• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities

HumblePi said:
Trump’s talking point that "catch and release" is a "Democrat rule" specifically Obama's, is wrong. In fact, the underlying policy has continued under his own administration. For decades, across both Democratic and Republican administrations, many immigrants apprehended while trying to enter the country (by land or sea) have been released from custody while their legal right to remain in the United States was being resolved by the courts. "Catch and release" refers to immigration authorities detaining undocumented immigrants but releasing them while they wait to appear before an immigration judge. The practice did not start during a Democratic administration. On the contrary, the roots can be traced back to a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2001 during the Republican administration of George W. Bush.

In January 2017, Trump signed an executive order to terminate "catch and release." In reality, it didn’t change actual policy. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions said "catch and release" was not official policy but was still happening due to a long backlog of cases and a shortage of immigration judges. Sessions said; "It's just the reality that there are so many people claiming and being entitled to hearings that we don't have the ability to provide those hearings, and they are being released into the community, and they're not coming back for their hearings,"

Immigration courts are so backlogged right now that a wait to see a judge could take weeks; if an immigrant actually has an argument to be allowed to stay in the United States, it could be years before the case is resolved. Keeping the overwhelming numbers of immigrants in a detention center isn't physically feasible nor is it financially responsible for the U.S. Immigrants who present themselves at the border for asylum have the right to a hearing by a federal immigration judge at the border. If these people are bused, trucked or flown to cities all over the country like New York, San Francisco or Chicago, their legal right to a hearing at the border by a federal judge is no longer within their rights as a person seeking asylum according to U.S. law.

Here's some facts. Fact #1, the U.S. does not detain absolutely everyone crossing the border, but Trump thinks we should. Fact #2, The laws and policies that Trump and his officials refer to as “catch and release” are actually legal protections for specific vulnerable populations — groups like children, families, and people who claim they’re in deadly peril if they’re sent home. These are asylum seekers that Congress and the courts have decided need to be treated with extra care. Fact #3, The desire to end “catch and release” is designed to push the federal government as far as it can legally go right now to make detention and deportation the rule for everyone crossing into the US without papers-- regardless of circumstance -- and to put pressure on Congress to change the laws to let the government go further still.
Click to expand...

Ok, I will say this, I was wrong about Clinton starting it, I thought he did, I was wrong...

But what you espoused here, doesn't change the fact that what Trump wanted to do, essentially, was a catch and release? Is that an incorrect assessment? We know he wants to catch and deport right away....that's not the argument....he wants to catch......and release them into cities.... is that correct?
 
sjmay said:
Bush, Clinton, and Obama,

Did they do catch and release? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

But that is not the question and never has been the question. We are talking about your claim that EVERYONE ELSE did just what Trump tried to do with migrants.

Jeffrey Toobin on proposed policy: This is grotesque - CNN Video

You have submitted no supporting evidence that any of those three Presidents did the same thing that Trump tired to pull with sending immigrants as punishment to sanctuary cities as their policy of punishment.
 
haymarket said:
But that is not the question and never has been the question. We are talking about your claim that EVERYONE ELSE did just what Trump tried to do with migrants.

Jeffrey Toobin on proposed policy: This is grotesque - CNN Video

You have submitted no supporting evidence that any of those three Presidents did the same thing that Trump tired to pull with sending immigrants as punishment to sanctuary cities as their policy of punishment.
Click to expand...

Why can't you answer the simple question,

Did Obama and Bush do catch and release? It's a simple yes or no, did they do it?
 
haymarket said:
Because it costs them money.

Don't try to be clever or cute as nether works for you.
Click to expand...
Im being honest. The left has been arguing that illegal immigration benefits the communities they are in. Now when it comes out that those the most welcoming of them was considered to be the primary location to release them the same people are crying foul.

And even if it did turn out that the democrats were wrong about the economic impact and you are correct that it does indeed put an economic burden on us to accept them; what happened to the hollier-than-thou moral argument about how we are obligated to take them no matter what the cost is.

As far as i am concerned they should send all illegals to their districts if they refuse to send them home where they belong. Progressives like to think they claim the moral high ground when it comes to compassion so let them put their money where their mouth is and spare those good people the unfair treatment they would get from the rest of the country.

Lead by example and show conseratives how wrong we are about illegals. Take them in and show us how your community is thriving due to their impact.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
trouble13 said:
Im being honest. The left has been arguing that illegal immigration benefits the communities they are in. Now when it comes out that those the most welcoming of them was considered to be the primaty location to release them the same people are crying foul.

And even if it did turn out that the democrats were wrong sbout the economic impact and you are correct that it does indeed put an economic burden on us to acceot them; what happened to the hollier-than-thou moral argument about how we are obligated to tske them no matter what thr cost is.

As far as i am concerned they should send all illegals to their districts if they refuse to send them home where they belong. Progressives like to think they claim the moral high ground when it comes to copassion so let them put their money where their mouth is and spare those good people the unfair treatment they would get from the rest of the country.

Lead by example and show conseratives how wrong we are about illegals. Take them in and show us how your community is thriving due to their impact.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

In the long run, immigration across the board of lots of people is a positive thing. No doubt about it. In the short run, the jamming of large number of the poorest immigrants into selected cities would indeed propose a financial penalty on those cities and that is what Trump intended.

There is no contradiction here and the part of people on the left in acknowledging that reality.
 
haymarket said:
Because it is your dishonest attempt to pretend that is the issue - when it is clearly not. The issue if the Trump proposal which he is catching holy hell for.

Jeffrey Toobin on proposed policy: This is grotesque - CNN Video
Click to expand...

Toobin is a tool, if that's what you are putting your stock in, you would get better mileage out of Jodie Foster for christ sake....


So it's an issue separating families because he won't catch and release.....so he says ok, I will do catch and release, and THAT's an issue?

Curious, would it make you feel better if he caught and released them in the middle of the desert? Sounds like it might....

Your issue isn't that he's catching them and releasing them, (you thought it was good for Obama) your issue is WHERE he is releasing him,

That's just brutal.
 
haymarket said:
In the long run, immigration across the board of lots of people is a positive thing. No doubt about it. In the short run, the jamming of large number of the poorest immigrants into selected cities would indeed propose a financial penalty on those cities and that is what Trump intended.

There is no contradiction here and the part of people on the left in acknowledging that reality.
Click to expand...
Why exactly should communities accept your admitted burden they bring if they dont want them there?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Felis Leo said:
I did not see where it said it was illegal. Perhaps I overlooked it but the article you cited said that DHS officials in question stated that the actions "might" be illegal. But I did not see what U.S. Code Section or case law was cited.

But let us put aside the issue of legality for a moment, because that does not touch on the issue of principle. What, in principle, is wrong with sending illegal immigrants to states and cities the governments of which state that they welcome them with open arms and will shield them from unwarranted persecution?
Click to expand...

It's wrong because the intention isn't to put illegals in places where they will thrive, but rather to overload the sanctuary states' and cities' systems, and force them to change their policies or collapse. It's partisan political warfare.

Also, the reasoning behind sanctuary policies are being misrepresented in this thread.

Misguided or not, these policies are about making it so illegals can function in society without constant fear they will be arrested and deported if they get pulled over for a speeding ticket or report a crime to police. It's so they don't panic and flee the scene of a car accident. It's so they have a reason to learn English, carry auto insurance, and send their kids to school.

It has nothing to do with wanting as many as they can get, but rather to permit the ones that are here (and agents of the government) to function.
 
HumblePi said:
[h=1]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities[/h]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities - CNNPolitics

Washington (CNN)The Trump administration pressured the Department of Homeland Security to release immigrants detained at the southern border into so-called sanctuary cities in part to retaliate against Democrats who oppose President Donald Trump's plans for a border wall, a source familiar with the discussions told CNN on Thursday.

Trump personally pushed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to follow through on the plan, the source said. Nielsen resisted and the DHS legal team eventually produced an analysis that killed the plan, which was first reported by The Washington Post.

The proposal is another example of Trump's willingness to enact hardline immigration policies to deliver on border security, a key issue for his political base. Thursday's reports come as the President has amplified his rhetoric on illegal immigration in recent weeks, even threatening to close the southern border if Congress and Mexico don't take action.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(mine)

Trump planned retaliation to sanctuary cities and asked Kristjen Nielson to release immigrants they captured released into sanctuary cities. No doubt this was Stephen Miller's plan and propaganda for the upcoming 2020 election. DHS said 'no, that's illegal'.

"These are human beings, not game pieces," the official said.
Click to expand...
So you want them release in non sanctuary cities where they don't have the same protections as they do in sanctuary cities.
 
haymarket said:
Because of the financial costs involved for the city government.

But then you probably knew that.
Click to expand...

but the city WANTS illegal immigrants,.. supposedly due to the positives undocumented workers bring, they will make all that money back easily... I see no problem.
 
hypothetical said:
but the city wants illegal immigrants,.. Supposedly due to the positives undocumented workers bring, they will make all that money back easily... I see no problem.
Click to expand...

spin zone!!!
 
haymarket said:
The difference is it was not a political punishment program to try and hurt cities who he was pissed at because they are centers of political opposition to his ineptitude.
Click to expand...
But, but, I thought you people said that immigrant enrich the communities they inhabit? How is that "punishment "???

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Im being honest. The left has been arguing that illegal immigration benefits the communities they are in. Now when it comes out that those the most welcoming of them was considered to be the primary location to release them the same people are crying foul.

And even if it did turn out that the democrats were wrong about the economic impact and you are correct that it does indeed put an economic burden on us to accept them; what happened to the hollier-than-thou moral argument about how we are obligated to take them no matter what the cost is.

As far as i am concerned they should send all illegals to their districts if they refuse to send them home where they belong. Progressives like to think they claim the moral high ground when it comes to compassion so let them put their money where their mouth is and spare those good people the unfair treatment they would get from the rest of the country.

Lead by example and show conseratives how wrong we are about illegals. Take them in and show us how your community is thriving due to their impact.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I would like this post more than once if I could

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
haymarket said:
In the long run, immigration across the board of lots of people is a positive thing. No doubt about it. In the short run, the jamming of large number of the poorest immigrants into selected cities would indeed propose a financial penalty on those cities and that is what Trump intended.

There is no contradiction here and the part of people on the left in acknowledging that reality.
Click to expand...
So, there IS a crisis at the border?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
haymarket said:
But that is not the question and never has been the question. We are talking about your claim that EVERYONE ELSE did just what Trump tried to do with migrants.

Jeffrey Toobin on proposed policy: This is grotesque - CNN Video

You have submitted no supporting evidence that any of those three Presidents did the same thing that Trump tired to pull with sending immigrants as punishment to sanctuary cities as their policy of punishment.
Click to expand...

Actually, Obama was trying to punish Alabama by doing the same thing...

Obama angling to house illegal alien minors at Alabama military base - Yellowhammer News |
Yellowhammer News

Of course Obama was smart enough not to come right out and say why he chose Alabama(it was well known at the time that Senator Jeff Sessions was one of the biggest critics of Obama's policy on illegals) but it sure wasn't very hard to figure out what the motivation was.
 
trouble13 said:
Im being honest. The left has been arguing that illegal immigration benefits the communities they are in. Now when it comes out that those the most welcoming of them was considered to be the primary location to release them the same people are crying foul.

And even if it did turn out that the democrats were wrong about the economic impact and you are correct that it does indeed put an economic burden on us to accept them; what happened to the hollier-than-thou moral argument about how we are obligated to take them no matter what the cost is.

As far as i am concerned they should send all illegals to their districts if they refuse to send them home where they belong. Progressives like to think they claim the moral high ground when it comes to compassion so let them put their money where their mouth is and spare those good people the unfair treatment they would get from the rest of the country.

Lead by example and show conseratives how wrong we are about illegals. Take them in and show us how your community is thriving due to their impact.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Agree 100% Yep take some of the burden of Texas. Our schools are buckling under the pressures of illegal immigration. People in non border states need to SEE how bad things have gotten. And states that resisted sending people to the border to help atop illegal immigration need to see why it needs to be stopped.
 
HumblePi said:
[h=1]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities[/h]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities - CNNPolitics

Washington (CNN)The Trump administration pressured the Department of Homeland Security to release immigrants detained at the southern border into so-called sanctuary cities in part to retaliate against Democrats who oppose President Donald Trump's plans for a border wall, a source familiar with the discussions told CNN on Thursday.

Trump personally pushed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to follow through on the plan, the source said. Nielsen resisted and the DHS legal team eventually produced an analysis that killed the plan, which was first reported by The Washington Post.

The proposal is another example of Trump's willingness to enact hardline immigration policies to deliver on border security, a key issue for his political base. Thursday's reports come as the President has amplified his rhetoric on illegal immigration in recent weeks, even threatening to close the southern border if Congress and Mexico don't take action.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(mine)

Trump planned retaliation to sanctuary cities and asked Kristjen Nielson to release immigrants they captured released into sanctuary cities. No doubt this was Stephen Miller's plan and propaganda for the upcoming 2020 election. DHS said 'no, that's illegal'.

"These are human beings, not game pieces," the official said.
Click to expand...

Noticed you skipped this part of the story:

""This was a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion."

So there was no proposal, no pressure, no targeted releases....another fake news story brought to you by the political operative known as ....CNN's Jim Acosta contributed to this report....of course.

AND

Even if any of the proposal and pressure assertions were true which has been established they were not....

Lets cut to the tape:

Nancy Pelosi Thanks Illegal Aliens for Breaking the Law-CSPAN..

She calls them over but they must reside in someone elses house.

Such hypocrisy on display is outrageous but unfortunately not as rare as it should be.
 
Felis Leo said:
I do not understand why this is so upsetting.

Trump refuses illegal immigrants and asylum seekers entry: The monster.

Trump seeks to deport illegal immigrants: the monster.

Trump wishes to detain immigrants and asylum seekers for processing: The monster.

Trump wishes to release immigrants into places where they are specifically being welcomed: The monster.

Should these people be deported? Should they be detained? Should they be released into the interior with no direction?

What should be done and why?
Click to expand...

I always thought that would be a great idea! I wouldn't have been against illegal border hoppers to the extent
that I am if all illegals were housed in California & they would need to get a passport to leave leave that state
to enter another state.

This was only a suggestion anyway as the Post article states toward the end of the article. Unlike the Obama
administration which in 2016 considered a plan to relocate thousands of illegal immigrant children to the home
state of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions. The plan would send the children to Baldwin County, across the bay
from Sessions' home in Mobile County. This was payback because Sessions, has emerged as a national figure.
The senator was considered the Obama Administration's toughest critic on immigration reform.

White House considers sending illegal immigrant children to Sessions' home state - al.com

If you are a political enemy send illegals into your turf seems to be a plan of the party in power.
It's obvious that having illegals around is more disturbing than having a homeless shelter or a
nuclear power plant designated for your particular area. It's brutal yet because of our idiotic laws
they keep coming.
 
j-mac said:
But, but, I thought you people said that immigrant enrich the communities they inhabit? How is that "punishment "???

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Siweeously?

Trump claims many of these migrants are realy criminals, killers, rapists and even terrorists like adherents of ISIS.

IOW, Trump knowingly intended to endanger the lives of innocent American citizens in cities he thinks don't like him.

Why do you support the murder of US citizens?
 
akyron said:
Noticed you skipped this part of the story:

""This was a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion."

So there was no proposal, no pressure, no targeted releases....another fake news story brought to you by the political operative known as ....CNN's Jim Acosta contributed to this report....of course.

AND

Even if any of the proposal and pressure assertions were true which has been established they were not....

Lets cut to the tape:

Nancy Pelosi Thanks Illegal Aliens for Breaking the Law-CSPAN..

She calls them over but they must reside in someone elses house.

Such hypocrisy on display is outrageous but unfortunately not as rare as it should be.
Click to expand...

The very idea that this flaming clown circus of an administration would consider it is the issue, not that they could have implemented it.

Here, have some "DUH".
 
Tanngrisnir said:
The very idea that this flaming clown circus of an administration would consider it is the issue, not that they could have implemented it.

Here, have some "DUH".
Click to expand...

And yet, Obama DID......so I guess he's a flaming clown circus to right?
 
HumblePi said:
[h=1]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities[/h]Trump pressured Nielsen to release detained immigrants into so-called sanctuary cities - CNNPolitics

Washington (CNN)The Trump administration pressured the Department of Homeland Security to release immigrants detained at the southern border into so-called sanctuary cities in part to retaliate against Democrats who oppose President Donald Trump's plans for a border wall, a source familiar with the discussions told CNN on Thursday.

Trump personally pushed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to follow through on the plan, the source said. Nielsen resisted and the DHS legal team eventually produced an analysis that killed the plan, which was first reported by The Washington Post.

The proposal is another example of Trump's willingness to enact hardline immigration policies to deliver on border security, a key issue for his political base. Thursday's reports come as the President has amplified his rhetoric on illegal immigration in recent weeks, even threatening to close the southern border if Congress and Mexico don't take action.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(mine)

Trump planned retaliation to sanctuary cities and asked Kristjen Nielson to release immigrants they captured released into sanctuary cities. No doubt this was Stephen Miller's plan and propaganda for the upcoming 2020 election. DHS said 'no, that's illegal'.

"These are human beings, not game pieces," the official said.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a good solution sending potential illegal aliens to cities where they are welcomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom