Posted on 10/23/2013 6:32:16 PM PDT by jimbo123
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is planning to release legislation next week that would provide legal status for six years to undocumented immigrants in the United States, he said in an interview Wednesday.
Issa, an influential Republican who leads the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, described the legislation as a “come-from-the-shadows” effort that would allow the government to do a full accounting of those who are in the U.S. illegally. Immigrants in this new status would be able to travel to their native country while on this temporary visa, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
RE :”I am sure you mean Hillary.”
or Christie. But maybe Hillary will beat him.
He is exceeding prosecutorial discretion. He is doing more than just selectively enforcing the law. He is legalizing the status of an entire class of lawbreakers, giving them work permits and social security, and allowing them to travel freely to and from this country.
There is a reason the ICE union issued a unnamimous vote of no confidence in the head of ICE, ICE's Mission Melt: Agents Vote 'No Confidence' in Leadership
On June 11, 2010, the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council and its constituent local representatives from around the nation, acting on behalf of approximately 7,000 ICE officers and employees from the ICE Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), cast a unanimous “Vote of No Confidence” in the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), John Morton, and the Assistant Director of the ICE Office of Detention Policy and Planning, (ODPP), Phyllis Coven.
Where you get the 3 million figure from?
Pew Hispanic Center estimated that 1.4 million aliens qualify for the amnesty. But those granted amnesty will then be able to sponsor parents, siblings, etc. once they reach 21. CIS and other knowledgeable immigration experts like NumbersUSA have put the figure around 3 million after all is said and done.
SCOTUS ruled that POTUS decides how to enforce laws, and Bush and Obama did.
Please cite the SCOTUS decision.
What I thought, I figured you just made that up. We were talking about those who signed up for Obama’s made up dreamer program which I assume is not many since they know any POTUS can deport them at any time for any reason so applying is a risk,
You jumped to hypothetical about a amnesty bill different subject.
Nonsense. I am so irritated when I hear that de facto amnesty crap--a term originated by McCain in his 2008 campaign. This is supposed to fool people into thinking that there really is no difference between amnesty and our current circumstance of having 11 to 20 million illegals in our midst.
There are major differences between de facto amnesty and real amnesty.
Under real amnesty, your status is legalized. You cannot be deported. You can work legally. You can get a SSN and be eligible for benefits like Medicaid, food stamps, etc. You can travel freely from and to the US. You can sponsor family members to join you. Eventually, you will be able to vote.
I am not defending Bush 43 or Bush 41 for that matter. They were terrible on immigration and still are. We are reaping what they did in terms of both illegal and illegal immigration. Bush 41 doubled our legal immigration numbers.
Hillary is as big a lock to be President on her first attempt as almost anyone since FDR. It will be a coronation. The Dems will mark another first—our first woman President.
Dont they use those taxpayer IDs to pay taxes??, not SS #s?
Now that you mention SS, Obama’s idea has some merits.
They come out of shadows and ID themselves, they work and pay SS taxes (To) our parents and since they have zero rights to be here we can boot them out before they retire so they get nothing, a great way to fix entitlements. Just got to cut out those food stamps.
But Christie is fatter than her and he is good at yelling at women LOL
These are interesting articles and should be examined further. I am reluctant at this time however, to accept this claim that Bush basically behaved the same as Zero when he was in office. For example, it’s possible Bush “ignored” or “refused to enforce” some executive order made by a previous president, or some EPA regulation not passed by Congress, but quite frankly any story sourced from “Prison Planet” (aka Alex Jones, the same man who believes 9/11 was an “inside job”) is suspect, IMO.
Following the link back to the original Boston Globe site yields no fruit. The Globe says the article doesn’t exist (would the Globe provide cover for Bush?). Maybe it got archived either for its age, or maybe removed as to not allow such comparisons as you are making (for whatever reason)
The point is, I’m reluctant to believe Prison Planet about anything for the obvious reason above. Provide another source please.
I have seen your post #151 too; this also doesn’t prove he ignored laws as Obama has done. The Human Events editorial makes a lot of claims about a speech he made around that time apparently, but doesn’t source the speech itself to back up its conclusions.
It does show a disregard on his (Bush’s) part for laws already on the books (at the time he was pushing for amnesty, saying our immigration laws don’t work, blah blah) but this doesn’t mean he didn’t enforce the laws. He was just saying they were ineffectual. At least that was his claim, as the editorial itself points out, Bush said it was impossible to deport 11 million but yet bragged about deporting 6 million over 5 years.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m no great fan of Bush , precisely because of his amnesty plan.
I too would have loved to ask him, “So which is it, is it impossible to deport millions or not Mr Bush?”
But really, since he (his administration) did deport 6 million, I’d still ask you, “So which is it, did Bush ignore laws like Obama or not?”
It seems to me he didn’t. Does that make him a great president? No, but he certainly was no Obama.
I believe unclaimed/uncollected social security payments attributable to an illegal alien of Mexican origin are remitted to the Mexican government.
Obviously they are not going to act identically. Ones GOP, the other a lib.
My point was that selectively enforcing laws is a well known precedent going back many POTUSs, Bush ignored parts of many laws he didnt like that libs put in bills to him he didnt want to veto, liberals raised a stink about it. Bush won. Rush and Levin were happy with most of it.
So now claiming that selectively enforcing laws by a POTUS is grounds for impeachment, ‘That darn Boehner just wont do his job’ is just more political noise which is what pays the talk radio bills.
RE :”I believe unclaimed/uncollected social security payments attributable to an illegal alien of Mexican origin are remitted to the Mexican government.”
I hope not. That would be stupid.
About 400,000 have been granted status including work permits and SSNs. The rejection rate is less than 1% for those who applied. High DACA Approval Rate Raises Amnesty Questions
The liberal Migration Policy Institute reports Obama youth amnesty numbers jump to 1.9 million.
since they know any POTUS can deport them at any time for any reason so applying is a risk,
Actually, the government has promised that it will not deport anyone who applies even if they are rejected. Obama wants them to come forward and apply.
You jumped to hypothetical about a amnesty bill different subject.
No, I didn't. Those who have been granted legal status will not be deported. They will eventually become US citizens. The Reps (Cantor and Goodlatte) are working on a "Kids bill" that will make them legal. I am afraid this train has left the station. Most Reps and the majority of the public are supportive of legalization of the Dreamers. It is really the camel's nose under the tent.
I’ve lost what little respect I held for Darrell Issa. He’s an absolutely despicable, duplicitous creature.
We have to continue the fight against the Democrats and the GOPe who are doing all they can (either knowingly or unknowingly) to destroy our Republic
Obama is only in office ~ 3 more years so unless he gets an amnesty bill that gives them a green like card they are taking a risk signing up.
Of course Obama wants them to sign up.
Of course a GOP POTUS is unlikely to try to throw them all out. But they dont know. We are citizens.
At the time, a FReeper posted a credible article about the destiny of unclaimed social security deposits as they relate to Mexico. I don't recall such an arrangement with any other country.
This is why I said this is something worth investigating. Apparently, if the Globe article is right (by the way it is there just archived; on a smartphone it says it doesn’t exist), then it’s as you said, many presidents have done this.
But I still return to my original point of hesitation: what precisely are these “laws” Bush and others ignored? It’s not very good reporting, IMO, (assuming the prison planet site transcribed the Globe article word for word) to describe them in vague terms as was (allegedly) done by the Globe. What are the official bill names? What are their numbers? When precisely were they ignored (dates and places)? It’s basic reporting that the Globe seems to be failing at; at some point in FR’s history we would have called it a hit piece.
And of course Prison Planet has/is eating it all up. They were never a “fan” of Bush to put it mildly. They blamed (and still do) him for 9/11 for goodness sakes!
Bottom line: was Bush just flat out wrong when it came to immigration? YES. But he never abused the office as Obama is now, not even close.
I’m willing to be proven wrong on that assertion. But an article from prison planet isn’t going to do it.
cut off the benefits and don’t let them vote.
I will. I was put on spot here and I cant do a decent investigate till later, challenged to come up with an example on the spot.
I love digging up stuff that surpises freepers
See Articles tab here
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.