patrick.net

News: Just today, the governor of Baja California state and her husband had their visas revoked.

She is Marina del Pilar Avila.

Some Mexicans say she's in with the "narcos"=cartels=gangsters.

DeficitHawk says

I oppose using war time powers in peace time. Both with respect to Alien Enemies Act, and with respect to suspension of Writ of Habeas Corpus.

What is "peace time" to you? Not reading the rest of it. We're not in a peace time. We're literally being attacked by foreigners crossing our border illegally. You think 30-40M people we have no clue about in this country isn't an invasion????? It's a massive invasion.

Suspend anything you want. Hell allow people that know you're illegal to just shoot you. Illegals will destroy the rule of law. You seriously don't get the severity of this?

You're bat shit or trolling at this point. 30M fucking illegals. We added 9% to our population and we don't know who the hell they are. That seems like a god damn invasion to me. Could we even sent 30M men into war in another country? Hell no. You seriously do not understand the severity of this and that's sad.

Remember when the illegals got shipped to Martha's Vineyard and they called the national guard and had them all removed in 24 hours with absolutely no due process?

WookieMan says

We're not in a peace time. We're literally being attacked by foreigners

I dont agree with you. Illegal immigraton has been a chronic problem for hundreds of years. It is not some new existential threat. Its not the fault of one administration. This has happened in every administration since the country was founded.

This type of rage baiting is just setting up for whining later when the 'activist judges' get in the way of what you say you want to do.

Instead of engaging in some unconstitutional theater and propaganda, maybe try something more productive:
1) Set laws on employing illegal immigrants and enforce them
2) Modify Asylum laws to make it more efficient to work through cases.
3) Add any exclusionary laws congress wants to add (crime, gang association or whatever)
4) Make a robust legal immigration program that is only available to people who meet the new requirements, and encourage illegals to go apply for that instead of remaining illegal.
5) Work the cases through the procedures, following due process.

Its not really that complicated to do this stuff. The reason its not being done is because it requires political consensus and political compromise (item 4, for example is very powerful, but republicans wont do it). I think democrats do still have an appetite for comprehensive immigration reform, though it has been considered hopeless for the past 30 years or so because there is no compromise.

If the republicans don't want to drive for consensus to improve the situation and instead take a strategy of rash unconstitutional actions, then they will just be stymied by the courts. That seems like the current plan of this administration, and I have no sympathy for the people who advocate for this charade and then whine about the inevitable outcome.

Deportation is not legally classified as a punishment in most legal systems, including the United States, but rather as an administrative or civil measure.

The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that deportation is not punishment. In Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893), the Court ruled that deportation is an exercise of the government’s sovereign power to control its borders and determine who may remain within them, not a penalty for criminal behavior.

In INS v. Lopez-Mendoza (1984), the Court reaffirmed that deportation proceedings are civil, meaning constitutional protections like the Fifth Amendment’s double jeopardy clause or the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment do not apply.

Being sent to one's home country is not punishment. It's going back to the place one grew up, has friends and family, knows the language and culture, etc.

@Patrick, deportation is a courtesy, an act of magnanimity on the part of the US to rapefugees who don't make the cut.

Instead of riding in trailers without water or food for up to 3 days, the US flies them in a chartered jet to whereverthefuck they're from, if they actually provide that information (if not, that's a 100 foot red flag right there).

No Coyotes, no gangs, just a plush seat on a jet plane so that they can rejoin mamacita and feel her tears of gratitude on his cheek.

What's not to like?

stereotomy says

What's not to like?

What they don't like is the lower wages they will get back home. That's all there is to it. 99.9% of "asylum" cases are bullshit.

Had a Sikh guy actually tell me once that there is a whole industry in India of providing fake evidence of persecution to use to get "asylum" in the US where wages are so much higher. You can get whatever documentation you want in India, for a price.

stereotomy says

deportation is a courtesy,

There's no problem with deportation as a result of immigration proceedings. Its not some cruel punishment. I agree. Its just what you do if you determine that a person belongs to a different country and doesn't have a legal right to stay in your country.

Immigrants who don't meet our requirements to enter should be turned away without entry. Immigrants that are already here who we determine don't have a legal right to be here should be deported.

The whole dispute as far as I am concerned whether we follow our laws and the constitution in the process of figuring out who has the legal right to be here and who doesn't.

Patrick says

That's all there is to it. 99.9% of "asylum" cases are bullshit.

If you feel that way, that's a good reason to look at asylum laws and see if they could be clarified or narrowed to make enforcement more practical, and better align with the intent. Its not a good reason to abandon due process.

It seems like many people in this thread are just not interested in following laws or due process... Not interested in getting the political consensus to change laws if they need changing... and just want to impose their own standards arbitrarily. That's what I am arguing against. I'm not arguing against deportation as the outcome.

DeficitHawk says

I dont agree with you. Illegal immigraton has been a chronic problem for hundreds of years.

This is a great example of an argument so distorted, I really think it's dishonest.

"Cholera, Polio, TB, and Dyptheria have been chronic problems for hundreds of years. Ignore the fact that they became increasingly rare throughout the 20th Century, especially in the second half, to the point of making front page news during rare outbreaks. Just because we're seeing an massive increases in them now, is no reason to take decisive action against the tens of millions of illegals in the country."

My other favorite is, "It's a crime to not report to the hospital if you have TB you got from sources unknown as you went about your daily routine, but not disclosing HIV status is a wrist-slap fine"

clambo says

To answer AmericanKulak above: the lack of possession of the proper visa is sufficient for deportation, just like almost any other country.

Correct. Just like not having a liquor or tobacco license is prima facie evidence sufficient to fine and impound. The State OR Federal Authorities don't need to wait for a hearing to close down a store selling liquor without a license, they can seize the items and shut the place down before the hearing.

Similarly, an "undocumented" illegal alien can be thrown out of the country before any hearing. If they think the Fed screwed up and lost their paperwork, they can present it over a Zoom from Venezuela.

WookieMan says

You seriously do not understand the severity of this and that's sad.

This is exactly why I called him/her/zer a dishonest person, at best.

GNL says

WookieMan says

You seriously do not understand the severity of this and that's sad.

This is exactly why I called him/her/zer a dishonest person, at best.

I agree with you. My take is open up your house to these people if you're worried about due process. He's not and won't. Conversation done.

Unless one is willing to take in a stranger, paying for the stranger, you have no leg to stand on. Just admit you're wrong Hawk. You know you wouldn't do it. That's what illegal immigration is.

There is a massive subsidy for Democrats involving an asston of jobs in the School System, in NGOs, etc. Mostly administrative.

If 20M illegals become 1-2M illegals, Dems lose a massive number of well paid, low-work, high-volume activists subsidized by the State and Fed. We're talking billions a year in combined State/Fed aid.

Peace and Conflict Resolution groups (total sidebar) is another but nowhere near the level of the illegal immigration situation.

AmericanKulak says

I dont agree with you. Illegal immigraton has been a chronic problem for hundreds of years.

This is a great example of an argument so distorted, I really think it's dishonest.

Im not trying to defend the biden/harris administrations record on immigration enforcement. They really did not do a good job on it, and Im sure thats a reason why Harris didn't win the election.

What I am trying to say is that this country has had ~10-20 million illegal immigrants for decades and that fact didnt fundamentally change during biden/harris even if there was an uptick.

I think the whole 'invasion' narrative is just thinly veiled rhetoric to try to justify using drastic wartime powers. That whole argument does not resonate with me. I dont think we should be using wartime powers in peace time. I hope the courts put a stop to it, and the Trump administration pursues constitutional means to deal with problems.

I am also very skeptical of the trump administraton motives when they use these tactics. Probably the courts put a stop to it, and in the end all that was accomplished was riling everyone up and blaming "activist judges" as the evil of america... when in truth they are pursuing unconstitutional means to their ends, and should expect the courts to intervene. Intentionally setting that conflict up, and then blaming the judges like that is really sickening to see in a leader. Its just 'theater', playing to the crowd... and not a real effort to solve a problem. A better leader would seek political consensus to update laws, and move ahead constitutionally.

WookieMan says

Unless one is willing to take in a stranger, paying for the stranger, you have no leg to stand on

I have done this for refugees. But I have not done it for illegal immigrants. Why is this the test of whether my opinion is right?

DeficitHawk says

What I am trying to say is that this country has had ~10-20 million illegal immigrants for decades and that fact didnt fundamentally change during biden/harris even if there was an uptick.

"Cholera, Polio, TB, and Dyptheria have been chronic problems for hundreds of years. Ignore the fact that they became increasingly rare throughout the 20th Century, especially in the second half, to the point of making front page news during rare outbreaks. Just because we're seeing massive increases in domestic cases over the past few years, there is no reason to take decisive action against the tens of millions of illegals in the country."

Also keeping in mind the people who think 20M illegals in the USA isn't important, they certainly felt different when Biden tried to command OSHA, in an unprecedented move with no parallel in US History, to fire anybody who would not take a (now proven all but useless) experimental medical procedure for a disease with an over 99% survival rate. It's now conclusive that those who took the vax, including those who got every booster the moment it came out, spread COVID just fine. Even the most sexxxed up, biased data sets made by Dems and Big Pharma were utterly underwhelming.

"FIRE THEM!! THEY'RE KILLING GRANDMA!"

DeficitHawk says

I have done this for refugees. But I have not done it for illegal immigrants. Why is this the test of whether my opinion is right?

Because they entered illegally. Boo hoo you rescued a dog for a month or two. The refugee status was likely bull shit and you have your blinders on. You clearly don't understand how people get into this country without following the laws. Hispanics are notoriously great liars. I lived in a 80% hispanic neighborhood for about 8 years in Chicago. Pilsen. I know my Latinos.

Fact is any "refugee" you helped was 100% lying to you. They're only loyal to family. That means they'll do whatever. You literally just admitted to helping illegals here. I'd tread lightly there.

"I can't believe we imported millions of people from low trust societies who were raised to use low trust tactics, and we're losing our high trust society. How can this be happening?"

AmericanKulak says

"I can't believe we imported millions of people from low trust societies who were raised to use low trust tactics, and we're losing our high trust society. How can this be happening?"

Because of our low trust government. This dumbass government even allows politicians to hold dual citizenship.

There is currently no official, comprehensive public list of members of the U.S. Congress who hold dual citizenship.

Theres no way to deal with 10-20 million people with some brute force enforcement methods without turning our country into the 3rd Reich.

ICE raids can handle a few people here and there. El Salvadorian gulags can take a few here and there, until the courts shut them down. But its all basically theater, and wont change the basic picture.

If you really want to deal with the problem, you have to do something more productive.

Why not do comprehensive reform and establish legal pathways for people wo meet the requirements we want?
1) Set the requirements we want into the immigration/asylum laws (No Criminal history, No gang membership)
2) Set a program where illegals can register, pay a fine for illegal entry, submit for screening against the requirements, and if they meet the requirements they get legal status and work permit, and if not deport.
3) Legal status people go through a probationary period where they have to stay out of trouble, stay off of the public dole and pay their taxes before gaining permanent resident status.

That will drive voluntary registration which is way easier than doing ice raids, and take a 10 million person problem down to a 1 million person problem where the people who didn't register are probably the people you really want to focus on to catch and deport. Giving the rest of them legal status will probably make it easier to focus on the troublemakers, and the legal people would probably be able to help with information to do this. They don't want gang members around either. You could even write 'failure to register' as a specific disqualifier for asylum admission into the law, so that enforcement can be streamlined.

Offer a carrot along with a stick, and the good people will self-select themselves from the bad people. If we treat the people who ARENT criminals and gang members fairly, this can work to snuff out the criminals and gang members.

This is an old idea, but no one has talked about comprehensive immigration reform for a long time because the two sides wont compromise even though it would benefit everyone.

DeficitHawk says

If you feel that way

Like all left wingers such as DeficitHawk, its all about emotions and feelings. That is why his gaslighting and manipulation efforts are reliably lame.

.

AmericanKulak says

"I can't believe we imported millions of people from low trust societies who were raised to use low trust tactics, and we're losing our high trust society. How can this be happening?"

It's all about the bad faith agenda of the DeficitHawk's which is to exploit the laws and use Soros immigration judges.

The process is anarcho tyranny and Cloward Piven Strategy and the end state or result is for the Democrat Party to gain more power and control, mainly by promoting demographics change via 3rd world immigration.

.

@DeficitHawk

Theres no way to deal with 10-20 million people with some brute force enforcement methods without turning our country into the 3rd Reich.

ICE raids can handle a few people here and there. El Salvadorian gulags can take a few here and there, until the courts shut them down. But its all basically theater, and wont change the basic picture.

If you really want to deal with the problem, you have to do something more productive.

Why not do comprehensive reform and establish legal pathways for people wo meet the requirements we want?

1) Remove criminal aliens, gang-affiliated etc. (in progress)
2) Remove federal funding (done)
3) Fine and/or imprison employers of illegal laborers (beginning)
4) Find and deport those who engaged in welfare fraud, illegal use of SSNs, and illegal voting — all felonies. That should cover the bulk of the alien population.

No need for “pathways to citizenship” after all.

"pathway to ctizenship" = amnesty. This country has done that every 30 years, always saying "this time will be the last time." Well, it's time to unleash Javert.

DeficitHawk says

Theres no way to deal with 10-20 million people with some brute force enforcement methods without turning our country into the 3rd Reich.

DeficitHawk says

Offer a carrot along with a stick, and the good people will self-select themselves from the bad people. If we treat the people who ARENT criminals and gang members fairly, this can work to snuff out the criminals and gang members.

Yep. So it's going to happen. However, the old motto of "Kill the Chicken to Scare the Monkey" applies. Forcibly deport enough, and the rest will flee - especially if there is a free flight and a grant awarded once the fakefugees deplane in their origin country, 5 years after the hurricane or earthquake or whatever bogus excuse was used.

Carrots alone don't do it, the stick has to be applied as well. It's not just illegals, fakefugees are getting thousands a month in free shit, NOT including any work permits. If they're getting $30k+/year in medical, food, housing, cash allowances, even a jalopy, why would they take $1000 and a free ticket to go home? Only if the alternative is forcible deportation.

Fakefugees are also considered eligible for "Getting off welfare" tax credits for businesses, which is why they "Work Harder" than Americans looking for jobs. Funny that.

stereotomy says

"pathway to ctizenship" = amnesty. This country has done that every 30 years, always saying "this time will be the last time." Well, it's time to unleash Javert.

Yep.

This is the LAST TIME - 1986

BTW, one of the very first acts of the Xiden regime was to repeal the First Trump Admin's tougher "Public Charge" rules about Medicaid, Welfare, etc. in March 2021

By the way, the idea that social programs should be for citizens only? That's "WELFARE CHAUVINISM", lol, is cloudy cuckoo lefty land
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_chauvinism

AmericanKulak says

BTW, one of the very first acts of the Xiden regime was to repeal the First Trump Admin's tougher "Public Charge" rules about Medicaid, Welfare, etc. in March 2021

And assuming the deficits were not (intentionally) under reported along with the unemployment rate, the effects of the Xiden or Birdbrain Biden administration were clearly displayed in the annual deficits of about $1.65 trillion in 2023 and $1.9 trillion in 2024.

How much of the Birdbrain Biden deficit spending propped up the economy, especially the stock market ?

.

Nope. No amnesty of any kind. No pathway bullshit either. BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

Cheaters aren’t supposed to prosper. What dumb shit would want cheaters?

DeficitHawk says

3) Legal status people go through a probationary period where they have to stay out of trouble, stay off of the public dole and pay their taxes before gaining permanent resident status.

This creates an incentive for more inflow.

Glock-n-Load says

No pathway bullshit either. BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

I agree.

Glock-n-Load says

Nope. No amnesty of any kind. No pathway bullshit either. BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

Cheaters aren’t supposed to prosper. What dumb shit would want cheaters?

I don't even think we need immigrants. We need two parent families assuming they're not widows(ers). Have children 2-3 at a pop. Raise a family. If younger people at least replaced themselves with kids this wouldn't be a problem.

I tell every kid I know, even in their teens to have kids as early as possible. I don't get pushing this back to 35 and 60% of kids come out retarded. I don't like religion but I do think marriage should be a thing. If divorce laws benefit women they need to be evened out.

Every couple will get in arguments. As long as it's not physical work it out. Don't just cut and run and take the bread winners money. Kids need structure. Instead we're importing kids that were likely abused and raped. They won't be great citizens even if the rules were followed. We need to fix our culture here first.

Glock-n-Load says

BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

A few years back, I had a bum ankle and had to take an airport wheelchair to get to my gate. I mistook the fellow wheeling me around for a Central American or South American Hispanic, and asked what he thought of Trump, who was in his first term at the time. He told me he strongly supported him which I found surprising. He said he was from the Phillipines, and his relatives were waiting over 7 years to get into the US legally, and he hated cheaters who cut the line, so supported Trump.

Eric Holder says

DeficitHawk says
3) Legal status people go through a probationary period where they have to stay out of trouble, stay off of the public dole and pay their taxes before gaining permanent resident status.

This creates an incentive for more inflow.

That is what the Left like DeficitHawk wants.

Exploit the immigration law along with Soros-style immigration judges to achieve an open border for the 3rd world.

That is why Trump is acting the way he is as far as damage control mode not just dealing with the trade deficit and Birdbrain Biden style spending at USAID, EPA, the ~$180 billion in student loan forgiveness, etc.

No one trusts the Left because of their virus-like bad faith agenda.

.

WookieMan says

I don't even think we need immigrants. We need two parent families assuming they're not widows(ers). Have children 2-3 at a pop. Raise a family.

If we had the demographics and birthrate to sustain our population, and maintain a ratio of working vs retired people, I'd agree we wouldn't need immigration. But we don't. And you cant legislate it. You can try pro-natalist policies... pay people for kids, tax breaks, etc... but i doubt it would have much impact. Every rich, industrialized, urbanized country goes through this demographic shift. The ones that don't take in immigrants will fall behind industrially.

The USA will become like a retirement community if we don't bring in immigrants. A few young people tending to a bunch of old codgers and feeding them oatmeal. Industry can't be sustained with demographics like that. We will have 'lost decades' period like Japan.

DeficitHawk says

The USA will become like a retirement community if we don't bring in immigrants. A few young people tending to a bunch of old codgers and feeding them oatmeal. Industry can't be sustained with demographics like that. We will have 'lost decades' period like Japan.

Since you Lefties love Silicon Valley and technology progress, then perhaps innovation and productivity gains can be realized to address demographic challenges.

I've mentioned how senior care has been modernized such as in small group homes for aging with internet cameras, etc.

.

WookieMan says

BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

Cheaters aren’t supposed to prosper.

I understand this perspective. It would allow the moral hazard of letting people who broke the rule get the benefit. It would be better if we had a legal alternative that they could have used. But we dont, and havent for a long time. Not in the numbers needed to prevent our demographic collapse.

IF you had a rule that people could immigrate, but must be outside the country to apply, that might make sense to avoid the moral hazard. But then you'd be driving a huge churn of people... the ones already here leaving and new ones coming. And I expect some of them woudl be the same people, leaving and applying to reenter.

DeficitHawk says

And you cant legislate it. You can try pro-natalist policies...

The first step would be to eliminate no-fault divorce...

Al_Sharpton_for_President says

Glock-n-Load says

BACK TO THE END OF THE LINE is the only fair way forward.

A few years back, I had a bum ankle and had to take an airport wheelchair to get to my gate. I mistook the fellow wheeling me around for a Central American or South American Hispanic, and asked what he thought of Trump, who was in his first term at the time. He told me he strongly supported him which I found surprising. He said he was from the Phillipines, and his relatives were waiting over 7 years to get into the US legally, and he hated cheaters who cut the line, so supported Trump.

That's how the left plays it. We hate these people. My guess is most on the left haven't even left the US ever. I love Mexico. All I've ever heard is how dangerous it is. Same with Belize, Costa Rica, Dominican, Jamaica, etc.

Philippine's are actually pretty fun if you cruise and they're on the front end of their contract. Tail end they're a little down. 7 days a week dealing with A LOT OF SHITTY Americans is not easy. I like cruising, I generally hate the other passengers. I find a few bars and hit it off with them. My tips are included but I tip heavy if I get a good vibe. They see me coming 50' away and my drink is ready.

As I said I think a lot on the left don't leave the country because they don't have the money. So they're like just bring them here. One rape later or murder and you're flipped. I'm hoping that's happening now. We'll see.

DeficitHawk says

IF you had a rule that people could immigrate, but must be outside the country to apply, that might make sense to avoid the moral hazard. But then you'd be driving a huge churn of people... the ones already here leaving and new ones coming. And I expect some of them woudl be the same people, leaving and applying to reenter.

What's the problem with that? People with expiring H1B visas have been doing this for decades: leaving, re-applying, returning.

AD says

Since you Lefties love Silicon Valley and technology progress, then perhaps innovation and productivity gains can be realized to address demographic challenges.

I've mentioned how senior care has been modernized such as in small group homes for aging with internet cameras, etc.

Innovation like Soylent Green?

I do agree innovation can improve productivity. But people want that improved productivity to benefit them by improving their lives. Not just making up for the fact that there are no people working anymore. I went to McDonalds the other day and you dont order at the cash register anymore... you punch everything into a kiosk and then go sit down with your number and wait. It feels like a dystopian future where you only interact with automation and not humans. A demographic collapse will be terrible to live through even if we do continue our progress with innovation.

Oh well. I guess Ill be soylent green by then anyway.