Posted on 02/12/2016 2:12:41 PM PST by conservativejoy
Trump's supporters loved his promise this week to create a "deportation force†to remove all 11 million illegal immigrants living in America, and his repeated declaration that everyone here illegally will “have to go."
But his supporters tend to overlook is his other promise - repeated in a recent debate - that under his immigration plan "they will come back."
That's right. Under Trump's immigration plan almost all of 11 million illegal aliens (save for a small minority with criminal records) will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay here in America.
Trump supports amnesty.
On the Kelly File Thursday, Trump's son Eric expressed frustration that the media overlooks this:
The point isn't just deporting them, it's deporting them and letting them back in legally. He's been so clear about that and I know the liberal media wants to misconstrue it, but its deporting them and letting them back legally.
Eric Trump is right. His father has been crystal clear that he wants all the illegals to return and live in America.
Listen closely to what Trump is actually proposing. In an interview with CNN's Dana Bash earlier this year, Trump explained his plan this way:
I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal. A lot of these people are helping us ... and sometimes it's jobs a citizen of the United States doesn't want to do. I want to move 'em out, and we're going to move 'em back in and let them be legal.
This is a policy called "touchback" and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX). She offered a "touchback" amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special "Z visa" that would allow them to reenter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.
Her amendment lost by a relatively close margin, 53-45. It was supported by most Republicans and even got five Democratic votes - Sens. Claire McCaskill, Max Baucus, Jon Tester, Byron Dorgan and John Rockefeller all voted for it.
The idea was considered so reasonable that in an April 22, 2007 editorial entitled "Progress on Immigration," the New York Times declared:
It's not ideal, but if a touchback provision is manageable and reassures people that illegal immigrants are indeed going to the back of the line, then it will be defensible.
So what Trump is proposing today - sending illegal immigrants back to their home countries and then allowing the "good ones" to return in an "expedited" fashion - was endorsed by the liberal New York Times!
In fact, the idea even got the support of - wait for it - illegal immigrants.
In 2007, the Los Angeles Times did the first telephone poll of illegal immigrants and asked whether they would go home under a "touchback" law that allowed them to return with legal status. Sixty-three percent said yes, 27% said no and 10% were undecided. If they were promised a path to citizenship when they returned, the number who said they would leave and return legally grew to 85%.
Donald Trump's detractors were aghast at his invocation during the Fox Business debate of President Dwight D. Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback" which forcibly removed 1.5 million illegal immigrants, and his promise the following day to establish a "deportation force" to remove the 11 million illegal immigrants living in America today.
Never mind the fact that we already have a "deportation force" - it's called US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The fact is, Trump won't need a "deportation force" or an "Operation Wetback" to get illegal immigrants to go home - because he has promised that they can return quickly with legal status.
The vast majority of illegal immigrants say they would voluntarily cooperate with Trump's plan.
If anything, the "touchback" plan Trump endorses was attacked by conservatives back in 2007. In an editorial, National Review called touchback a "fraud" that gives illegal aliens “their own privileged pathway†ahead of "applicants who have complied with US immigration laws."
That is precisely what Trump is proposing. Under his plan, illegal aliens don't have to go to the end of the line behind those who have complied with our immigration laws. They get an "expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal." They get to cut the line and then stay in America.
So if you get past Trump's bluster, the plan he is proposing is so liberal that it earned the support of the New York Times and the opposition of National Review.
The reason is simple: Trump's plan is in fact a form of amnesty - you just have to leave the country briefly to get it.
So when Trump says of illegal immigrants "they all have to go," don't overlook the fact that under his plan almost all would be able to immediately return – and stay.
This means there is very little difference between his plan and what John Kasich and Jeb Bush are supporting.
And most of his supporters don't even realize it.
Yeah like that is going to happen. Even if they did fingerprint them criminals here are fingerprinted and they still commit crimes and disappear from justice.
Yuuge wall, deport, let everyone apply legally, select those that would fit in society for legal immigration(as it should have been anyway). Some of those applying may have once been illegal. Many won’t have been. But all coming here need to assimilate, obey laws or get out.
And well that may be. I’ll check further than just what you’re posting. Seems you’re being disingenuous because of your own leanings and I hate when people try to change other people’s minds by taking things out of context in order to sway others.
Here’s what it says on the issues, hmmm, doesn’t say anything near what you’re saying and these are straight from the horses mouth. But I will investigate further, hope you have your facts right and not just making things up. I know he did say some could come back but it would be LEGALLY. We’ll see. He’s the only one that will build the wall.
lick here for 30 full quotes on Immigration OR other candidates on Immigration OR background on Immigration.
No apology for banning Muslims from entering America. (Jan 2016)
Need to keep database of Muslim refugees. (Nov 2015)
We must stop illegal immigration; it hurts us economically. (Nov 2015)
I don’t care how they come in, if they come in legally. (Oct 2015)
Syrian refugees are a Trojan Horse. (Oct 2015)
Syrian refugee crisis partly our fault; but don’t take any. (Oct 2015)
We’re only country dumb enough for birthright citizenship. (Sep 2015)
Illegal immigrants populate many criminal gangs. (Sep 2015)
This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish. (Sep 2015)
Half of the undocumented residents in America are criminals. (Jun 2015)
We need strong borders; we need a wall. (Feb 2015)
Citizenship for illegal immigrants is a GOP suicide mission. (Mar 2013)
351,000 illegal aliens are in our prisons; costing $1.1B. (Dec 2011)
Anchor babies were NEVER the intent of the 14th Amendment. (Dec 2011)
Invite foreigners graduating from college to stay in US. (Dec 2011)
Control borders; even legal immigration should be difficult. (Jul 2000)
Limit new immigration; focus on people already here. (Dec 1999)
Mexico
Ship millions back to Mexico, like Eisenhower did. (Nov 2015)
Walls on borders work; just ask Israel. (Nov 2015)
Mexico will pay for wall, but not through tariffs. (Nov 2015)
I can get Mexico to pay for border wall; politicians can’t. (Oct 2015)
The border wall will be well-managed and built correctly. (Aug 2015)
We need wall on Mexican border, but ok to have a door in it. (Aug 2015)
Mexican government is sending criminals across the border. (Aug 2015)
Building a wall will save money because it stops bad dudes. (Jul 2015)
OpEd: businesses & Republicans condemn anti-Mexico terms. (Jul 2015)
Make Mexico pay for wall with severe economics. (Jun 2015)
Mexico & Latin America send us drugs, crime, and rapists. (Jun 2015)
Build great wall on southern border; have Mexico pay for it. (Jun 2015)
Triple-layered fence & Predator drones on Mexican border. (Dec 2011)
Donald Trump on Jobs
Can you cite a source for this or is it pure speculation on your part. This is crazy, this might be your plan but it's certainly not his (unless you can come up with some credible source where you got this information).
Why? Why let those who came here illegally live here legally?
You sound exactly like the Obamabots. You hear whatever you WANT to hear, not what was said. You’re projecting, not hearing.
Because you will never stop them without yet another government data bank and more tax money wasted. Once deported with nowhere to illegally return, how many do you think will go through the hoops of legal immigration to return? Maybe those willing to do that love this country enough to contribute. Many have lived here since birth because I think we send even the so called dreamers back to start over legally anchor baby or not.
Because you think we can’t keep those we’ve deported out, we should make it legal for them to return? That makes no sense at all!
Would you have the same for those who have committed violent crimes while here as well? I imagine not, so I see no reason to legalize especially those whom you’re certain will just break our laws again.
And—we’ve already imported with legal credentials a century’s worth of low-skill immigrants from third-world countries. Masters or above in STEM fields would be about the only ones I’d welcome here for the next decade.
I totally disagree with most of what you say as I am not for increasing government like the new data bank you would need but I agree on limiting immigration severely until Americans are thriving at least a decade likely. Because someone applies to immigrate does not mean they need be allowed.
Neither of us is likely to change our opinions so have a terrific day!
Illegals aren’t eligible to return legally according to our present laws. Trump would have to change or ignore the law (maybe some sort of bogus executive order claim like Obama has used) in order to not only suddenly make them eligible to return, but to then expedite their return over others.
Oh, and BTW, those who have been here since birth are legal US citizens according to our present laws.
We don’t even know who all is here or has been so illegally. It has been a revolving door. So your idea is not workable. Again I think you want something that requires more government data resources. Kicking them out doesn’t. Reapplying doesn’t give them anything including priority. And you are full of that bad word “crap” about Trump. Bye now.
Because we might not keep every illegal out is no reason for us to scrap our laws barring their return. We need to do a better job of enforcement to keep that from happening in the vast majority of cases.
Trump’s still my candidate (or Cruz), I’d be happy with either, given our choices. But that’s no reason for me to delude myself nor let misinformed or worse Freepers try to misinform others on this board.
I get it—you’re massively pro-amnesty.
The Citizenship Clause is the first sentence of Section 1 in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”
As of 2015, there has been no Supreme Court decision that explicitly holds that persons born in the U.S. to illegal aliens are automatically afforded U.S. citizenship.
Truly move on. I will never agree with you.
Illegals are subjects of their country of origin! You may believe that the Democrat Immigtation Act of 1965 overrides the Consttutional Amendment I do not.
Our laws as currently enforced consider them citizens, and though I agree that the Constitution properly read doesn’t, there’s no scenario—and you make your case here for amnesty based on supposed realism—by which those so considered are going to have it retroactively taken away from them.
You can’t keep posting misinformation and wacko assumptions here and not expect someone to correct you.
The horse you are beating is dead. Move on. You won’t change my opinion nor I yours. I have a right to my opinion. My opinion is no wackier than yours. One last request to end the conversation by agreeing to disagree beyond this you are badgering.
I haven’t posted anything to this thread that you haven’t responded to.
I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal. A lot of these people are helping us... and sometimes it's jobs a citizen of the United States doesn't want to do. I want to move 'em out, and we're going to move 'em back in and let them be legal.
This is a policy called "touchback" and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas). She offered a "touchback" amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special "Z visa" that would allow them to re-enter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.
Care to give a specific example? I somehow do not think you will.
The reality is that it will be very difficult for any of them to come back legally given the fact that they have committed multiple crimes beyond just entering illegally. As someone who has actually issued visas, the vast majority of them couldn't even get a tourist visa let alone a permanent immigrant visa.
Trump has taken lots of heat for his position that all of them must go. Like a politician, which he is not, he tried to soften the blow by saying it will be done humanely and that the good ones will be allowed to come legally. I am sure Trump does not know immigration law and our visa policies. None of the candidates really do.
It is just hyperbole and misinformation to say that Trump favors amnesty. He does not and I am sure will reiterate that tonight in the debate. I can guarantee that he will not retreat from his position that all the illegal aliens must go.
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.