Pelosi: Immigration framework is a ‘campaign to make America white again’
Thursday the White House announced its new immigration framework, an offer that would grant a pathway to citizenship for nearly 2 million so-called dreamers. Today, Nancy Pelosi denounced the plan as racist. From the Washington Free Beacon:
Speaking at the United States Conference of Mayors, Pelosi blasted the framework with racially-charged rhetoric, suggesting that the White House plan seeks to hurt minority groups.
“Let me just say what I said last night: that plan is a campaign to make America white again,” Pelosi said, claiming that the proposal will cut legal immigration by 50 percent…
In her remarks, Pelosi thanked mayors across the country for their “courage” in overseeing sanctuary cities, jurisdictions that do not fully cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
“People don’t understand—the one problem I think the current occupant of the White House—they don’t understand that sanctuary cities is [sic] what helps law enforcement. It helps public safety,” Pelosi said.
Pelosi also referred to money the White House is requesting for a border wall as ransom. “They want the ransom for these children to be $25 billion dollars for a wall when we have all the needs that we have for infrastructure in our own country,” she said.
The White House proposal would grant a pathway to citizenship not just for the 800,000 or so people currently signed up for DACA but also for those who were eligible but did not sign up. From CNN’s report yesterday:
see also:
In what the White House framed as a “dramatic concession” and “compromise,” Trump would accept a path to citizenship not just for the roughly 700,000 undocumented immigrants were covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program when it was ended. But the proposal would also cover those undocumented immigrants who meet the DACA criteria but did not sign up and even more who would be newly eligible under the proposal’s timeframe requirements — giving legal status and a pathway to citizenship to about 1.8 million people.
In return, the White House would like to see a $25 billion investment in a trust for border infrastructure and technology, as well as more funds for personnel, and an end to family migration beyond spouses and minor children. The diversity visa lottery would also be abolished, though the visas would be reallocated so that the backlog of people already waiting for family visas and high-skilled immigration green cards would be processed.
In what may end up being the most contentious piece of the proposal, the White House is also looking to close “legal loopholes” that will allow it to deport more immigrants, specifically as it relates to undocumented immigrants from countries that don’t border the United States — which would likely include changes in immigration enforcement authority that would be virtually impossible for Democrats to swallow.
I included that final paragraph to point out that there are parts of this offer that Democrats will find unacceptable, but some of Trump’s supporters find his support for any form of amnesty equally unacceptable.
Given how far apart the parties are on this issue, any agreement is going to probably contain things that both sides view as poison pills. But demonizing the effort out of the gate as racist seems like a ploy aimed at giving Democrats a second bite at the government shutdown apple. Here’s Pelosi pouring gasoline on an already combustible negotiation process.
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/01/26/pelosi-immigration-framework-campaign-make-america-white/
Tags
These are the people the goobers seek to protect - the very lowest of the low, animals, drug cartel pushers, gang members.
While rightwing NRA gun-freak scumbags want to make sure mass murderers like Stephen Paddock get as many mass killing weapons as they can.
You are very fond of straw man arguments. We uphold the Right to keep and bear arms that cannot be infringed by government. We have no desire to see mass murdeers or other criminals have weapons.
But to the point about Paddock. He purchased his weapons legally, having gone through the required FBI background checks. given your past statements you probably have no problem denying people those rights you disagree with. The Constitution was written to protect us from people like you
You are very fond of straw man arguments.
Don't forget a propensity for pushing ad hominine and hyperbole - basically making sh*t up and hoping someone believes it. The fly in the ointment is that conservatives show up and set the record straight.
That being said - don't waste time waiting for a lucid argument - or even a fact based rebuttal.
given your past statements you probably have no problem denying people those rights you disagree with. The Constitution was written to protect us from people like you.
Well said - but let me add that the second amendment was also included so citizens could protect themselves from a government - or even a political party gone mad. Note that the liberals rig their own primaries, collude with Russian to sell American owned uranium, collude with Russians to rig a national election, employ SS-like goon squads and call it "antifa", weaponize the IRS, the CIA, the FBI, the DOJ and the NSA by shredding the bill of rights - one amendment at a time.
Under the guise of benevolent government the liberal left seeks to take religious freedom from Jews and Christians, to take away our firearms while liberal held social media obstructs and impedes free speech. They employ supposedly non-political government departments to strip us of our rights to privacy, to intimidate conservative voters and to create politically driven witch hunts in an attempt to delegitimize a lawful election.
The modern day liberal - direct descendent of the german Nazi.
Lies, propaganda, misinformation and gestapo techniques - it's all they as they scramble to build their new voting base - illegal immigrants.
When all else fails, the race card is their motives.... they have forgotten their oaths, all that matters is the votes and money in the bank. Meantime, America suffers as the big circus of the Democratic Party pushes on. Embarrassing and troublesome.
AR
I don’t see the point to Trump’s plan. He doubled the number of DACA illegals in play and added conditions that are dead on arrival. Democrats will never agree to reduce legal immigration and simultaneously eliminate diversity visas because it will look like (and may actually be) a racist plan to turn the country white.
Schumer will offer the same money on the wall that he did before . . . not enough to actually do the job right because he doesn’t want the job done anyway. Plus, I heard Trump say that he doesn’t even need as much money for the wall as he asked for and plans to use the excess for something else. There is a zero chance that congress will give him a trust fund for the wall that’s actually a slush fund.
Are conservatives supposed to look at this mess and say, “gee, 700,000 DACA illegals are better than the almost 2 million under a Trump plan, so I guess I’d better agree to the original 700,000 along with whatever chump change Schumer throws at the wall?” To me, Trump is simply saying, one way or the other, I’m shoving at least 700,000 DACA illegals down your throat (which is what obama did).
“People don’t understand—the one problem I think the current occupant of the White House—they don’t understand that sanctuary cities is [sic] what helps law enforcement. It helps public safety,” Pelosi said.
The liberals keep saying this but fail to show any proof that law enforcement is helped at all in the sanctuary cities. Gee, I wonder why that is?
Does this surprise anyone? She is the one whom always seems to think that everything is about keeping America White...yet, she is a White American woman whom has done nothing to protect the citizens of this country and wants to have the borders completely open with GIANT NEON SIGNS similar to what you would see in a Looney Tunes cartoon telling terrorists, violent gangs, and cartels to COME RIGHT ON IN! Does she and any other Democrat actually remember what they swore to do when they took office? Do they remember that they swore to PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION and that means putting AMERICAN CITIZENS FIRST!
perhaps nancy needs some more gardeners and pickers and she knows "white america" won't vote for her and you can hear the fear of that in her voice so she needs to import some she can exploit.
Originally the Liberals were worried about 800,000 or so. Now they are given 2 million "Illegals" in a deal.
That's Racist.
Trump needs to go back to the 800,000 or so, and tell Crying Chuck and Miss "Needs a tune up" Pelosi to Fuck off !
I swear.......I think if our southern Border was with Pakistan and full of ISIS......Some of these Democrats would be doing all they could to get them to come here and Vote for them......
I don't care what color or race you are.......If you want to come here, assimilate into our culture, be a part of the American Dream and Make America a Better Place......I say.....Welcome to America!
That being said......We are foolish, if we are not careful about bringing people in that are from places that have rampant terrorism.......
Like for example?
^^^^^^ Thanks XD!
And in true Democrat and liberal fashion, when all else fails - make it about race.
Unique logic - the President offers to give amnesty to double the amount of illegal aliens under consideration and somehow it's "racism"
Why I hate progressives
If you read carefully, it is Pelosi who, in this case, is making it about race. Not the President.
Let me ask all of you in this thread: Do you feel that our immigration system lets too many darker skinned people compared to what you'd consider European whites?
Nice dodge (well, pretty clumsy, in fact). But I AM talking about legal immigration. Why don't you want to talk about that? Isn't one of the big rightwing whines that not enough white people are being admitted? It sure was what the WHShitbag® complained about when he wondered why so many people were coming in legally from "shithole" (i.e. non-white) countries and wished more Norwegians would be let in.
Have you noticed that YOU are the only one who brought skin color into this. Why does that even matter to you? It obviously doesn't matter to anybody else.
Why are YOUR representatives more worried about "ILLEGAL's" and not much about "Legal" ?
No one has EVER complained about "Legal".
Maybe you should ask DC Liberals why "Illegals" are MORE important these days.
Except you're the one who made this a race issue be claiming (falsely, of course) you were unfairly being called racists. You might want to think about toning down the high dudgeon every time this issue gets brought up. It sort of undermines your case of being unfairly labeled. Just look at how wigged out you and Xdwhatever got with a very simple straightforward question about legal immigration. It's absolutely upended the two of you.
Ok, two things.
You left out 'as long as they bow to the same God I do'.
OK if you want to talk about legal immigration and color, per the the Washington (com)Post the vast majority 38% of legal immigrants come from Asia and Africa (those are not predominantly white areas) and only 9% come from predominantly white areas of the world. (North America and Europe). So,in terms of legal immigration and seeing that those gere are not opposed to legal immigrants, your question is meaningless.
www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/05/17/how-the-geography-of-u-s-immigration-has-changed-over-time/?utm_term=.7b7f5b8e3799
No he saud exactly what he meant. It was you that is attemoting to bring that lie into things.
Personally, I don’t know or care about the race of people entering the country legally. But Democrats seem to think it’s ok for illegal aliens to jump the fence if they’re not white.
No...I don't know why it is important to you, but the race of most people entering this country either legally or illegally continues to be white.
A better question might be do we want to diversify the immigration a bit. Chain migration means we keep bringing in people from the same countries. A merit system like other nations use "would" diversify the new immigrants - I say "would" if we didn't have this long history of illegal migration flowing over our southern border. That kind of undermines the entire process.
Wow, the way my very simple question about immigration has caused your heads to explode answers it and it's exactly the answer you all were hoping not to give me.
You question is nothing more than a typical leftist / liberal deflection. I guess you don't know the difference between "illegal" immigration (that is being discussed here), and legal immigration (which NOBODY has mentioned or complained about). You should really pay closer attention to what is being discussed.
Which is how Jeremy started the thread--falsely accusing Pelosi of race-bating, or racist-bating. The degree to which my perfectly reasonable question, especially in view of your WHShitbag®'s comments about why so many LEGAL immigrants were coming from "shithole" countries instead of Norway, gives you all away despite (or rather, because) of how ferocious and unhinged and dishonest all of your responses have been. Once again, you've hoisted yourselves on your own petards.
See comment 7.3.12
The country is being governed by fools from both the left and right.
On the left, raging loon Pelosi is publically thanking God for illegal aliens and praising sanctuary cities. She has absolutely no intention of ever agreeing to immigration laws/policies that actually work.
On the right, Trump (who campaigned against DACA and amnesty), is proposing amnesty for twice as many DACA illegals as we have now. In return, he wants a wall and a reduction in legal immigration but (as near as I can tell) e-verify is not included (even though it’s probably more effective and cheaper than a wall).
So, after Trump won an election on opposing illegal immigration and the proposals from opponents like Jeb Bush (who he called weak on immigration), he turns around and proposes his own amnesty that keeps the DACA illegals but restricts legal immigration. Plus, we get a ridiculously expensive Trump wall (of dubious effectiveness) and we keep the sanctuary cities that act as a lure for more illegals seeking to jump the wall no matter how we design it.
I want the illegals deported not put on a path to citizenship and I certainly don’t want to trade legal immigrants who follow the law for the illegal aliens who broke it. I’m also not interested in restricting legal immigration or eliminating its diversity at all. To me, Trump’s entire approach to this issue is a classic bait and switch where the promotion of a product (his campaign) entices the public to come to the store expecting one thing but what’s actually on the sale table (his policy) is something else.
I didn’t vote for Trump because I think he’s a dolt. But I had hoped that he could at least do something positive on illegal immigration. Apparently, he can’t even do that.
You do understand, the Democrats won't except ANYTHING he proposes.....so no worry about what you are worrying about.
I’d be fine if the democrats don’t accept anything Trump offers and I’d be fine if Trump let’s DACA crash and burn.
Trump was elected for one reason, and one reason only.
To get the Dinosaurs in congress to fix themselves !
Love how he get's everyone in DC, and the "News" media, falling all over themselves.......to "Explain".
And you do understand that the WHShitbag®'s word isn't worth a tiny turd.
The Official "Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey" :
"One thing kids like is to be tricked. For instance, I was going to take my little nephew to Disneyland, but instead I drove him to an old burned-out warehouse. "Oh, no," I said, "Disneyland burned down." He cried and cried, but I think that deep down he thought it was a pretty good joke. I started to drive over to the real Disneyland, but it was getting pretty late. "
Mirror, Mirror on the wall.......
If that vignette was supposed to be a paean to the WHShitbag®-in-Chief it sort of backfired into a pee-on. It certainly certainly does describe His Assholeness accurately.
That is pitifully, hilariously and ridiculously false at the same time. But it's the rightwing chant so we understand why you sing it.
The words tumble from the mouth of this loon for all to hear.
I suppose she's referring to how much more valuable these Dreamers are to the country based on their achievements compared to the kind of people who hate them.
She has made it unequivocally clear that she values illegal aliens over American citizens. She and others like her are scoundrels and should be driven from office.
Have you noticed that it's the Democrats that call illegals "Dreamers" and actual US citizens "Deplorable". Really shows who they are really supporting and who they are shitting on.
This is the most common plaint from citizens who finds it too much trouble to really learn about the issues. It's just a way of justifying mental laziness.
Even more common are the bovine “moos” and farts that pass for mental acuity in the liberal herd.
You must be very proud that the tactics your sanctuary city of San Fran aided and abetted Kate Steinle's ILLEGAL ALIEN MURDERER.
Lies like that, especially screamed hysterically like that, are not helping your case much so very much appreciated.
What lie?
Lies like what? I used facts that no one can dispute:
Prove that the above 4 bulleted facts are "lies".
The lie that SF's sanctuary status had anything to do with Steinle's murderer being loose. It was entirely due to the incompetence of the INS who failed to respond to several calls from the SF police to come pick him up. After 2 weeks of waiting and holding him with cause, the court was forced to release him. City jails cannot be permanent holding facilities for people who might be illegal immigrants until, if ever, ICE gets around to doing its job.
That's the lie. I've explained why just a few seconds ago.
So you agree with Pelosi that sanctuary cities, which protect ILLEGAL ALIENS, also somehow protect the public safety of US citizens and LEGAL immigrants. Wowwwww.
Wrong again bucko. The scumbag was in custody by INS and was transfered to San Francisco authorities for prosecution of a drug crime. SF drop the drug charges and instead of notifying ICE the county just released him.
There's only one that's a lie and that's all I needed and it actually contains more than one lie. The man who fired the gunshot that killed Steinle never saw her, didn't know her and had no intention of killing anyone. He fired the gun (which had been stolen out of a BLM agent's truck while he ate dinner in downtown SF--so negligence there, and also not stolen by the shooter who had been in jail at the time) he said toward a seal in the Bay but the round ricocheted off the pavement and struck the young woman who was many yards away. Negligent homicide--yes. Not first degree murder, which was the charge, in any way. BTW, he's never been set free and is now back, finally, where he should have been all along, in federal custody.
And just think, if SF would have kept him in custody and turned him over to the Feds he would not have been abke to have stolen/ found that weapon and shot Kate Steinle.
And this is an important point. He was in federal custody, guilty of a felony for illegal re-entry, and the feds turned him over to SF so they could try him on a minor drug offense. However, SF dropped the charge and, instead of turning him back over to the feds, they let him go. SF is deliberately undermining federal immigration law and a woman died because of it. Democrats are crazy and there’s no point negotiating with crazy people. Just deport illegals wherever you find them.
Gawd I love it when you bang your head against a wall like this. Please don't ever leave me. As always there's a whole lot of wrong to unpack in your comments:
1. The scumbag was in custody by INS and was transfered [sic] to San Francisco authorities for prosecution of a drug crime.
It was a 20 year old charge and couldn't be prosecuted because of lack of evidence. He was actually in the county, not city, jail so the city's sanctuary policy didn't really apply to the sheriff (although he did try to blame that policy, of course).
2. SF drop[sic] the drug charges and instead of notifying ICE the county just released him.
The sheriff's office notified INS to come back to get Zarate but no one did for 18 days. The sheriff had no legal basis to hold him and he was released. Fuck ups like this by INS/ICE are almost the rule than the exception.
Furthermore, the whole notion that INS, who had him in custody and were under no obligation to do so, sent him back to the County for this old and weak charge in the first place. Why the fuck would they do that? This whole sad episode originated and proceeded on INS incompetence and stupidty.
Ka- BOOM.
Yep.
The modern day liberal will do anything to protect spotted owls, whales - even illegal immigrant MS-13 gang members and convicted killers yet whistle a happy tune going to and from their appointment at an abortion clinic.
Next time you see some goober suggest that we need more illegal "migrants" to fill out our work force, challenge them to explain why then are they slaughtering their own unborn children.......
SF is full of shit. People are rountinely transferred from federal custody to state custody and from one state to another so that they can stand trial in the appropriate jurisdiction. But I do agree that it’s stupid to release an illegal alien into the custody of sanctuary city loons because they’ll look for any excuse to let him go even if he’s guilty of a felony for illegal re-entry.
When sorting through the rubble of the liberal mind one must keep in mind that Pelosi once said "Hamas is a humanitarian organization". These are the same loons that see the mess Kalifornia has become -one of highest crime rated stated (paralleled only by other liberal run states), highest unemployment, highest entitlement program participation - and the highest concentration of illegal immigrants.....and the goobers are way too stupid to see the connection.
37-year-old Luis Enrique Monroy Bracamontes, arrested for murdering two Northen Kalifornia sheriff's deputies, and while on trial says: “I wish I had killed more of the mother—–s,” , and
These are the people the goobers seek to protect - the very lowest of the low, animals, drug cartel pushers, gang members.