?

I would love to know what your achievements as an adult are compared to hers.

She was raised by a single mother, went to a HBCU (Howard) for undergrad, a decidedly not Ivy League school for her JD (Cal-Hastings), and first worked as an assistant district attorney (working with child abuse and neglect cases - not the most prestigious or desirable population to work with). From there, she was elected, which I would assume you would agree is not something that DEI can give a leg up to someone, as the San Francisco district attorney for 10-years, AG of California for six years, Senator for California for 4-years, and Vice President of the United States (on the ticket that received the most votes in US history) for the past 4 years. Now, you can argue that every VP is given an opportunity as a "diversity and equality and inclusion" selection (Pence as a religious, experienced government official; Vance as a younger, veteran, midwestern male; Walz as a midwestern, union, ex-military, etc), but I don't see how her being chosen as a black woman was any different than Obama chasing Biden as an establishment, white male, or McCain choosing Palin as a younger, female. An old, white democrat choosing a younger, black female is just another example of balancing the ticket.

I guess I am sincerely curious as to what criteria a black female could be added to a presidential ticket without you considering it a DEI puppet? Look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.

I did a quick search queue of the word "immigration" and you have made 524 posts about it, so I assume it is on your mind quite a lot: Front Office Football Central

You also have over 300 posts with the word "illegal": Front Office Football Central

When you were signing all the paperwork and making sure that all the proper permits, licenses, insurance were in place, did it cross your mind to consider whether the people building your house were doing so legally (proper labor laws followed, payroll taxes being paid by the builder)? It just seems like someone that is so interested in immigration would like to make sure that things are being done above board for, what I assume, is one of the biggest financial investments of your life? If not, that is fine, as I am sure it was financially advantageous to you to get the labor as cheaply as you possibly could - but surprising, given that you seem to have such strong feelings on the subject and would have the opportunity to actually affect change in a situation like this by demanding that your builder do things by the way that they were legally or morally intended.

Just say the N word. That's what you really want to say.

Apparently another potential assassination attempt thwarted in CA?