Trump: If President, I'll Deport *All* Undocumented Immigrants

"We're going to keep the families together, but they have to go,"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.671323

 

Spoken like a true submissive. "law is law". ... Who told you that you have to believe that all law is good law ? This is the mantra of totalitarianism and not one of freedom.

 

So which is it? You said he would split them up didn't you? That isn't what he is saying.

 

I said he would split families up. Deporting the parents of US citizen immigrant children who were born on US soil = breaking up families.

 

Why, because it is not a cash cow anymore.

 

Evidently Trump stalked Princess Diana and wanted her for a trophy wife.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/holly...nted-her-as-trophy-wife/article1-1380987.aspx

 

They are broken up when the illegally come here.

 

Beside the point. Trump made two incompatible claims:

1. To deport all illegal immigrants
2. To not break up families.

One of them has to give.

 

You can run around, scream, shout and carry on until you foam at the mouth. That does not change what that right leaning think tank found, nor in any way does it improve your math skills (which are quite deficient). And until your, or any other rant 'n raver, comes up with something rational that disproves that study, please understand if I don't mostly ignore you (though I'm generally an optimistic person, I've about given up trying to inform and educate people who prefer to remain ignorant).

 

I could care less what Trump says.

 

Not if the children go with them, which I bet most of them would.

They are anchor babies anyway, and wouldnt even have US citizenship under jus sanguinis law, which is what the rest of the world uses.

 

And all you and Mr. Trump need for that is a Constitutional amendment. It cannot be done by passing a law.

 

Up until now but you have a USSC that rules not by the Constitution but by what they think the intent is. See the last Obamacare ruling. Anchor babies was not the intent of the Amendment it was to guarentee rights to the freed slaves.

 

I dunno. Obama has proved that as long as the bulk of the nation's Mainstream Media will loyally back one's play then all one needs do to end-run the Constitution is use a Pen and Phone and some handy activist judges who adhere to the radical ideology of one's own Party. Remember that the biggest danger Barack Obama's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad habits as president present to the nation is the fact that in all likelihood he will be followed in office by an EVIL GOPer president who will also have access to a pen and a phone and ideologically loyal activist judges. Oh my!

 

But they do, and so the conflict remains.

All I'm saying is that Trump's claims conflicted - that's the topic of the thread after all.

[hr][/hr]

Why would a US citizen leave the country and go back to Mexico? That sort of defeats the purpose.

 

So Trump is running for President of the U.S. and President of Mexico?

 

When there is a dispute on the meaning of a law, or portion thereof, and it is not clear to one or both parties what that meaning is, they go to court. If the courts have difficulty interpreting what is written in the law, then they go deeper, just as the Supremes did with Obamacare. The four or five words upon which the plaintiffs made their case was tossed because the body of the law and Congressional hearings, speeches, and everything else, said it was intended to grant coverage, not deny it, and a sketchy series of words did not take away from that.

Well, sorry, but your reading and understanding of the 14 Amendment was overruled in 1898 by the Supreme Court. The case was called Wong Kim Ark and it's well worth a read. Even though it's quite long, it is very informative of the history of that period of time and the evolution of birthright citizenship.

 

It will be interesting to watch because the illegals confer a benefit upon their children, namely, citizenship. Nobody shall confer a benefit to another as a result of a crime so the "Dreamers" are actually entitled to nothing. Let's see if anyone has the stomach to make this right and point out the law.

 

What if they aren't from Mexico?

 

Overall spending for DHS would massively increase as they would have to hire thousands more workers to man the wall along the border.

 

Lol ... a joke in itself from the political "Chief-Clown" of the USA.

I can go deeper here and ask who will then make these cheap paid harvesting inside the USA ... but a discussion about statements from this troll is superfluous.

 

Why should it be felony? Is not it easier to give a company a tax credit for every legitimate worker?

 

Shovel ready jobs. Result!

 

Ah yes, the system were rights are not inherent but are instead priveleges based entirely on who your parents are.

 

If you find the workers to fulfill this job ... but maybe some immigrants will then make?