Ted Cruz Says Donald Trump’s Immigration Policy Amounts to 'Amnesty'

ABC News ^ | Jan 22, 2016 | JESSICA HOPPER

[PA Engineer]

Thanks Admin!

[biff]

Your last sentence is what donnie took from the cruz long time plane. Actually since 2011.

[Seattle Conservative]

I like your post!

[trebb]

Anyone else listen to that interview? Hate to say it but Cruz misrepresented.

[Redleg Duke]

Good Lord! Did he say this with a straight face? How much did his nose grow?

Conservatives are supposed to be rooted in logic...this is totally illogical!

What respect and enthusiasm I once had for Cruz (And I had a great deal!) has evaporated as he has proven to be nothing but a Washington Politician!

[Steven Tyler]

Y`know, every time I read “Ted Cruz says” National Enquier, or the Globe, now come to mind.

The cruzandian has ruined his credibility

[FenwickBabbitt]

Cruz is such a facile, skilled liar. I’ve already disproven these lies about Trump on other threads (the lie about him supporting the amnesty bill, when he spoke out against it repeatedly is especially egregious), so I won’t revisit that here, but I just marvel at Cruz’s cunning deviousness and manipulation of the facts. I see why he’s such a great lawyer.

[TBP]

Every one of the things I posted about Trump is absolutely, completely 100 percent TRUE.

Ted Cruz actually fought the bill and yet you claim he was for amnesty. All Donald did was make a statement and he’s totally against amnesty. You don’t even see the contradiction there, do you?

Now, Trump has spoken of “giving them a path”, of illegals needing to “come out from under the shadows”, of “Making it possible for them to succeed here”. His policy, as many people have pointed out, mirrors the “touchback” amnesty of the 2007 immigration bill. I can post the links and show it to you, but Trumpkins won’t believe it even in the face of the facts and evidence. (They’re much like liberals in that regard.)

[TBP]

What Trump has proposed is sending illegals home, then letting “the good ones” back in. His son Eric Trump wants to make sure you understand that second part.

Now, touchback was a scheme whereby illegals had to go to their home countries, then they’d be eligible to return to the USA. Not all would hve gotten back in.

IOW, they’re the same thing. The Trumpsters are in denial about that, but it’s a fact.

[A Conservative Thinker]

No, that's called projection. You're to caught up in all the Trump mania to take a hard look and analyze his record. Like you, I liked the buzz surrounding Trump's remarks on immigration but once you sort through the hype and look back at his record you find holes and a large canyon in 2013. Ted Cruz has nothing to do with my position and really avoided going after him until January. You did attempt to misdirect me and spin the comments Donald Trump made against Mitt Romney to give a misleading impression that they're consistent with anything but pandering to Hispanics and supportive of amnesty. You ignored his reference to comprehensive reform and continue to spin. I would point to his 2013 meeting with a Democrat Strategist and three DREAMer activists that were on tour. They evidently "convinced him" on the issue and he admitted to employing illegal aliens in Miami. I would point to his support for a path citizenship in remarks to the press in Chicago endorsing amnesty. I would point to Eric Trump's complaint about the media ignoring their swift reentry upon deportation. I would point to his "big open door" in reference to building a wall on the southern border. I am sure you'll spin that as well but he clearly did support amnesty and he has no record of opposing the Gang of 8 immigration bill. Jeff Sessions has stated that Ted Cruz was right along side him fighting it and Trump supporters overlook it or intentionally ignore it. Ted Cruz supports making E-Verify a requirement. Cruz was running for Senate on building a wall and his amendment was thwarted in committee. Is Ted Cruz the perfect candidate on the issue? Absolutely not. As I said, I am completely opposed to any effort to legalize law breaking otherwise called amnesty. We do not owe illegal aliens anything nor are they entitled to anything because use they utterly disregard American laws and sovereignty. I want American soldiers on the border defending our country. Mark Kirkorian formerly at CIS summed up my take on Trump and immigration..he made it an issue for 2016 but that's the extent of it and you can't seriously support him. There is a Latino vote because of prior amnesty and anchor babies. Its absurd that illegal aliens can birth US citizens and to his credit Trump made that an issue. If you want address Ted Kennedy's immigration bill in 1965, I don't see you as being serious about undoing the problem. It opened up America to the entire third world and the Democrats are importing their constituents. I've already went on record saying I will take Trump as a secondary choice very reluctantly with huge misgivings as a protest againat the GOPe if somehow Ted Cruz was not the nominee.

[A Conservative Thinker]

I’m pressed for time and we can discuss this later.

[Heart of Georgia]

“BTW, if I seemed a little harsh on you, I apologize.”

Not at all, no apology needed. :)

“It’s just very frustrating that so often, the right questions do not get asked of our candidates.”

Yes, it is. I don’t always think of the best questions to ask; however, I’m here hunting for info whenever I have free time.

“In all fairness, I DO have many questions for Mr. Trump. A very few of them are, concerning immigration”

Regarding your list of questions .. I’d be interested if you get any answers, directly or indirectly. Thanks for your post!

[Paul R.]

One other thing: I have found out the hard way, in life, repeatedly (until it got through my thick skull!*), that going by what people say, at one time or another, well spoken or not, is a good way to get into trouble, fast. If I have absolute trust in someone, then, yes, their word is good enough for me. But, otherwise, and certainly any politician fits into "otherwise", one MUST "get it in writing". This is true in business or most any legal matter, really. Not doing so has cost me terribly in the past, and probably resulted in me having 1/4 to 1/2 the "wealth" I'd otherwise have now, to take care of my family, and so on. Even then, once you "have it in writing", one must evaluate the person you are "contracting" with. Oversimplifying, this boils down to "Do they have a history of "delivering the goods" as promised?"

In this context, Trump, as an executive, looks pretty good, tho' certainly not flawless. With Cruz, it's more like "huh?".

This is certainly not the only consideration, but, it is a very significant one.

My biggest concerns with Trump are in the area of personal freedom. He's screwed up about the San Bernardino shooter's cell phone, for example. That's understandable, if he was watching friends die, on 911, but, I really wish he'd talk to the woman in CA who's husband, I think it was, died in the S.B. shooting, and yesterday(?) she was interviewed regarding the Apple vs. FBI dispute. I was very impressed that she could see the privacy concerns regarding the FBI's desires...

It does no good to go after an evil now, by creating what could, no, will, without iron-clad safeguards, grow into a greater monster later. Can Trump think ahead decades, or generations?

[kabar]

No, the Mike Pence touchback scan was far different than that. Aside from the off the cuff remark, Trump has never provided any details on how they would return except they would come back legally. Since the overwhelming majority of the lawbreakers have committed multiple crimes in addition to entering illegally, a misdemeanor the first time and a felony thereafter, it is doubtful many could return unless you change the laws.

Here is a 2006 article by Phyllis Schafly on the Pence touchback scam: Whatever Happened to Mike Pence?

Despite the consistent failure of all guest worker plans (e.g., France), Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) is peddling a new plan to import foreign workers who really are guests and really do go home. Pence has turned his back on the 88 percent of House Republicans who voted that we must achieve border security first, because we'll be cheated on border security if Congress passes a "comprehensive" bill.

The Pence plan tries to avoid the amnesty label by requiring illegal aliens now in the U.S. to make what he calls "a quick trip across the border" to Mexico or Canada to pick up a new W visa. A foreigner could get a W visa only if a U.S. employer certifies that a job awaits him.

Pence's plan calls for setting up privately financed offices outside the U.S., with the cutesy title Ellis Island Centers, to hand out the new W visas, which he claims would be more efficient than government bureaucracy. Business would, indeed, be more efficient than government in importing more foreign workers.

Having private employment agencies distribute the W visas would put the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Private industry has a built-in incentive to import as much cheap labor as possible.

[Robert DeLong]

No I think I was correct tunnel-vision, and here's why.

You focus entirely on what Donald Trump has said in the past while total ignoring what he has said in recent times.

Here is Donald Trump's immigration reform plan. In contrast here is what Ted Cruz recently had to say with regards to immigration reform as he will deal with it. In many ways they are the same. I do not honestly believe Trump will round them up either, except when it comes to gang-bangers. I think it will take force and Donald will employ force there. But Donald actually goes a few steps further than Ted that will facilitate their leaving. I will leave it up to you to read his statement rather than provide it here. Since Ted was a Johnny come lately to stating he would deport those here illegally, he must have had some other plan in mind for them, like perhaps amnesty. Now let's take on Romney's plan, self-deportation, really? That's an effective plan? It may indeed be what happens, but other things have to happen first. Again Donald discusses those at the link as well. Obviously, at least to me at any rate, there is nothing mean with regards to Romney's plan to deal with illegals. Since he used the word Republicans, we must conclude it was intended to be taken separately and not directly referring to Romney. I am under the opinion Donald totally underestimated the power the press has in formulating people's opinions. Do you think he might have a clue now? I think he does.

The only thing I am caught up in doing is what is best for this country, and hopefully you have the same goal. We just disagree whom we think will be more successful. But my biggest concern is Ted's eligibility, for I do not believe he qualifies as a natural born citizen. By the mere fact that it can be a topic of question, makes me certain of my belief. His being a citizen is without question. But he is citizen by virtue of what Congress has stated with regards to children born out of the country where at least one parent is a citizen. A natural born citizen would be someone where there is zero doubt of their citizenship. Born in this country and both parents are American citizens are the only ones who rise to the criteria satisfying natural born status.

I do not operate in the manner you accuse me of. I do not knowingly misdirect anyone or employ spin tactics. Instead I gave you my interpretations. In that case it was of Donald's statements. If you don't accept my interpretation that's fine. You are certainly free to interpret as you choose. However, you are not free to cavalierly accuse me of anything.

I didn't ignore comprehensive reform at all, in fact I underlined and bolded that very line. What exactly does comprehensive reform mean to you? To me it means an all encompassing reform, and in this case he is referring to immigration. It neither implies or makes reference to amnesty.

The tweet you reference from 2013 clearly states: Congress must protect our borders first. Amnesty should be done only if the border is secure and illegal immigration is stopped. From that you interpret he is supportive of amnesty. However, I think you are overlooking the fact a few months earlier the immigration bill was submitted by Schumer and cosponsored by seven other Senators, or the Gang of 8 as they were later referred to. That bill called for amnesty. So as I read his tweet I see him as opposing the bill, and calling for border security before any talk of amnesty can continue. When that has been accomplished we can then talk about amnesty. It in no way implies to me his support or rejection of amnesty.

As for the big open door statement, he was, again as I read it, signaling that America is and always will be very supportive on immigration.

I have said many times now that I have given kudos to Ted Cruz on numerous occasions and he was my man, even after Donald Trump had entered the race. It really was a slow migration to Trump. It started when I came to the realization that this topic would not even have become an issue if it hadn't been for Donald. Furthermore, I realized that Ted Cruz could not have raised the issue. It had to be someone like Donald Trump. He had the money to finance his own campaign. His motivation? To me it was to give people a choice of someone to attack this problem and fix it. The straw that finally made me a Trump supporter was Ted's eligibility issue. Get a ruling Ted. I may not agree with the ruling but I can at least hang my hat on it. If you seriously think this will not become a real issue in the general election, think again. With the unfortunate passing of Anthony Scalia, it may prove to be an even bigger problem, and one that throws the election to the Democrat nominee.

Mark Kirkorian also said: if mass legal immigration is permitted to continue, the Right is finished. Even I could tell that is a reality, but apparently many Republican politicians believe they are conservative because many Hispanics are religious. It's just not the case. Yes, we have to fix this problem and fix it now. We also need to rollback the legal immigration flow, because the 1965 bill sponsored by Ted Kennedy, passed by both House of Congress in Democrat control, and signed into law by the President, also a Democrat; threw the doors wide open. This immigration bill not only allowed Africans and Asians, who were previously prohibited, the right to immigrate here. In addition it increased numbers for Southern and Eastern Europe and reduced numbers from Northern and Western Europe. During debate on the Senate floor, Senator Kennedy, speaking of the effects of the act, said, "our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. ... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset". Boy was he ever wrong, and even perhaps intentionally misleading. Either way, bad for America, and bad for Americans.

I had honestly hoped that the riff between Donald and Ted would cease and the possibility of them joining to form a knockout ticket would happen. I think that horse may have left the barn now though. But let's pray that happens.

[TBP]

Essentially the same thing. Go home, then (some, not all) come back.

That’s touchback, and that’s the Trump plan.

[kabar]

LOL. The Mike Pence touchback scheme is far different. It be run by the private sector. Did you even bother to read the Schlafly article?

Unless Congress changes the laws, very few would be able to come back legally.

[TBP]

Under the touchback scheme, illegals go home and then some get to come back.

Under the Trump plan, illegals go home and then some get to come back.

Essentially the same thing. Spin it however you want.