Trump to dump detained illegal immigrants in sanctuary cities

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, I get the game. You're not wrong.

But it seems like a win for people who support this, right?

It feels like the episode of the Simpsons where Homer walks in on Bart and his room if full of cigarette's and Homer says, "Bart, you're gonna smoke every one of these!"

It's like that.

But like I said, based on the commentary I've seen on it, it doesn't seem all that likely to happen anyway. Even ICE seems to be reluctant. Could just be more dick waving from Trump.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
So it's the legislative equivalent of the retarded "if you like immigrants so much why not let some stay at your house" argument?

I thought it was more along the lines of Murika was built on immigrants so we need more...argument.

Originally posted by mike brown
I'm not really defending sanctuary cities... I'm spelling out Trump's obvious motives in my eyes.

But yeah... They don't apparently want to deport their residents. That doesn't mean they want ICE to start directing massive waves of detainees to their districts.

Why not?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
"Der liberals r gunna be so triggered der hur hur"

This sounds like a great plan, the people who feel these people deserve to be here, whether legally or not, can show them first hand how wonderful, caring and giving they are, by housing them, feeding them and welcoming them. This is a great humanitarian move by the president. The people who are outraged, are just virtue signalers, they talk a big game, but when it comes down to it, it's ok as long as i don't have to deal with it. But, it's ok for the border towns to take on all these?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Why not?

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
This sounds like a great plan, the people who feel these people deserve to be here, whether legally or not, can show them first hand how wonderful, caring and giving they are, by housing them, feeding them and welcoming them. This is a great humanitarian move by the president. The people who are outraged, are just virtue signalers, they talk a big game, but when it comes down to it, it's ok as long as i don't have to deal with it. But, it's ok for the border towns to take on all theses?

2) No, the border towns should be given federal assistance to deal with the problem. But there is a difference between purposely sending the people to specific districts out of spite and the fact that border towns feel the impact naturally due to their location.

Well IIRC the democrats have voted down funding for beds and rooms and shit at the border to hold people making asylum claims while said claims are reviewed.

What's weird is they actively seem to want illegal immigration.

Yes I agree that was a dumb move when they did that.. but this isn't a good solution...

Originally posted by mike brown
Pretty sure I already answered that. Because they will make it harder to sustain those districts. Anytime you flood one area with tons of low income, unskilled laborers all at once you are going to have problems.

Are you saying that illegal immigrants are a drain on society?

I'm saying that you have to moderate that kind of thing... Moving too many people too quickly into one area can cause problems, yes.

Ftr I do think illegal immigration is a problem because they're undocumented. But what we are dealing with right now are largely people who are walking right up to the border and asking for asylum rather than trying to sneak in.

Originally posted by mike brown
I'm saying that you have to moderate that kind of thing... Moving too many people too quickly into one area can cause problems, yes.

How many is too many?

Lol... Are you asking for an actual number or what?

If you don't know, why are you saying this is a bad thing?

You're right.... I shouldn't have jumped the gun until I found out exactly how many detainees each district can reasonably handle... Thank you for correcting me

Originally posted by mike brown
... It's actually an act of retaliation against his political rivals. After all this time speaking out against sanctuary cities Trump suddenly supports them for humane reasons? REALLY?

And delaying Trumps various court nominee's was an act of retaliation by Dem's. Saying he couldn't give his state of the union was as well, etc. So the point is...? They lost all room to cry over this stuff.

Originally posted by BackFire
Bus them to Texas for the 2020 election.

I used to consider myself more neutral on the issue of immigration, in the sense that I don't feel the way Trump does and I don't feel the way the democrats do.

I still don't agree fully with Trump, my stance itself hasn't shifted, but it's become increasingly obvious to me that the democrats seem opposed to border security. So obviously the issue is going to tilt me a certain way in 2020.

When they vote to not provide funding for beds and rooms and expedited legal processes at the border so those with asylum claims can actually be held while their claims are being reviewed (presumably quicker with more funding to that whole process), why would that be? It seems like their hoping there's a shortage of resources that forces the government to release them prematurely into the general public.

When Beto talks, not about not wanting to spend money on a wall, but about tearing down barriers at the border that have already been paid for and built, what the **** is the reasoning behind that?

ABOLISH ICE!!! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Make cities where federal law can't be enforced.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
So it's the legislative equivalent of the retarded "if you like immigrants so much why not let some stay at your house" argument?

Originally posted by Surtur
And delaying Trumps various court nominee's was an act of retaliation by Dem's. Saying he couldn't give his state of the union was as well, etc. So the point is...? They lost all room to cry over this stuff.

2) the real problem with this proposal is not that it's an act of retaliation, it's that he's using people who are in a desperate situation as a sort of political bargaining chip with no concern whatsoever about either their well being or what's best for the country. Bottom line is he wants his symbolic victory on the border via a wall he can slap his name on... And he's been throwing hissy fits every time someone stands in the way of that. See: govt shut down

3) this is basically why nobody has any standards for their own side any more. Because they can always just deflect with "well the other side..."

Originally posted by Emperordmb

I still don't agree fully with Trump, my stance itself hasn't shifted, but it's become increasingly obvious to me that the democrats seem opposed to border security. So obviously the issue is going to tilt me a certain way in 2020.

When they vote to not provide funding for beds and rooms and expedited legal processes at the border so those with asylum claims can actually be held while their claims are being reviewed (presumably quicker with more funding to that whole process), why would that be? It seems like their hoping there's a shortage of resources that forces the government to release them prematurely into the general public.

Personally I think the main problem with our immigration is people being undocumented.. I'm fine with the numbers of people coming here ( the asylum seekers are a temporary spike due to deteriorating conditions in a few countries). The system should be changed to make legal immigration easier. And the majority of illegals are visa overstays so something should be done about that as well.

I think border security is more of a problem because of the cartels than immigrants personally. I think a coast to coast wall is simplistic... But something should be done yes.