Posted on 11/24/2018 12:01:19 PM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Edited on 11/24/2018 12:35:56 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Trump administration has reached a deal with Mexico's incoming government under which asylum seekers will wait in Mexico while their claims are assessed by US courts, The Washington Post reported on Saturday (Nov 24).
The deal, which would overhaul US border policy, comes with President Donald Trump outraged over the presence of thousands of Central American migrants who marched to the Mexican side of the border hoping to enter the US for a better life free from the poverty and gang violence in their homelands.
(Excerpt) Read more at straitstimes.com ...
1. We are screening them over their safety in Mexico?? (So they are presenting at our border)
2. We are speeding up the process -doubling it.
3. Once we deny the asylum claim, "They remain in US custody pending immediate deportation to his or her home country.**
We have to burden the cost of flying them back to Honduras- expected.
We are giving them a loophole to claim they don’t feel safe in Mexico?
We had better being filling up the plane daily and deporting them by the hundreds, asap.
When it's written that way, it makes Trump outrage sound unjustified.
Shouldn't the word "unvetted" be included?
Shouldn't the 5 or 10% compliance rate with showing up for their asylum hearing under "catch and release" be noted?
Shouldn't the gang issues be noted?
How about welfare and voter fraud?
Better to incur the costs of flying them home than have them become dependents of the American welfare state!
Wars Over!
Go Home.
An initial screening about staying in Mexico being dangerous sounds like it has to be done while they are still in Mexico. Wouldn’t Mexico have to do that? Are they going to admit that they are dangerous to foreigners?
and cost effective
Really pretty cheap since round trip coach coast to coast in US is about $600, probably less that keeping even one of them here for just a week. Also flying coach is comfortable enough, compared to how they usually travel, that many might voluntarily take the ride.
"Alleged" would be applicable as well. Or, the media's recent favorite, "With no evidence provided".
We are giving them a loophole to claim they don’t feel safe in Mexico?
><><
I think you nailed it. Yes, possibly a huge loophole.
This is closing a much bigger loophole. As long as catch and release is occuring they come. Once they know they will not be released into the US, the flood drops off to a trickle.
The asylum seekers “are in danger in Mexico”.
You want to see people in danger? Go to San Francisco. People are pooping on the sidewalks and needles are lying around everywhere!
This is 2nd hand from WAPO. Of course, it’s written with garbage bias thrown in.
San Francisco is where we should take anyone we catch sneaking in illegally and who we can’t deport. It’s a sanctuary city and SF would be glad to have them. Dump the sick ones out at the best Hospital in town and the rest in front of the Mayors house.
Excellent. Not sufficient, but a step in the right direction.
It’s good that Mexico is willing to cooperate with the US.
“We are giving them a loophole to claim they don’t feel safe in Mexico?”
If the rules were drafted right, they would have to justify that “feeling” with some proof.
Once the asylum seeking mob realizes they have to live in Mexico for months, awaiting a small chance that they will be admitted (near zero chance for all those young males), we shall see just how “peaceful” they really are... Some will accept their dreams of free stuff in the USA are dashed, and go home. Others will fight. It won’t be much fun in Mexico, like it would have been in the USA.
But if they all claim they’re not safe in Mexico don’t they have to be let in?
So what happens when this is announced? Riots?
Taco Tuesday!!!
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.