Walker inserted “ no amnesty” into that county resolution. So please stop lying on purpose. This has been shown to you multiple times.
Additionally, Walker has clarified, each time, that whether it was work permits, or fines that he does not support amnesty or a path to citizenship ahead of those in the legal system now.
Walker may not have been clear in the past, but he NEVER supported amnesty.
Walker toured the border states, talked with the governors and adoped Jeff Sessions’ position on immigration.
That is pretty good.
The 2006 resolution embracing the McCain-Kennedy bill was sent to Walker by the Milwaukee Board of Supervisors. He signed it despite returning or vetoing numerous other matters that year. The final version of the resolution signaled support for criminalizing federal immigration law violations and increased border fencing. But it also referred to a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and “full labor rights.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/scott-walkers-immigration-problem-115303.html
Erik, what do you think a "path to citizenship is?"
Additionally, Walker has clarified, each time, that whether it was work permits, or fines that he does not support amnesty or a path to citizenship ahead of those in the legal system now.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker told a private dinner of New Hampshire Republicans this month that he backed the idea of allowing undocumented immigrants to stay in the country and to eventually become eligible for citizenship, a position at odds with his previous public statements on the matter.
Erik, what do you think a "pathway to citizenship" is?
Walker may not have been clear in the past
I still supported Walker and defended him given his past remarks. All I'm asking for is clarity. This is the 2nd time in which he has signaled support for comprehensive immigration reform (amnesty).
but he NEVER supported amnesty.
Bullsh-t.
Walker toured the border states, talked with the governors and adoped Jeff Sessions’ position on immigration.
That's fine, but where's the clarity and unabashed support for upholding the rule of law and treating illegal immigration as a national security/sovereignty issue and not an economic one?