Posted on 04/05/2019 9:06:53 PM PDT by Innovative
President Donald Trump said Friday that there was no need for a summit with the Presidents of Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador because "they understand" the implications of his recent move to cut stabilizing aid to the Central American countries.
Trump's dismissal of a summit comes in light of a recent uptick in Mexico's apprehensions of migrants at its southern border, shared with Central America. It remains unclear whether the increase was spurred by Trump's threat to shut down the US-Mexico border if Mexico didn't stop migrants from illegally crossing the US border or simply from greater immigration traffic.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
:)
What we need to do is figure out how the put a stop to both the MS-13 and other Central American gangs, as well as the cartels in Mexico. Any foreign aid we give those countries needs to be designed so it does not line the pockets of corrupt politicians. Some of the NGO run projects sounded good, but cannot really succeed if the people they are helping are being robbed by gang “taxes”, even several at a time. How have places like NY or Chicago dealt with “protection” rackets?
I think I read somewhere that US Presidents have the power to unilaterally sign treaties. I think it came up when Obama was on one of his apology tours.
If that is the case then drawing up a treaty with very specific border control protocols would be the final solution
.
In the hundreds of postings here in Free Republic rarely is this brought up. It’s Known As Reciprocity. We treat Mexican citizens the way they treat Americans when we go there.
The issue of sovereignty should not be allowed to get twisted into being propagandized as “White Nationalism”. Use of that term is usually directed when the immigration issue is brought up to devalue of the protections an American citizen have by being one. When allowing the hoards illegally entering the US through the Mexican border avoid enforcing the reciprocal 2nd class treatment that American citizens get while legally residing in Mexico which of course also includes denial of voting privileges..
Today’s so called democrats insist Americans must allow illegals storm in here by the hundreds of thousands despite their cost to us of billion$ in tax dollars,which is never enough. Tax money that should be going to our citizens for their sustenance,health,education,and housing even infrastructure needs. But Americans must do the tax flagellating punishment because we’re the very rich United States and must divert those billion$ to fill the needs of those poor illegals plus give them the right to vote. Sustained by our tax money which our children’s children if not aborted will be paying for.
What never gets mentioned in all of this is the lacking reciprocal treatment. If we applied that policy Because when an American citizen ever tries getting any of those handouts including voting when going to where the great undocumented come from That would never happen. Would this continue ?
WHY ARE WE ALLOWING CITIZENS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES
WHO ENTER US ILLEGALLY GRANT THEM RIGHTS
THAT THEIR COUNTRY DENY US HAVING
WHEN WE ENTER THEIRS LEGALLY TO VISIT OR RETIRE ???
It’s time we consider illegal entry by any person who is a non Mexican citizen illegally entering the United States through the US Mexican border a defacto Mexican citizen with limited Mexican constitutional rights subject to their laws while transiting. As well as any Mexican citizen entering illegally exempting those who do so legally and meet US citizenship requirements. All subject to reciprocal citizen treatment a citizen of the United States receives in Mexico through the Mexican constitution on citizenship .
Besides being unable to vote one must also be a citizen to own land and Mexico is very restrictive about granting citizenship. Because of that a US citizen besides not being able to vote,and cannot have title in their name to any land property in Mexico. And until that is changed the US and the affected state should consider making that reciprocal. Prohibiting any illegal entrant employment, voting, and land ownership privileges fully enforced ..
In other words Sneak into this country before expulsion no job no voting no landowning ..
What Trump asked the State Department to do (seems like back in Feb), was asking if we could put the cartels onto the terrorist list. If approved, then we would shift to hunt-down or terminate status, and that creates an entire new game. They’d go after the money, the bosses, and the drug-flow would go into chaos in a matter of just a hundred days.
This would also create a tit-for-tat situation, with US political figures likely targeted by the cartels. Not sure if the State Department will sign off on this idea.
Presidents can sign any treaty but they only become law if ratified by two thirds of the senate. He can also sign an executive agreement (like nafta) but it needs a majority of both houses. Either can be abrogated by the president without getting approval.
...because "they understand" the implications of his recent move to cut stabilizing aid to the Central American countries.
There would just be coverage of the rioters who would be rioting because of his visit, assuming the summit happened in one of the other countries..
And he shall show no fear!!!
>> put the cartels onto the terrorist list.
The drug trade is definitely something that should be factored into the equation. So many points of leverage.
Were you always never-Trump or is this just a phase?
“...cut stabilizing aid...” ???
Of course, this is CNN, but still. Stabilizing Aid?
Well, if that were working, why are they still crossing Mexico to invade the US?
Such nonsense, even from the Clintoon News Nwtwork.
Absolutely right! they want a meeting to see if the stupid Americans will give us more money if we behave ourselves
“stabilizing aid” A perfect example of a fedgov contradiction in terms, sort of like Jumbo Shrimp.
What we need to do is figure out how the put a stop to both the MS-13 and other Central American gangs, as well as the cartels in Mexico.
EZ PZ .... halt ANY, ALL, EVERY SINGLE BIT, IN ITS ENTIRETY, EVERYTHING, related to immigration into this country to include EVERY SINGLE BIT o the any refugee program.
Only way someone should be able to come here as a refugee is if their status as a refugee was the direct result of an US initiated action ANNNNNDDDDD there’s no suitable place/country near their homes that we can assist them with. If the US does something in Self Defense or in retaliation to actions taken by their country, then they are SOL.
Be cheaper to put them up in CHUs and feed them at a chow hall, then letting them move to Minneapolis or Dearborn.
I think if there were a mechanism for him to do it all by himself, he would. But, he can’t. He’s put forward some legitimate policies and tried to change the rules. And off to the 9th Circuit they went. He has to go through Congress. And even when they had both Houses, they did nothing. He’s been obstructed from Day 1, because of Soros on the Left and the Koch Bros/Chamber of Commerce on the Right.
I will however concede that what he’s done with the DACA people and extending these work permits is pure bullsh*t.
I think, given all his campaign talk, a lot of states backed away from lawsuits about DACA and a few other things, thinking that he would take care of them. He didn’t. What’s most interesting to me is, even obama stated that many of the things he did through EOs wouldn’t stand up in court. So, he got as much mileage out of them as possible and yet, they’re still humming along.
But, then again, we could be doing a lot more for the guy. The Left will gather thousands to protest a frog in the desert that might have to move because of the border wall. If a few hundred thousand or a million or two, showed up in DC and around the country to support the guy, maybe some in Congress might get behind him.
KJU GAME
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.