Donald Trump

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by TJDave

Stopping from entry?
Does that mean on the other side of the border?

No, it doesn't. Illegals caught here within a certain distance of the border are generally given the option of returning voluntarily without a hearing. They pretty much always agree, because if they have a hearing and are officially deported, they can never legally come back into the US.

Previous administrations did not count those voluntary returns as deportations. The Obama administration does count them to prop up its stats.

[NJ Stinks]

Originally Posted by Clocker

No, it doesn't. Illegals caught here within a certain distance of the border are generally given the option of returning voluntarily without a hearing. They pretty much always agree, because if they have a hearing and are officially deported, they can never legally come back into the US.

Previous administrations did not count those voluntary returns as deportations. The Obama administration does count them to prop up its stats.

I assume you have a source?

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

I assume you have a source?

"At this point what does it really matter?"

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

I assume you have a source?

Yes I do, thanks for asking. I have many sources. I didn't provide any because I assumed that any well informed person was well aware of the situation.

How about the left wing LA Times to start?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...402-story.html

[barn32]

Originally Posted by Ann Coulter

I hear Churchill had a nice turn of phrase, but Trump's immigration speech is the most magnificent speech ever given.

Sorry, Abe.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Yes I do, thanks for asking. I have many sources. I didn't provide any because I assumed that any well informed person was well aware of the situation.

How about the left wing LA Times to start?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...402-story.html

looks awful familiar to the one I posed earlier he chose to ignore

[chadk66]

I guess that was Trump's version of the Gettinsome Address

[NJ Stinks]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Yes I do, thanks for asking. I have many sources. I didn't provide any because I assumed that any well informed person was well aware of the situation.

How about the left wing LA Times to start?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...402-story.html

From the linked LA Times article:

Now, the vast majority of border crossers who are apprehended get fingerprinted and formally deported. The change began during the George W. Bush administration and accelerated under Obama. The policy stemmed in part from a desire to ensure that people who had crossed into the country illegally would have formal charges on their records.


So Obama follows the previous administration in counting deportations yet you said in reply #8251 above: "Previous administrations did not count those voluntary returns as deportations."

Are you sure you don't work for FOX News? (Pick an icon.)

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

I assume you have a source?

Yes, Clocker does have a source. And, as usual he got it wrong.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na...0402-story.html

I would appreciate it if you would read that LA Times article and tell me if I am wrong about this.
Illegal immigrants in the past who were caught near the border were given the option of returning voluntarily or facing a hearing. They almost always chose to return voluntarily because if they were deported after a hearing, they would never be able to return to the US legally. These people were not counted in the deportation statistics. Now, people caught near the border are not just told to go back, they are fingerprinted and formally deported. Their path back into the United States is now blocked.

So they should be counted as legally deported because that is what they are. And since they were not legally deported under previous administrations, they should not have been counted as such.

The Obama administration claims to have deported more illegal immigrants than previous administrations and they have. They have done it the right way. Previous administrations did it the convenient way.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

From the linked LA Times article:

Now, the vast majority of border crossers who are apprehended get fingerprinted and formally deported. The change began during the George W. Bush administration and accelerated under Obama. The policy stemmed in part from a desire to ensure that people who had crossed into the country illegally would have formal charges on their records.


So Obama follows the previous administration in counting deportations yet you said in reply #8251 above: "Previous administrations did not count those voluntary returns as deportations."

Are you sure you don't work for FOX News? (Pick an icon.)

I see you have already figured out what I said in my previous post. When Clocker said previous administrations, he did not mean that previous administration. He meant the previous administration that proved he was right-if any.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Clocker

No, it doesn't. Illegals caught here within a certain distance of the border are generally given the option of returning voluntarily without a hearing. They pretty much always agree, because if they have a hearing and are officially deported, they can never legally come back into the US.

Previous administrations did not count those voluntary returns as deportations. The Obama administration does count them to prop up its stats.

As NJ Stinks pointed out, voluntary returns stopped happening in the GWB administration. Obama is counting them as deportations because they are deportations.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by mostpost

As NJ Stinks pointed out, voluntary returns stopped happening in the GWB administration. Obama is counting them as deportations because they are deportations.

ICE is on pace to complete about 230,000 deportations, which would be the lowest number since 2006:

http://cis.org/Immigration-Enforceme...s-Decline-2016

[NJ Stinks]

Originally Posted by mostpost

I see you have already figured out what I said in my previous post. When Clocker said previous administrations, he did not mean that previous administration. He meant the previous administration that proved he was right-if any.

Mostpost, these guys won't say so very often but damn it, you raise a ton of great points!

(Should be fun to hear Clocker explain why we're nuts. )

[JustRalph]

I guess Mostie using the LA Times as the know all, end all last word validates their latest poll that shows Trump ahead. 👍

[reckless]

Originally Posted by Clocker

I don't know what she is smoking, but I want some.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/01/going-ann-coulter-standard-trumps-immigration-speech-might-rank-just-behind-gettysburg-address/

Not sure what Coulter smokes either, but more people should take up the hobby -- especially so-called Republicans and pseudo conservatives.

Her tweet I like best from the posted article:

After Trump's triumphant visit with the Mexican president today, he should skip this speech & start putting together his transition team.

I am not so sure either if Trump's speech ranks up there with any of Lincoln's or Churchill's speeches but history will show that his immigration speech won Trump the presidency, as if we didn't know this already.