A great argument to make Trump President for life

Loading

 

 

Central American migrants hoping to enter the United States have said they will wait in Mexico in the hope that President Donald Trump loses reelection, where they will then cross the U.S. border.

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that advocates for reduced immigration, visited southern Mexico and interviewed Central American migrants who have ambitions of reaching the U.S. However, because of the policies put in place by the Trump administration, they are unable to migrate any father north.

Their plan? Wait in Mexico and bet on Trump losing the election in November. Once that happens, they said they believe the rules that are preventing them from migrating will be lifted, and they will then be able to claim asylum in the U.S.

“I want Trump out!” said Katherine Cabrera, one of the Honduran migrant interviewed by CIS. “I’ll wait for that because it would make things easier to get in.”

Cabrera is one of many Honduran migrants stuck in Tapachua, a southern Mexican city that sits just north of the Guatemalan border. Because of travel agreements between Central American countries, many of their citizens are able to pass freely though each other’s countries. However, Central American migrants find themselves stuck once they hit the Mexican border. At that point, they must apply for protected status there, or return home.

Many of the migrants interviewed by CIS said they are seeking asylum in Mexico, but they have no intention of staying there permanently. Instead, they will enjoy protected status in Mexico until Trump loses election, and then trek northward into the U.S. once — as they believe — the restrictionist immigration rules are taken down.

More at the Daily Caller

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
39 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A great argument to make Trump President for life

Keeping poorer people of color fleeing for their lives scared to death of him while he continues to fleece the working class and hand our electoral process over to Russia?

We already learned this lesson with Roosevelt, but thanks anyway.
4 but no more years.

No doubt many others want Trump to be replaced so, like before, an inept, incompetent idiot in charge will make the US much easier to be taken advantage of. The guy that makes others follow the rules is not usually adored. What others want is someone more “flexible”.

We should keep Trump until someone just as good comes along. There are no Democrats on the horizon that can fit that bill.

@Ronald J. Ward: So Ronny, exactly how many illegals are you personally supporting. I’m going to be it’s a sum less then zero.

@Ronald J. Ward: Is your solution to hand our electoral process over to poorer people of color instead?
That’s apparently what the democrats want.

@Petercat:

@Ronald J. Ward: Is your solution to hand our electoral process over to poorer people of color instead?
That’s apparently what the democrats want.

Are you suggesting that the need to eliminate asylum seekers and perhaps even to “send them back” is to prevent people of color from ultimately entering into our electoral system?

@Ronald J. Ward: That is what Democrats see happening.

@Deplorable Me:

I can’t speak for Democrats in general but from my own perspective, I see the U.S. turning browner and browner. This is by in large part due to an increasing African American population as well as Mexicans crossing the boarder (with open arms from business and politicians) for over 100 years. And then of course, we’ve welcomed people fleeing war torn countries for years.

But the overall theme here seems to be the great argument of keeping Trump president for life-that he’s are only hope of making America white again. And I suspect that ranks high on the top 4 reasons his supporters would stand behind him even if he shot someone dead on 5th Avenue.

@Ronald J. Ward: Your identity politics has you blinded. Somehow you only have a narrow view of people.
We have no problems with immigration. Wanting that process to be orderly and legal seems to be translated by you as no brown people, how racist is that? You are saying they cannot obey the laws? Let them in without restraint? Yet you screech no one is above the law. So can you tell us who is above the law as criminals with Ice detainers filed are set free into the population, mostly to victimize minority groups.
Mansplain that to me.

4 more no more

@Ronald J. Ward: Well, of course you, predictably, turn everything to race but the issue is being AMERICAN. What is opposed is the unrestricted immigration that has no intention of assimilating or promoting the American values that have made this nation great. Democrats simply want to dilute the voting population with more that are dependent upon government and will keep Democrats in power.

@kitt: @Deplorable Me:

By what other meaning can be interpreted of keeping asylum seekers, particularly Hondurans who are afraid of Trump, out as a premise of “A great argument to make Trump President for life”?

The argument of what’s really meant by Trump’s slogan “Male America Greta Again” has been around for some time. Why it has energized the KKK, alt-right, white supremacist groups, etc has been pretty much laid bare. This article only reinforces that.

Are we going to and do you advocate that we just disallow any people entry who are fleeing for their lives from their own government or war or is it just “those kinds”, you know, the “shithole” people?

@Ronald J. Ward: If they were so afraid of Trump why did they march en mass to our border? Passing through 2 countries Mexico offering them asylum? Will they wait around another 5 years? Not shithole people but they dont stay and try to make their own countries great.
So who is above the law Ronnie just border invaders? You may want to check all the nationalities of those that dont wish to follow our lax immigration laws.
https://immigration.procon.org/demographics-of-immigrants-in-the-united-states-illegally/
Looks like some are much better swimmers than others they can cross oceans.
4more no more

@Ronald J. Ward:

Are we going to and do you advocate that we just disallow any people entry who are fleeing for their lives from their own government or war or is it just “those kinds”, you know, the “shithole” people?

What happened to seeking permission to enter the U.S. LEGALLY? Or are you a cayote who is getting rich off ILLEGAL immigration?

This is by in large part due to an increasing African American population

Really? The black population is increasing from its 13.4%? No, the black population is not increasing considering it was 16% in 1865. But then, instead of blaming Planned Parenthood for murdering black babies with abandon, you will blame whites for that. Did it ever occur to you that PP puts its abortion centers in minority neighborhoods for a reason?

Take your hatred for white people somewhere else, AJ/Ward.

@kitt:

Passing through 2 countries Mexico offering them asylum?

Not true.

Not shithole people but they dont stay and try to make their own countries great.

It’s hard to envision what you’re talking about as they are outnumbered. They were fleeing for their lives. You don’t make sense.

So who is above the law Ronnie just border invaders?

Asking for asylum is not illegal.

The above Dr John’s lifter argument is all about selling Trump as a life long president under the premise that asylum seekers, particularly those of “shithole countries” who are fleeing in order to protect what’s left of their family will be too afraid to come here. Is it not?

@retire05:

Take your hatred for white people somewhere else, AJ/Ward.

When you acquire administrative privileges, I’ll consider your demands. Until then, your allegiance to the rabid racist in the WH and instructed hatred of those victims south of the boarder of us along with abetting an agenda to make America white again is of no interest to me.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Asking for asylum is not illegal.

Asylum can be sought at any American embassy in any nation.

The above Dr John’s lifter argument is all about selling Trump as a life long president under the premise that asylum seekers, particularly those of “shithole countries” who are fleeing in order to protect what’s left of their family will be too afraid to come here. Is it not?

Perhaps you should contact Adam Schiff and ask him for the meaning of “parody.”

FDR refused entry to Jews who were fleeing Nazi Europe during WWII. 80% of them returned to Europe only to die in Hitler’s extermination camps. Seems it was the Democrats who decided that people, of a different race or ethnicity, were not wanted.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Until then, your allegiance to the rabid racist in the WH

I hold no allegiance to any man. My allegiance is to the United States of America.
I know yours is not.

and instructed hatred of those victims south of the boarder of us along with abetting an agenda to make America white again is of no interest to me.

Perhaps they should do what my people did, fight for their homelands.

@Ronald J. Ward: There are even rules for asylum US and Canada have an agreement requiring asylum seekers to ask for protection in the first country they arrive at.
First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution in their home country. Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group.
Not that there are no jobs or welfare benefits.

@retire05:

I hold no allegiance to any man. My allegiance is to the United States of America.
I know yours is not.

Because you state verbatim at least one item which is a lie or at best an opinion based on your deep seeded prejudice of those you disagree with, nothing you say can be taken with any grain of credence.

But why you seem to have some need to sell me on anything, other than to distract from Dr John’s obvious endorsement of a lifetime Trump to make America white again, is unclear.

@Ronald J. Ward: Baiting dumb trolls like this is hilarious.

Please, do another!

@Ronald J. Ward:

Asking for asylum is not illegal.

Trying to break into a country instead of passing through a legal port of entry, is.

No one says people can’t seek asylum. Any law-abiding citizen is saying that breaking our laws and invading our country is both wrong and not the act of someone fleeing for their life.

The border wall is making this a moot issue, thankfully.

“I want Trump out!” said Katherine Cabrera, one of the Honduran migrant interviewed by CIS. “I’ll wait for that because it would make things easier to get in.”

This is the issue: Democrats who don’t want to enforce the most basic of laws to keep both our own citizen and immigrants safe.

If only they didn’t have to import their voters, this wouldn’t be an issue.

P.S. – AJ/Ward is white. Obviously.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Because you state verbatim at least one item which is a lie

Really?
Did you learn a new word? Because your comment makes absolutely no sense.

But why you seem to have some need to sell me on anything,

Your posts confirm that someone else has already “sold” you a line of b/s that you have bought into hook, line and sinker. You’re the one that comes here blathering b/s.

other than to distract from Dr John’s obvious endorsement of a lifetime Trump to make America white again, is unclear.

Maybe Dr John is as fed up with illegals who think they have a right to enter a nation without the permission of that nation. If your nation is such a hell hole, fight to change it because if you have no love for your own heritage, you are not going to honor mine.

@retire05:

If your nation is such a hell hole, fight to change it because if you have no love for your own heritage, you are not going to honor mine.

If you are a white Christian male American, you’re not allowed to have heritage. You’re a racist and need to accept that sooner rather than later…

Jokes aside, that was well-said.

@Ronald J. Ward:

By what other meaning can be interpreted of keeping asylum seekers, particularly Hondurans who are afraid of Trump, out as a premise of “A great argument to make Trump President for life”?

The meaning is solely enforcing laws and protecting citizens. That is more important to me than Democrats voting bloc.

The above Dr John’s lifter argument is all about selling Trump as a life long president under the premise that asylum seekers, particularly those of “shithole countries” who are fleeing in order to protect what’s left of their family will be too afraid to come here. Is it not?

It is not. It is about those seeking easy entry and subsidized living here illegally not daring to try when our laws are being enforced. It being the case that Democrats only think convenient laws should be enforced, I understand how difficult it is for you to understand the concept.

Until then, your allegiance to the rabid racist in the WH 

How is Trump racist?

Democrat abuse of the asylum process is the problem, which you,with your racist tendencies, try to weaponize.

@retire05:

FDR refused entry to Jews who were fleeing Nazi Europe during WWII. 80% of them returned to Europe only to die in Hitler’s extermination camps. Seems it was the Democrats who decided that people, of a different race or ethnicity, were not wanted.

It would seem that should have been a lesson learned. Why are today’s so-called Christian conservatives so hell bent on repeating it?

Or is it that it only applies when such people are needed to clean their casinos for the benefit of the cheep labor? Seem today’s so-called Christian conservatives have such a hard time distinguishing the difference.

@Ronald J. Ward:

It would seem that should have been a lesson learned. Why are today’s so-called Christian conservatives so hell bent on repeating it?

The Jews sought asylum. They were denied. Now, if an illegal seeks asylum, they get a judicial review, something denied to the Jews. Damn, do you know anything about American history?

Or is it that it only applies when such people are needed to clean their casinos for the benefit of the cheep labor? Seem today’s so-called Christian conservatives have such a hard time distinguishing the difference.

Since I don’t gamble, I know nothing of casinos, but it seems you do. And now you are railing on “Christian” conservatives. No surprise. You hate everyone that is not like you.

Frankly, I think it is insulting for you to insinuate that immigrants are too damn stupid to do anything other than clean casinos. But then, you are a hater.

@Ronald J. Ward: Maybe you can provide the evidence of something besides economic opportunity they seek. If there are hundreds of thousands threatened with extinction, that sounds like a job for the UN.

I guess FDR felt the same about Jews as Democrats do today.

@retire05:

The Jews sought asylum. They were denied. Now, if an illegal seeks asylum, they get a judicial review, something denied to the Jews. Damn, do you know anything about American history?

Okay, so the Jews were not illegals whereas the Hondurans and El Salvadorians were? Best I recall, the Jews were turned around whereas those you deem illegal were declared by Trump as a “caravan mob” he determined needed to be met with military force and later separated and caged.

But all that aside, the argument presented on this forum is that we need Trump for a lifetime president in order to keep asylum seekers from Honduras and such places in fear so they will not apply for a judicial review:

Their plan? Wait in Mexico and bet on Trump losing the election in November. Once that happens, they said they believe the rules that are preventing them from migrating will be lifted, and they will then be able to claim asylum in the U.S.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Okay, so the Jews were not illegals whereas the Hondurans and El Salvadorians were?

Where did I say that? Oh, that’s right. I didn’t. Clearly, English is your second language.

Best I recall, the Jews were turned around whereas those you deem illegal were declared by Trump as a “caravan mob” he determined needed to be met with military force and later separated and caged.

The Jews were never allowed to leave the ship so no, they were not personally “turned around.” And docking privileges were denied to the ship.

Of course, the “cages” you refer to were built by Obama. But you ignore that fact. At least those “immigrants”, who are really illegal aliens, have an opportunity for a judicial hearing. Not something afforded to the Japanese, Germans and Italians that FDR put in concentration camps.

Try sneaking into Mexico or Honduras, AJ/Ward, and let us know how it goes.

@Ronald J. Ward: Who here argued for a lifetime? The article was troll bait, its too easy to punk a retard. Check out the moron bigot #1 post lol

@retire05:

RJW: Okay, so the Jews were not illegals whereas the Hondurans and El Salvadorians were?

Retire05: Where did I say that? Oh, that’s right. I didn’t. Clearly, English is your second language.

I guess you missed the question mark, something asking for a meaning?

@retire05:

The Jews sought asylum. They were denied. Now, if an illegal seeks asylum…..

RJW: Best I recall, the Jews were turned around whereas those you deem illegal were declared by Trump as a “caravan mob” he determined needed to be met with military force and later separated and caged.

Retire05 The Jews were never allowed to leave the ship so no, they were not personally “turned around.” And docking privileges were denied to the ship.

So, occupants on a boat which was denied docking privileges and thus, turned around, invalidates my argument that the occupants on that boat were turned around?

Seriously dude, grasp much? Best go fetch your Nathan Blue buddy to add something stupid only to explain how I’ve been argumentatively crushed again by the FA heroes.

@kitt:

@Ronald J. Ward: Who here argued for a lifetime?

Funny how the regulars turn to 1 scripted.

@Ronald J. Ward:

Funny how the regulars turn to 1 scripted.

Thats zero in retard translation.

@kitt:

Thats (sic) zero in retard translation.

Maybe because I suck at at communicating with retards?

But alas, I’ll try to drop a hint.

@kitt:

A great argument to make Trump President for life

Who here argued for a lifetime?

Get it? Guess not. I did my best.

@Ronald J. Ward: Troll bait, isnt agreeing, you jumping in to be first translates well.

@kitt:

Quite silly but whatever you need for your own self assurance. I bet DJ stands behinds his argument. We’re unlikely to know as he has you.

@Ronald J. Ward: If you bother to pay the least bit attention the author:
Jason Hopkins
Immigration and politics reporter

Hook line sinker rod and reel.

@kitt:

AJ/Ward is just generally a nasty person. Add that to being not real bright, and you have a total loser.

Ignore him. He’s as useless as Comrade Greggie when it comes to rational discussions.

@kitt:

In case you need a reminder of the Daily Caller’s pedigree, it was set up by Fox’s Tucker Carlson and funded at least in part by the Kochs and other billionaires. That anyone considers it news and not purely opinion (or just propaganda) is a shame. We’ve covered the Caller’s Michael Bastasch plenty. Recently, we’ve seen a new byline on some staunchly pro-Pruitt pieces: Jason Hopkins.

Is Hopkins more of an actual reporter than Bastasch? Sort of. Unlike Bastasch, Hopkins’s resume appears to be more than just a string of positions at Koch-backed organizations. But like Mike, he has gone from one overtly biased conservative gig to another. Before working for the Caller, Hopkins wrote for the racist, GOP-operative-run fake news operation Western Journal, scribbling boilerplate conservative political attacks. Before that, he was at The Resurgent, the blog of conservative radio star Erik Erikson. Prior to that, he wrote for at TownHall (originally a Heritage Foundation operation before being bought by pro-Trump Salem) churning out more of the same sort of Fox-News-on-steroids political opinion masquerading as reporting.

Apparently, when Hopkins went to Daily Caller he stopped being a general political hack and became an “Energy Investigator.” Hopkins has written a lot in the almost two months since starting at the Daily Caller, like an attack on electric vehicles based on a fossil fuel-funded group’s research, which we covered. (Apparently, he didn’t approve of how we pointed out the corrupt nature of the report, and somehow failed to see the half-dozen or so contradicting links we provided to address the report’s content.)

It doesn’t take long to see a theme to his work. Hopkins’s first story, from early April, is a hit piece on Paul Ryan’s Democratic challenger, dragging him for his support of renewables–based, of course, on Republican’s unofficial opposition research group, America Rising. Ten days later, Hopkins wrote another renewables attack, also based on a report from that same group, which just so happens to share staff and office space with Pruitt’s no-bid media work contract winner, Definers Public Affairs. And one of his most recent pieces is–you guessed it–another attack on renewables. The source for his claims? That’s right: research from America Rising.

He’s also started branching out to defending Scott Pruitt from other outlet’s real reporting, as though he’s some sort of definer of Pruitt’s public affairs. Hopkins jumped to Pruitt’s defense regarding the story of how an AP reporter tried to attend a meeting but EPA security “shoved her forcibly out of the EPA building.” According to the Daily Caller, that didn’t happen and that per Hopkins eyewitness account, the woman was overreacting.

Similarly, Hopkins took issue with a supposedly “misleading” AP story about Pruitt’s travel, pushed back on the stories about Pruitt’s pending firing, and defended Pruitt on the security issue.

Now, as a recent Media Matters post shows, Michael Bastasch is still the reigning champion of pro-Pruitt propaganda. But when Bastasch is busy and the Daily Caller needs to attack clean energy or defend dirty politicians like Pruitt, Jason Hopkins to it.

@retire05: @kitt: So, the bottom line is that all these liberals who just LOVE for everyone else to live out their generosity without they themselves ever lifting a finger believe that anyone and everyone should be allowed to flood the country with unskilled and poorly educated laborers, driving wages down, driving crime up, overwhelming housing and taxpayer funded services. Just as long as they don’t wander into the liberal neighborhoods. Anything else is racist.

But, according to them, anti-Semitism is OK. Got it.