Said Donald Trump, about a year ago. August 16, 2015. "Meet the Press." I'm reading the transcript because someone on Twitter offered it as the answer to my challenge to find a place where Trump himself said that he would deport 11 million undocumented aliens. In the interview, Chuck Todd asks him about his immigration plan, which, if you check the text, you'll see only talks about removing 2 categories of people: 1. those who are caught crossing the border and 2. those who've been convicted of crimes.
DONALD TRUMP: We have to make a whole new set of standards. And when people come in, they have to come in legally--That most closely refers to Category #1, people who are crossing the border.
CHUCK TODD: So you're going to split up families?Todd is stirring things up here, trying to pull the focus to the well-settled people who are living productive, peaceful lives in the United States.
DONALD TRUMP: Chuck.They have to go doesn't mean Trump plans to gather them all up and physically remove them.
CHUCK TODD: You're going to deport children--
DONALD TRUMP: Chuck. No, no. We're going to keep the families together. We have to keep the families together.
CHUCK TODD: But you're going to keep them together out--
DONALD TRUMP: But they have to go. But they have to go.
CHUCK TODD: What if they have no place to go?Now, Trump is talking about Category #2, those who have committed crimes.
DONALD TRUMP: We will work with them. They have to go. Chuck, we either have a country or we don't have a country.
CHUCK TODD: The cost of--
DONALD TRUMP: Either, we have a country--
CHUCK TODD: --doing this--
DONALD TRUMP: --or not.
CHUCK TODD: How do you do it?
DONALD TRUMP: The cost of doing it? Look at the cost of what we have right now.
CHUCK TODD: But the cost of doing it.
DONALD TRUMP: Let me ask you this. Do you think there's--
CHUCK TODD: I understand that. But how do you it?
DONALD TRUMP: Do you think there's tremendous cost for the illegals that are in here right now?
CHUCK TODD: Of course there's cost to it.
DONALD TRUMP: Okay, tremendous. Do you think there's tremendous crime being committed by illegals?
CHUCK TODD: I know there's definitely evidence that it's happened.Somehow people felt that Trump said he'd deport 11 million people, but he didn't say it there. He did brag that he's the "super genius of all time," and when I read this now and think about all that has happened and contemplate what Trump is likely to say today in Mexico and in his immigration speech, I'm thinking maybe he's right about that super genius of all time. People love to call Trump an idiot, but check the transcript. He is not the idiot.
DONALD TRUMP: Tremendous--
(OVERTALK)
CHUCK TODD: --heinous crimes--
DONALD TRUMP: Far greater than what--
(OVERTALK)
CHUCK TODD: There's been some heinous ones.
DONALD TRUMP: And you see it all over. Just last night. All over. We will do it. And we will expedite it so people can come back in.
CHUCK TODD: It's still not clear to me here--
DONALD TRUMP: Chuck, it'll work out so well. You will be so happy. In four years, you're going to be interviewing me and you're going to say, "What a great job you've done, President Trump."
পোস্টগুলি
১১১টি মন্তব্য:
The media is really good at this.
A politician, or anyone, for that matter, says,
"Yesterday I went to the store and walked out with a candy bar."
And the media translates,
He admitted to theft as he, "walked out with a candy bar."
At this point we just roll our eyes. But they've stepped it up a notch.
Now, we push back. And later, when interviewed, they say, "Why are you for stealing?" And the answer is. "What? I'm not for stealing. Never have been. Everyone needs to pay."
Then the report from the media is, "He is hacking down! Flip flopping! No longer supports theft, now thinks others "have to pay!""
Makes your head spin after awhile.
But no one will check the transcript.
Todd just tries to create controversy and then crosstalk.
Politically, Trump is an idiot, and you're an idiot if you don't realize that.
He has said repeatedly that he wants to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants.
"He has said repeatedly that he wants to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants."
--> Probably. Clinton wanted to deport a lot more people at one point too.
"They have to go doesn't mean Trump plans to gather them all up and physically remove them."
Maybe Trump has knowlege of some super secret teleportation technology. No need to physically remove them at all.
So when Jeb Bush and John Kasich were lambasting Trump over any notion of actually doing 11 million deportations, they were exactly right. All that Trump had to do was say, "Yes, my plan won't involve that many deportations. It is more nuanced than that. We agree about those things..."
Did Althouse make a post when Rush Limbaugh admitted that Trump was a con artist about immigration (among other things) and Rush knew not to take Trump seriously, but Rush never told his audience that.
David said...
"Politically, Trump is an idiot, and you're an idiot if you don't realize that.
He has said repeatedly that he wants to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants."
Nice of you to drop by.
What our hostess want to know is the proof that he said it. Do you have a cite? Not that we don't believe you or anything. I'm sure you can back up your statement.
"He is not the idiot."
No, the idiots are going to elect Hillary Clinton as president. That includes media idiots like Todd.
Re: Unknown:
Maybe Trump has knowlege of some super secret teleportation technology. No need to physically remove them at all.
Or it could be the dreaded Self-Deportation Device!! Commentators like to portray it as somehow absurd or unsavoury, but it's actually the most common-sensical approach imaginable to dealing with illegal immigration. It's nothing more than the notion that if you enforce laws, then people who are actively breaking the law will find it difficult to continue doing so, so they'll give up and (in the case of illegal immigrants) go home.
Fundamentally, the discomfort these commentators feel is with the idea that anyone could reside in the country illegally in the first place, because no matter how we "reform" our immigration laws, there will always be someone living here illegally, or trying to, unless we abolish immigration laws entirely. When it comes right down to it, they're uncomfortable with the idea that nations have borders in the first place.
"Politically, Trump is an idiot, and you're an idiot if you don't realize that. He has said repeatedly that he wants to deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants."
Huh? Talk about idiot...
Don't you hear me saying that I've asked on this blog and on Twitter and it's been 7 hours and still no one has provided a direct quote?
You're just showing that you have been tricked. You feel something was said. But you don't have it in writing. The art of the deal....
What our hostess want to know is the proof that he said it. Do you have a cite? Not that we don't believe you or anything. I'm sure you can back up your statement.
I'm honestly having a hard time believing that someone could even remotely be paying attention to this campaign and not realize that Trump has repeatedly talked about this. I'm on my phone, but I'll post some links shortly and you all can admit you're idiots. Sound good?
The Davids disagree. I'd be glad to join the Other David if he has a cite to a statement by Trump. No fair using the conclusions of others.
My God, Kasich looks good and Trump looks like a shit head in this 2:50 video from the WSJ debate last fall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqoKiDgR_iI
What's a "Kasich"? Is that a new STD or something?
Trump should say to Peña Nieto that we'll treat Mexican illegals the same way Mexico treats Guatemalan illegals.
How are these articles? Do you agree that Trump has said he will deport the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United State? This is four sources - interview with Lester Holt, interview with Matt Lauer, campaign rally, and phone call with Alabama Republicans.
Here’s How Much Trump’s Mass Deportation Policy Would Cost Everyone
On his first day as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump went on NBC and reiterated his plan to deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants living in this country if he becomes president.
“They’re going to be deported,” he told host Lester Holt on Wednesday. “We have many illegals in the country, and we have to get them out.” The ones who have “done well and really achieved,” he added, would then be allowed back in.
Deportation of Undocumented Immigrants
But during that rally Trump asserted his deportation stance clearly: "I'm tougher on illegal immigration than anybody. That's what I'm saying we have to take people that are here illegally and we have to move them out and you know what, it's going to be done, it's going to be done, it's going to work and now even the other candidates are saying, 'you know what, I think he's right.' They don't know, we have to do it."
...
Asked by NBC's Matt Lauer if he's backing off talk of the wall along the Southern border and deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants, Trump replied: "no, not at all." He doubled down then saying that "when I'm talking about immigration…I'm talking about that and more in the form of immigration, the wall, undocumented immigrants being -- having to be brought out of the country. And we will do that. It has never been a worse situation than we have right now."
Donald Trump Says Immigrant Deportations Done in Two Years
“We have to get them out. If we have wonderful cases, they can come back in but they have to come back in legally,” Mr. Trump said in an audio clip posted on YouTube Thursday night by a person on the call.
By the way, Professor...
Karl Rove might well agree with you. He'd say -- and has said -- that Trump was vague all along. That any of the extremists hoping that Trump would really deport every illegal were kidding themselves because all along, Trump talked about his big beautiful wall, with a door in it for the "great" people whom he "loved."
To me (and perhaps you're not aiming it at me) this is a mind-numbingly silly argument that you're engaging in.
Seems to me if you're talking about whether to split families, you must be thinking about families here long enough that one or more children were born here. As far as I know, if the Border Patrol intercepts someone crossing the border without documentation, they're sent home.
People love to call Trump an idiot, but check the transcript. He is not the idiot.
To be fair, compared to Chuck Todd nobody is going to look like an idiot.
Mexico's President says NAFTA can be improved. Trump already working the guy.
Balfegor speak Heap Big Medicine. The vast majority of Mexicans returned to Mexico under Eisenhowers "Operation Wetback" were indeed of the self-deported kind. And just test the open borders crowd and see what kind of answer you get when you ask what percentage of LEGAL immigration from Mexico is optimum. 50%, 60% 70% of Mexicos population? Is there EVER an upper bound with that crowd? What if, say, 300 million Chinese (the least educated) decided in a "Camp of the Saints" move to sail to the US? What would the open borders crowd say? And if they say: "Don't be ridiculous" then what lower number would be acceptable to that crowd? Like Lady Astor in the apocyphal story about Churchills offer to go to bed with her for a million pounds in which she accepted but when Churchill asked her if she would for five pounds and she replied "What sort of person do you think I am?" We all know what kind of people this crowd consists of--those who would abolish our nation state--all we're doing is haggling about the numbers.
I guess my question is if Trump never promised to deport all illegals (which I don't recall him specifically promising that, only that many of his supporters assumed he would) then what was Rush Limbaugh talking about when he said he never took that stuff seriously and what was Ann Coulter talking about when she expressed anger over Trump's new limited amnesty position? Did Trump supporters simply impose their own wishes on what they saw in him, as Obama's fans did with him?
Trump, "We had a substantive exchange of ideas."
And Hillary is in America recovering from her hangover by harranguing the Vets in Cleveland.
You want self-deportation? Not hard to do - just deny illegal aliens a cent of public money or assistance. You help the Federal, state and local government budget crises, lower classroom sizes, all sorts of good things.
The criminal element? Deport them forcibly.
There. Was that so bad?
Plus, you have the fun of watching the Democrat party shit their collective pants.
Blogger Bill Harshaw said...
Seems to me if you're talking about whether to split families, you must be thinking about families here long enough that one or more children were born here. As far as I know, if the Border Patrol intercepts someone crossing the border without documentation, they're sent home.
This is not correct.
Since I started in the INS back in 1996, there was always a group known as OTMs that were released and expected to appear in court on their court date. OTM stands for other than Mexican. This is because Mexico won't take them back and we have to fly them home. So, if you're from other central American or south American countries, it's catch and release. The no-show rate of these border crossers is over 90℅.
Sense Obama has been elected, there is a new group of catch and release. These are minors. Anyone 17 and under is turned over to family or another agency and put through the process. I believe they've now added mothers of minors too. So if a woman crosses with two minors, it's catch and release.
News flash. Trump now owns the President of Mexico. Five point plan and they both agree. China is our joint enemy. Brilliant.
Mexico's President says NAFTA can be improved. Trump already working the guy.
The PTB had no interest in revisiting NAFTA because the PTB are profiting off of it quite nicely, thank you. And have no interest in the fact that it might not be the greatest thing since privatizing profits and socializing losses to some segments of the population who just don't understand that Globalization is inevitable and national borders are passe.
But obviously Mexico is going to want to continue to trade with the US under the best conditions possible, so if the US asks Mexico to give a little in order to get a little their not going to simply flounce off in a huff, not for long anyway.
And NAFTA has been effect for 22 years. Renegotiating a deal after 22 years is not unheard of.
And to all those who decry Trumps "baby steps" statement, let me ask: If the main water line breaks in your house and floods the place, isn't the very first thing one does is turn off the water? Then next one pumps the water out, no? Followed by clean up efforts. Only then does one discuss what kind/color of replacement carpet or the merits of tile vs carpet and if tile what kind/color. One most certainly DOES NOT discuss redecorating while the place is still flooding. "Baby steps"= sequential, rational action.
"I can work with Trump."
Hillary has been upstaged.
You won't find a Trump quote that includes the phrase "11 million" because he isn't stupid enough to say it. You'll find someone interviewing Trump saying "11 million" and you'll find Trump refusing to back down from his comments about deportation because he knows he's being played. Instead, he'll keep saying "them," and then, when he is no longer in a position of being played by the interviewer, he'll clarify which "them" he meant, in a context where it's at least harder to use against him.
Again, I am not a Trump fan. I would have gladly backed Senator Paul, and somewhat less gladly Senator Cruz. But you go to the voting booth with the candidates you have, and it helps to be clear about what their strengths and weaknesses are. And one clear strength that Trump has is that he refuses to play the media game by their rules. As a corollary, he plays the media game in such a way as to live, rent-free, in the media's collective heads for months on end. That is a kind of genius. Not one that I find particularly admirable, but I know skill when I see it whether I like it or not.
GO AHEAD My man Wilbur!
I think it was just last week that I saw an article stating that INS was still "vetting" would be immigrants by asking if they had ever been members of a Nazi or Communist party organization. If that is so, I think it is a fair guess that the other old laws and regulations relating to immigration also are still on the books.
Now, Caesar Barack Augustus have publicly threatened all immigration officials with "personal consequences" if they presume to enforce the laws as written rather than as He has ordered by "internal memoranda" that is not even published, and the bureaucracies have adjusted to that. Likewise, state and local authorities have gotten away with declaring themselves "sanctuary jurisdictions," etc., and defying Federal laws and regulations wholesale for decades.
If Trump wins the election and is inaugurated, he can start working on turning all that around on January 21, 2017, but it is going to be a long, tough slog with the Democrats resisting him tooth and nail in the courts and in the field all the way.
When Trump says that he'd like to negotiate great trade deals for the United States, exactly who does he think he is arguing against?
Who, out there, is opposed to "negotiating great trade deals"?
The devil is in the details, and whether the U.S., for example, is going to let the UAW influence the deal, at the expense of some other provision. Republicans are more likely to resist the UAW. The UAW doesn't support us; they campaign against us every election.
Whose side is Trump on; the UAW, or freer trade?
.....the well-settled people who are living productive, peaceful lives in the United States.
They're here illegally. And this would not come as a surprise to them. They know this, and it was their choice. And they've been able to live peaceful lives is because our government has for decades turned blind eye and refused to enforce our laws, even though the people (citizens) asked them to. Our government has failed in their duty to enforce the laws of this country - on purpose.
People here illegally need to go home. I have as much sympathy for them as you would have for me when/if I got caught breaking the law and were facing the consequences of my choices.
So the Trumpkins are angry with the GOP because (they think that) so many congressional Republicans said one thing and did another...
And they love Trump because he is proving so skillful in not committing to do anything definite; to not saying anything at all that people can hold him to later...
Blogger Hagar said...
I think it was just last week that I saw an article stating that INS was still "vetting" would be immigrants by asking if they had ever been members of a Nazi or Communist party organization. If that is so, I think it is a fair guess that the other old laws and regulations relating to immigration also are still on the books.
Well, there is no more INS, it was abolished. We are all now under DHS in different departments.
However, yes, the laws are still on the books. Communists and Nazis not allowed.
Global warming.
Same arguments: you're either on the far left, yelling that humans are evil, or on the far right, yelling that humans should stay where they are.
In today's presser with Mexico's President, Trump came across as a negotiator. He might actually have a thing or two to say.
David:
None of those three links provides the proof Althouse seeks. Here is a direct quote (which is what she wants to see from Trump) from the NBC link:
'Trump does not state in his original policy plan that he wants to deport all undocumented immigrants. He outlines the need to deport "all illegal aliens in gangs" as well as "all criminal aliens," and advocates "criminal penalties" for those individuals who overstay or refuse to leave after their visas expire. Absent from this plan are the words "mass deportation" - but that doesn't mean it's not implied in the policy prescription.'
Got it? "Trump doesn't say it, but we know what he really means." I don't think that kind of argument will cut it with a law professor (or any of a number of other people).
The evidence she seeks may actually be out there (I don't know), but it's not in here. Not yet.
She can answer for herself.
Well, what Democrats claim Trump means is the important thing. So it's been proven. Q.E.D.
She can answer for herself.
LOL. You are blinded by your partisanship.
Donald Trump: "we have to take people that are here illegally and we have to move them out and you know what, it's going to be done, it's going to be done..."
Donald Trump: "we have to take people that are here illegally and we have to move them out and you know what, it's going to be done, it's going to be done..."
Donald Trump: "we have to take people that are here illegally and we have to move them out and you know what, it's going to be done, it's going to be done..."
Any questions?
Hillary is complaining now that Trump is meeting with the Mexican leader. He should do it the old-fashioned way, take huge contributions to his personal charity he uses to provide jobs for his family and his political supporters... Oh, wait! Trump doesn't have a Clinton Foundation!
@David:Any questions?
Yep. The quote where he says he will deport 11 million people.
There is no such quote and never was.
Ann's contention is that words have been put into Trump's mouth. You cannot refute that by putting words in Trump's mouth.
"Putting words in Trump's mouth" strikes me as a really odd characterization.
Trump was given many, many opportunities to lay out a policy; and to the Althouse telling, we should regard Trump as having been "cagey," and having successfully deflected all questions on the topic. Giving him plausible deniability later on. If Trump managed to mislead all of his core supporters on this point. Including his philosophical mentors like Ann Coulter, one can hardly complain about "putting words in Trump's mouth."
If we clean up the mess, we don't even know -- you said 11 million. Nobody knows what the number is. They are going out and they are coming back in legally. That's the way it has to be.
@David: See, ""we have to take people that are here illegally and we have to move them out and you know what, it's going to be done, it's going to be done..."
does NOT say "we are going to take all the illegals that are here and move them out by force".
You are asserting that he said he would deport all illegals, but he did not in fact say that.
It's like saying that "I am going to eat McDonald's cheeseburgers next year" is the same as saying that "I am going to eat every single cheeseburger McDonald's produces in the next year".
At least he hasn't proposed destroying their country and forcing Mexicans to cast their fate to rickety ships, where tens of thousands drown, as Hillary has actually done in Libya and Syria.
Chuck, don't worry, you will get your neocon president Hillary.
The "other old laws and regulations" are to start with, of course, that if you are an alien found in this country without a visa, you have committed a crime and will be either deported immediately, or tried and incarcerated for some time, and then deported.
Anyone, who has known of your presence and has not reported it to the authorities, also has committed a punishable crime, not to mention if such a person has helped you in any way, or -horrors! - offered you employment.
If you are legally present in the country on a properly issued visa, you will still not be eligible for any taxpayer funded assistance of any kind, federal, state, or local, except on an emergency basis, and in that case you will be deported as soon as you are able to travel, and you and any sponsor, or other person in any way responsible for you, will be charged for any and all expenses incurred related your treatment and deportation proceedings.
And son on and etc.
@Chuck:Trump was given many, many opportunities to lay out a policy; and to the Althouse telling, we should regard Trump as having been "cagey," and having successfully deflected all questions on the topic. Giving him plausible deniability later on.
On the nose, Chuck. Pointing out that Trump is a bullshitter who will say something and let you walk away with a misinterpretation that he will not abide by later is not an endorsement of Trump.
As for Ann Coulter, she sold herself that bill of goods along with everyone else.
That's the whole point.
I am not a Trump supporter, because of things like this.
I’m sorry, but the plain-speech meaning of round-em-up below is that the state will compel the removal of the illegal immigrant population. It matters not a whit that Trump envisions that most will deport themselves voluntarily. Most of us obey laws “voluntarily,” not least because we know what happens to those who do not.
Scott Pelley: Eleven, 12 million illegal immigrants--
Donald Trump: Or whatever the number is.
Scott Pelley: Still in the country, what do you do?
Donald Trump: If they've done well they're going out and they're coming back in legally. Because you said it----
Scott Pelley: You're rounding them all up?
Donald Trump: We're rounding 'em up in a very humane way, in a very nice way.
60 Minutes, September 28, 2015
I wonder if the Dems can say if there's anyone in this country that we have a constitutional right to deport. Also, is there any country so frenzied in their hatred of the United States that we can tell those countries that we don't want any more of their immigrants? What do we owe Somalia or Syria?........Immigration is not a big issue for me, but the way that they demonize people who have misgivings about it makes it an issue. It's apparently unAmerican to be patriotic. Real Americans support Americans who sit down for the national anthem and salute and honor Mexicans who cross the border illegally. That's what real Americans do. These Trump supporters should all be deported to Nazi Germany where they belong.
Trump meets with the President of Mexico, he flew there on time. Hillary gives a speech to a less than half full room to the American Legion in Cincinnati with almost no applause. A speech she was forty minutes late for, was she hungover or ill?
@Earnest Prole:the plain speech meaning of round-em-up below is that the state will compel the removal of the illegal immigrant population.
Is the plain meaning of "I will eat cheeseburgers" "I will eat every single cheeseburger ever"?
Pelley is the one who said "round them ALL up", not Trump.
Chuck and Gabriel, you seem to be upset that Trump speaks with plausible deniability just like Clinton does.
Mac
She was late nearly an hour one time when I saw her in Council Bluffs, Iowa. Party official lied about bad roads.
@Madison Man:Gabriel, you seem to be upset
Based on....
Did you see my "I am not a Trump supporter, because of things like this."
I do not approve of people who act like the Clintons, but less so and with less graft.
So... We still don't know who is going to have to pay for that wall. Trump neglected to bring it up with the Mexican president. LOL.
@Madison Man: My sole point is that the media creates a straw man Trump and then criticizes Trump for not being it.
I think it is pretty clear that David wins this. Even though 99 times out of a hundred it is great bet that when a liberal quotes a single sentence, there is additional context and more accurate interpretation that puts the lie to their claim. This time he is right. Trump has claimed that he would send them all back and expedite the return of those who check out criminally, which is the vast majority, I think, even he would admit.
@tim in vermont:Trump has claimed that he would send them all back
But again, no one can quote him saying those words. What they can quote is an off the cuff exchange where that statement is attributed to him and he does not deny it, which is the very thing at issue, you see.
But yes, you know, go ahead and award victory to whatever side you like, for any reason you like. Nonetheless the standard Ann asked for is not met.
We still don't know who is going to have to pay for that wall. Trump neglected to bring it up with the Mexican president. LOL
He has talked about the 45 billion annually in transfer payments that illegals are sending to Mexico. Cut that down and you come up with some significant money pretty quickly.
Unknown supports the neocon though, who can do no wrong in her eyes.
That is a quote from Trump. Google it, it is in context. You are splitting hairs. Getting into Unkown's territory, sticking to unsupportable claims.
@tim in vermont: What is the quote? Humor me and reproduce it.
The media had to create this meme so that they could scream racist and drive a wedge between Hispanics and Trump. Its the same as George Stephanopoulos asking a question in a debate that was not being discussed anywhere so that the media could scream "War on Women!". It's the same as Mitt Romney in artfully saying that he had "binders full of women" to show that he took seriously adding women to his cabinet and staff and that became proof that he was sexist. It's the same as George Allen calling someone a nonsensical name, "Macaca", and the Washington Post and the rest of the MSM turning it into a racial slur. It was a purposeful lie by the MSM.
@tim in vermont: You're accusing me of splitting hairs: I'm actually accusing Trump of splitting hairs.
He doesn't bother to winnow the chaff to specifics or correct people for attributing things to him he didn't say, except when it suits him. Clown nose on, clown nose off.
It may be a deliberate tactic or just a habit that served him well. Not a mind reader and don't know.
I think it's really a stretch to try to make excuses for Trump on the basis of his almost always elliptical way of asserting things. He almost never actually says what EVERYONE, including EVERYONE who agrees with him, says he said. But so many have said he intends to or said he intends to deport eleven million people, or promises to, or whatever they are sure they know he said, including many who want him to do those things, that if he did NOT mean to do this, he had an obligation to CLARIFY that he did not. Come on, Ann. He's the one serving up these word salads. We have a right to know what he put in them, without us having to pick out every piece of lettuce and arugula and onion and line them up to shine our own light of reason on them.
@Gabriel: Look, I know it’s possible to debate the meaning of the word is, but that puts you in bad company.
Trump will do what Eisenhower did, it's called "touch back". We will vet them at least know who is not a citizen and make them legally documented with no road to full citizenship. That no road to citizenship will cause a lot of self deportation, as will the "round up".
The 11 million number is just an estimate, it's like official unemployment numbers, a hoax. Of that number, whatever it is, 30 to 40% of illegals are visa overstays not necessarily poor "wetbacks".
@Earnest Prole: Look, I know it’s possible to debate the meaning of the word is, but that puts you in bad company.
Did no such thing. When I ask for a quote of Trump saying something, I expect the transcript offered in proof not to say that Scott Pelley said it.
"Todd is stirring things up here." Don't you just hate it when they do that?
@Jon Burack: I do not think Ann is offering Trump total absolution. The thing you accuse Trump of doing is what he is doing and it is perfectly proper to criticize him for that.
But that thing is much more subtle than what other commenters are accusing him of doing, and he is not guilty of THAT thing whatever else he may be guilty of.
The first rule of Trump politics is the media is the enemy at the front of the line. which is what Romney and McCain failed to grasp. Expect the bias in the media to fall like the Berlin Wall under a Trump presidency. Then thank him for it.
One wall goes up, another comes down.
Pro tip: When a politician must resort to lawyerly parsing, it means he’s screwed the pooch.
MadisonMan said...
Chuck and Gabriel, you seem to be upset that Trump speaks with plausible deniability just like Clinton does.
It is not upsetting to me. Trump, I think (he doesn't much act like it), wants my vote, and there's a fair chance he'll get it. Despite my mostly despising him.
Clinton has no chance of getting my vote. She need not waste her time posturing for it. I won't waste a thought on her.
@Earnest Prole:Pro tip: When a politician must resort to lawyerly parsing, it means he’s screwed the pooch
Really? Because Hillary and Bill seem to have doing pretty well, and the polls have Hillary beating Trump.
@Earnest Prole: Pro-tip: When someone is repeatedly asked to produce a piece if evidence and something else is always offered with the assertion it is the same thing really, then perhaps that person is not operating in good faith.
Trump played it to give hisself an out using Clintonesque parsing. He filled the bellies of his alt-right nutbar base with all the hate they could swallow, but it turns out to be tofu, not carne asada.
Is anybody else laughing at the part where Trump labels himself as "a conservative Republican"?
Love the Dem talk about breaking up families, etc. what they are talking about, of course, are "anchor babies", kids intentionally born north of the Rio Grande in order to get them citizenship, and protection for their illegal parents and siblings from deportation. My position is that the parents should be given the choice of taking the kid with them back to Mexico and places south, or leave them here with relatives or CPS. Then, when the kids are old enough to travel alone, they can come back alone and legally - the beauty of dual citizenship: American by place of birth, and Mexican (etc) by parentage. It is just plain stupid to give people this avenue to keep from being deported, because they will obviously take advantage of it in decently large numbers. Enforce the immigration laws, and deport the parents and siblings who are here illegally, and the number of women traveling here to have Anchor Babies will shrink dramatically.
Stephen Hawking is no Trump, that's for sure.
I think the anti-Trump David deserves a more complete acknowledgement and response. David has provided some verbatim quotes in which Trump says "all people here illegally will be gone" and also agrees with the number "11 million or perhaps more". But he hasn't provided a verbatim quote in which Trump says something like, "when I become President all 11 million illegals will be deported."
How could Trump say the things he says and not mean the thing in the missing quote?
I think Trump believes that when he is elected, a lot of illegals will return to their home countries, fearing a Trump Administration. I think he believes further that as a Trump administration begins highly publicized (and relatively non-controversial) deportations of criminals who are illegally in the country, that will convince a number of others to leave in fear. I think he believes further that as a Trump administration adopts a policy of more liberal legal immigration that requires people to apply from their home countries, that even more will leave.
So with this frame of mind, Trump could believe that "all illegals will be gone" and also assert "we'll only deport a few, and most of them criminals."
It is the press, not Trump, who insists on characterizing the Trump policy as "mass deportations". And I think that's the main point of Althouse's challenge to find a verbatim quote from Trump on the matter.
Clear speech or weasel words: we all have to choose what we value more.
I've asked on this blog and on Twitter and it's been 7 hours and still no one has provided a direct quote?
Of course not. It's all done with dog whistles.
Molly said...
I think Trump believes that when he is elected, a lot of illegals will return to their home countries, fearing a Trump Administration.
That is exactly what happened under Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback," but the number of illegals was far less. The INS claimed that 1.3 million Mexicans were part of the relocation but government deportations likely were less than 250,000. California numbers showed a reduction of 540,000 Mexicans but authorities rousted only 55,000.
You want self-deportation? Not hard to do - just deny illegal aliens a cent of public money or assistance.
THIS a thousand times THIS. If you are illegally in the country and defacto a criminal you do not get to jump onto the gravy train. NO food stamps, no subsidized housing, no monthly welfare check. Stop the give aways that are costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars a year.
If you are working and using someone else's SSN. Go to jail. That is identity theft. Using forged documents? Using fake driver's license. Voting? GTFO.
If you take away the cushion people will decide on their own to go home.
People make a big deal about previous immigration in the 1800's. The process was entirely different but the biggest difference is that when you came from Ireland, Poland, Italy or anywhere else in the world to America you were on your own. ON. YOUR. OWN. with the exception of private assistance, churches, charities and people who had come before you and worked to become a part of this country.
EARN IT or go home.
Look at it this way.Getting rid of 11 million criminals can't be that bad.
You want specifics from Trump? Why?
He appeals to nativism - that he gets away with it in a place like America is what makes this all so laughably ironic.
Trump is a showman peddling "us vs them" rhetoric, substantive details don't really matter. And he doesn't care about the effects of his rhetoric.
“Trump favors deporting 11 million illegal immigrants” is a perfectly fair and straightforward headline summarizing what Trump said in his 60 Minutes interview a year ago. Trump did not complain during or following the interview that his words were being misrepresented; on the contrary, they were heralded by his supporters as a refreshing piece of plain talk. That he now fancies a different position is fine: people and politics evolve. But as was the case with Bill Clinton's lawyerly weaseling, I refuse to be a mark for a con job over the plain meaning of words.
Chuck Todd is true asshole. He seems to think destroying Trump by making things up is a noble activity. CNN will go out of the Cable News business soon at this rate.He is making CNN into a third rate Telemundo.
Earnest, "evolved position" rings hollow.
Trump is seeking to appeal to those white voters (And perhaps some english speaking hispanics who don't wish to associate themselves with undocumented workers) who are put off by his rhetoric and would feel more comfortable voting for a "softer Trump". Does he really mean anything? Who can tell with this Demagogue PT Barnum character.
Back in 1990 I was living in an apartment where many illegal immigrants (farmworkers) lived. They'd rent a one bedroom apartment and swear it was only for one or maybe two people and then they would cover the floor with mattresses and fifteen guys would move in. If you complained about the noise you would get your tires slashed and be accused of racism. There was nothing anyone could do. Then Operation Desert Storm happened and there was a rumor that illegals would be drafted to serve. The illegals left overnight. They were completely gone in one night.
There are different ways to motivate people to leave. For example, what if we stopped giving automatic citizenship to people born here, if their parents came in illegally? What if the parents are Mexican nationals their children would be Mexican nationals or we could create a new status called American nationals? In Mexico no one born there is automatically a citizen. Even if their parents are citizens the children are considered Mexican nationals until they are 18 and only granted citizenship if they have an honorable way to make a living, no criminal record. (Is this part of the reason so many undesirable Mexican nationals decide to come to US? What do they have to lose?) What if illegal immigrants with children had to register or their children would have no chance to become citizens? They'd register. What if those illegal immigrants knew they had to leave for a while or their children could not ever become citizens? They'd leave for a while.
@DBQ: "NO food stamps, no subsidized housing, no monthly welfare check. Stop the give aways that are costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars a year." Sorry, too late. The biggies are education (mandated by SCOTUS) and emergency health care (more or less required). Yes, there are ways to encourage people to leave, but it's hard to see how we're gonna take away those magnets.
I don't know how he spoke the words.
But if Donald Trump said "Suuuper Geeenius" like While E. Coyote, then I'll inconvenience myself to vote for him.
Okay.
Just kidding.
I inconvenience myself for nobody.
Well . . .
Different rules apply if somebody's paying me.
Gabriel: "I am not a Trump supporter, because of things like this"
Hillary appreciates your support.....
Now, don't tell me you are one of the deluded who believes your non-support of Trump is consequence free and doesn't objectively help Hillary.
You know, Hillary: she for whom "lifelong Republican" Chuck can never quite get around to criticizing.
Unexpectedly.
Trump specifically says he will deport 11 million illegal immigrants in this audio recording of the Calling Alabama series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8ZT_dsB5gM
Starting at 14:47. Trump says "really good management" will enable him to take all illegal immigrants and "get them out", but "wonderful cases" can come back in. He says it will 18 months-two years, and it has to be done "humanely". He also says Ben Carson couldn't handle it.
What do I win?
Okay, I'll concede David's original point (though not on the basis of what was in those links). Now what? Am I supposed to vote for Hillary? What difference does it make now?
Damn the "you will split families" whine is such utter bulshit. Families are welcome to stay together, in their fucking country. Go to your home! If America is your home and Mexico is your family's home, then choose...your choice is not my fault! If you want to stay in America more than you want to be with your family, then YOU have broken up your family. Geez.
For whom else do we accept the complaint "you can't enforce the law against me...am I breaking the law but if you enforce it then I will be split up from my faaaamily!"
Utter, utter bullshit.
Chuck said...
Is anybody else laughing at the part where Trump labels himself as "a conservative Republican"?
8/31/16, 5:08 PM
Chuck, I laugh when you label yourself as a "conservative Republican."
Damn the "you will split families" whine is such utter bulshit. Families are welcome to stay together, in their fucking country. Go to your home! If America is your home and Mexico is your family's home, then choose...your choice is not my fault! If you want to stay in America more than you want to be with your family, then YOU have broken up your family. Geez.
I agree.
Plus, we split up families when we sent troops off to war (or kinetic military actions).
We split up families when we send people to jail.
Families get split up when the parents are overseas contractors, or have to move to follow a job, or work on an oil well.
Heck, most congress people live away from their families.
That and the "through no fault of their own" is just emotional blackmail. All kids are in the situation they are in through no fault of their own.
what if we stopped giving automatic citizenship to people born here, if their parents came in illegally?
This is the thing. It's been labeled racist and impossible to even countenance this idea, but it is neither. Most countries in the world don't do this, and we certainly don't need to.
Trust everyone's minding his/her Scott Adams. If Trump is just a(nother political) conman, the racist tag falls away, yes?
@Maybee: The concept was made up in the early 80s, as I trust you aware, by Brennan in a footnote. It's the newly discovered rights that are sacrosanct. Those written down, well, they're negotiable / subject to degradation by the state's employees in dressed in robes.
The devil is in the details, and whether the U.S., for example, is going to let the UAW influence the deal, at the expense of some other provision. Republicans are more likely to resist the UAW. The UAW doesn't support us; they campaign against us every election.
At this point all good conservatives are supposed to take to their fainting couches at the thought of the UAW having influence concerning a trade deal as opposed to the Chamber of Commerce. But why, exactly, is the UAW my enemy? If they are willing to be my ally in pressuring the government to enact provisions in the "free trade" deals that protect the jobs of American citizens and want the borders to be defended, perhaps I can give a little on the things they want? Right now the situation is that the UAW and other unions get as much assistance from the government as Democrats can manage and meanwhile the Chamber of Commerce is accommodated too. It seems to me that I am in a lose/lose situation so why should I support the status quo?
Liberal Democrats do see each other as exceptionally smart people, which is ironic. If, by this point in human history, you see the State as some kind of benevolent uncle, and think the more power you give it the better off you'll be, you're some kind of retarded.
from the Hugfingnton Post:
Every single time Samuel L. Jackson said M/F in a movie .
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-deportation-force-illegal-immigration-2015-11
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন