But that has always been the case since America's 1st immigration Amnesty in the 1980s:
Posted on 04/02/2018 6:57:01 AM PDT by davikkm
Mexico is perpetrating a crime by helping 1,000 Hondurans march through the country to invade the United States. The immigrants are not Mexican citizens; therefore, Mexico has no legal basis to allow them to use their country to illegally cross into the US. I thought we had a good relationship with Mexico, but as President Trump said, “Mexico must help.”
President Trump gave a brief message on the crisis before attending Easter service:
https://youtu.be/buDd0Ha7LbE
He, also tweeted about the situation:
Trump made the comment that these immigrants are trying to take advantage of DACA. He said, “NO MORE DACA DEAL!”
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...
Our government would deal more harshly with citizens trying to stop them than they would the illegal aliens trying to break into our country.
As these people move north we will be able to tell where they have intend to cross. Surge a pile of BP agents into that sector and shut the ports of entry. Force the Mexicans to turn them around.
Shoot to kill!!! Or, “Release the hounds!”.
I believe it was the new Republic of Texas that got all that land. Right?
It's a winner for President Trump if he takes aggressive action to stop them at the border. If they are allowed to enter the country unopposed, he has lost all credibility on the issue of illegal immigration.
But that has always been the case since America's 1st immigration Amnesty in the 1980s:
Texas fought Mexico for independence in 1836
We (USA) fought Mexico in 1846-1848 after we annexed Texas. We gained much more land after that. Then We BOUGHT land from Mexico Gadsden purchase. To straighten out border lines etc.
I’ll be very happy if any compromise involving DACA (particularly anything involving a path to citizenship) is in fact permanently off the table, as opposed to being a negotiation bluff.
You're particularly right about the danger of DACA granting a path to US citizenship - even just to the recipients and not their families. Chain migration will take care of their family anyway.
Time to deploy concertina razor wire and plug it into 440V
I wasn't pleased that Trump was initially willing to compromise on DACA in return for funding for the border wall. However, the fact that he also demanded an end to chain migration in exchange for not deporting the DACA anchor-babies would have minimized the damage that they could do. If an end to chain migration is combined with the stipulation that the DACA beneficiaries can never become citizens, that would be a compromise I could live with in return for a border wall.
“Mexico is perpetrating a crime”
just because in our country we may perceive it a crime, doesn’t mean it’s a crime what mexico chooses to do in their own country as the S American’s come through. I agree it severely hurts country relations but to say Mexico is perpetuating a crime is not accurate, imo.
This is true, and unfortunately it isn't only the Democrats. Well over half of Congressional Republicans are on the same open borders and amnesty page as the Democrats.
The national question - our sovereign right to decide who does get to live or vote here and who doesn't, is probably the most important issue facing America. Not surprisingly, it has become a litmus test for one's standing relative to the internationalist political establishment. If you're concerned with the national question and favor immigration restrictions, you're an "extremist." In contrast, as long as you're in favor of amnesty and open borders, there's room for disagreement on almost everything else - you have the credentials necessary to be member of the elite political establishment, or at least one of their lapdogs.
I believe the annexation is where the US almost tripled in land mass...all the way north to parts of what is now Colorado. I believe we picked up the land between the Nueces River and the Rio Grane when the US fought Mexico. I may be wrong and I’m too lazy to look it up.
Think Pershing in 1916: 
You can be sure they will cross at a sanctuary state. Cali or NM. Being it's a San Diego activist group leading them, Tijuana would be a good bet.
I’m was called a punitive expedition. It was for punishment. Patton was a young officer who killed a couple of Villaistas and tied their corpses to the tenders of his car and brought them back to Pershing.
This is an Act of War!
No need to be heavy handed. Just shoot the coyotes. Let the smart ones run back south and spread the word...
The gringos are shooting coyotes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.