President Donald Trump walks towards the steps of Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base in Md., Monday, April 15, 2019. Trump is heading to Minnesota for a tax day event. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
world

Trump suggests he's moving forward with sanctuary city plan

59 Comments
By JILL COLVIN and ALAN FRAM

President Donald Trump suggested Monday that his threat to ship migrants to so-called sanctuary cities is taking effect, even though it remains unclear whether such a plan is feasible.

"Those Illegal Immigrants who can no longer be legally held (Congress must fix the laws and loopholes) will be, subject to Homeland Security, given to Sanctuary Cities and States!" Trump tweeted just days after aides insisted the plan had been shelved.

Neither the White House nor Department of Homeland Security immediately responded to requests for comment Monday. And it's unclear whether DHS has taken any steps to implement the controversial plan. Lawyers there had previously told the White House that the idea was unfeasible and a misuse of funds. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is already strapped for cash.

Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said during a pair of Sunday show appearances that the idea was just one option under consideration.

"Whether or not it moves forward, that's yet to be determined," she said on Fox, acknowledging that the idea had been rejected by DHS lawyers several times.

"The president heard the idea, he likes it, so - well, we're looking to see if there are options that make it possible and doing a full and thorough and extensive review.," she said on ABC.

At the same time, Democrats on Monday asked the White House and agency officials for internal documents on the administration's deliberations on its proposal to send detained migrants to "sanctuary cities" — cities and districts that don't cooperate with federal immigration officials and which are mostly Democratic strongholds.

"Not only does the administration lack the legal authority to transfer detainees in this manner, it is shocking that the president and senior administration officials are even considering manipulating release decisions for purely political reasons," read the letter , which was signed by three House committee chairmen.

The letter said the plan seemed aimed at targeting Democratic areas "in a bizarre and unlawful attempt to score political points," citing news reports.

The proposal was rejected twice by administration officials, but Trump has defended the idea.

"The USA has the absolute legal right to have apprehended illegal immigrants transferred to Sanctuary Cities," Trump tweeted Saturday as part of his larger push to tighten immigration laws and try to stop the flow of migrants across the southern border.

The plan comes as the administration has said it's been overwhelmed by a flood of migrant families, largely from Central America, attempting to cross the southwestern border. The U.S. Border Patrol said the number of families apprehended in March, 53,000, set a new record, though Democrats say the administration is worsening the problem by aggressively detaining people caught entering illegally and limiting the number of applicants for refugee status who are processed.

The letter requests all relevant documents from Nov. 1, 2018, through Monday. It asks for them by May 3.

The letter was sent by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.; Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md.; and Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. It was sent to Mick Mulvaney, White House acting chief of staff, and Kevin McAleenan, acting secretary of the Homeland Security Department.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

59 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Do it, Mr President! MAGA!

2 ( +13 / -11 )

The man is close to out of control.  This proposed action is akin to how a spoilt child reacts. 

"You can't make me"

"Yes I can, just watch me".

And his now oft used of the phrase "absolute right (to do something/anything)" is sounding dangerously dictorial.  And his enablers are just as bad as the idiot in chief.

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

Trump exposing the Republican's attempts to cover up their open-borders policy, even though they've been pretending they are against open borders for years.

Trump may suck, but at least he's exposing the lies of the right on this one.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

in a bizarre and unlawful attempt to score political points," 

Sadly Trump’s been effective at using bizarre (bizarre to those able to reason beyond beer hall rally slogans) and unlawful (probably) attempts to further fracture the nation. 

He continues trying to score political points with those in his base (mostly from his demographic) by ramping up their already high fear levels and getting them to think some ‘others’ might want the same rights they have. Too many in Trump’s base fear the notion of ‘equality’, believing equality no longer makes them the superior demographic.

Like despots before him Trump is using the principle of divide and rule. He’s widening gaps - political, religious, ethnic, income, geographic, among others - on his quest to undermine US systems. And his supporters - mostly from his demographic - cheer him on.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Do it, Mr President!

2 ( +10 / -8 )

Do it, Mr President! MAGA!

I definitely concur, the Democrats want and believe in sanctuary cities, they have the biggest open hearts and they should care and do whatever they can to help these people and accommodate them the best way they can, give them as much entitlements as they can and allow them to reside anywhere in their sanctuary city or state. Best of luck to them. These are great Americans and I salute them.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

Trump exposing the Republican's attempts to cover up their open-borders policy, even though they've been pretending they are against open borders for years.

Trump may suck, but at least he's exposing the lies of the right on this one.

Yet Trumpophiles fail to see the utter hypocrisy in being against most forms of immigration and for the government transporting undocumented immigrants farther into the country at taxpayer expense.

Seems to me if you are truly against undocumented immigration, you have to be against this "idea."

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

The Democrats who created, and control, sanctuary cities have been repeatedly  welcoming illegal aliens with open arms. At least that's what they've been saying. Now that they have a chance to do more than talk about welcoming illegal aliens, the Democrats are making it clear that they don't actually want illegal aliens moving to their sanctuary cities. They only want to talk about it.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

I don't understand what Trump is hoping to achieve.

If he can send migrants to sanctuary cities, then what ? There are already illegal immigrants there, so what difference does it make ?

Does he think these cities will suddenly crumble because of it ? What's going on in this man's head ?

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Another empty threat from the empty suit.

Yawn.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Bintaro - I don't understand what Trump is hoping to achieve.

Illegal aliens are currently overwhelming the detention system. Democrats in control of sanctuary cities have repeatedly said that illegal aliens are welcome there. This seems like a win-win situation. Unless those Democrats were lying when they said they welcomed illegal aliens to their cities.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

Sure, arrestpaul. Send us those illegals so we can get them into our illegal voting scheme.

Unless you weren't serious about that.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Lol, now the republicans want illegal immigrants in the country?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

No. It cannot and will not happen unless the United States adopts a policy of internal passports, where authorities are permitted to inspect residency permits.

Trump is growing increasingly unscrewed.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Another empty threat from the empty suit.

Yawn.

It might be a symbolic threat, but now we know for a fact, the Democrats could care less about illegal aliens and them moving closer or in areas where they live, they seem now uneasy, kinda reminds me when the late George Carlin said, “build more prisons! .....But not in my backyard.” The Democrats are always about illusion and optics, they’ll say things emphatically and then when called on it, it becomes a giant exploding balloon. So either they are for sanctuary cities and think America is country that shouldn’t have borders and walls are meaningless. Even Cher...lol...even she thinks the idea of dumping these people into these sanctuary cities is a bad idea. Now the liberals are dealing with reality. They don’t want them, we know that. It’s all and only about not to give Trump a political win. Let them move to Ventura County, Pacific Heights, Pasadena, Bel Air, there is NO WAY on God’s green Earth that liberals living in these upscale neighborhoods would ever allow that. Trump called them out on it and they buckled. Again, this is why they will not get the WH, they just don’t get it.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

A Repub history of inaction and incompetence on immigration...

Failure #1: Republicans could have supported the comprehensive immigration reform bill of 2013 - it passed the Repub Senate, but Ryan wouldn't bring it to the floor for a vote because far right Repubs would have voted it down - a fix that could have prevented this "emergency" was lost - Repubs fault.

Failure #2: Repubs had the White House and both sides of Congress for two years, and did absolutely nothing on immigration - they didn't anticipate the increase at the border and did nothing to put in place more ICE, more judges, more facilities - a complete failure to govern.

Failure #3: Trump has been President for two years and three months - he has done nothing. As the country's Chief Executive, he should have led the response to this effort - all he's done is spread lies (Mexico will pay for the wall) and shut down the government for the longest period in history. This all happened "on his watch" - he did nothing to foresee it and take any action - the same criticism he said of President Bush and Sept 11 2001.

We are at where we are today on immigration because of more than two years of Trump and Repub inaction and incompetence.

The responsibility lies clearly with them.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Lol, now the republicans want illegal immigrants in the country?

No, they want to relocate them in sanctuary cities where rich politics like Newsom encourages and takes pride that California is a sanctuary State, the same as Rahm Emanuel, so the President should accommodate these people and relocate these people to their cities and States, that’s what they want.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Lol, now the republicans want illegal immigrants in the country?

@bass No, they want to relocate them

In other words the Republicans want illegal immigrants in the country.

California is a sanctuary State, the same as Rahm Emanuel,

Rahm Emanuel is a state? A partial reason Trump backers might use terms like 'exonerated', 'innocent', spy', etc. so frequently - and incorrectly - could be they don't know what they mean; they just parrot them because Trump used them.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

No, they want to relocate them in sanctuary cities where rich politics like Newsom encourages and takes pride that California is a sanctuary State, the same as Rahm Emanuel, so the President should accommodate these people and relocate these people to their cities and States, that’s what they want.

Yep, they want to relocate them farther into the country. Trump's open border policy is now a welcome policy.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Deadforgood - Lol, now the republicans want illegal immigrants in the country?

No. But thanks to elected Democrats in Congress, and a few biased judges, the U.S. can't get rid of many of these illegal aliens as they had hoped to do.

The Democrats who created sanctuary cities repeatedly said that they will welcome illegal aliens. Here is their chance to prove that illegal aliens are indeed welcome to their sanctuary cities.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

PTownsend - Rahm Emanuel is a state? A partial reason Trump backers might use terms like 'exonerated', 'innocent', spy', etc. so frequently - and incorrectly - could be they don't know what they mean

It appears that you read the statement incorrectly.

quote:

"No, they want to relocate them in sanctuary cities where rich politics like Newsom encourages and takes pride that California is a sanctuary State, the same as Rahm Emanuel,"

It's obvious that Newsom is being compared to Rahm Emanuel.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

No. But thanks to elected Democrats in Congress, and a few biased judges, the U.S. can't get rid of many of these illegal aliens as they had hoped to do.

The Democrats who created sanctuary cities repeatedly said that they will welcome illegal aliens. Here is their chance to prove that illegal aliens are indeed welcome to their sanctuary cities.

OK fine, they don't want to. But Trump's turned 180 on his border policies and is acting to relocate illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities and you guys are now all for it!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

In other words the Republicans want illegal immigrants in the country.

In the liberal controlled and safety net of the sanctuary cities, yes.

Rahm Emanuel is a state?

Pretty much. They were actually thinking about becoming one, so....

A partial reason Trump backers might use terms like 'exonerated', 'innocent', spy', etc. so frequently - and incorrectly - could be they don't know what they mean; they just parrot them because Trump used them.

They took a keynote from the Democrats playbook.

Yep, they want to relocate them farther into the country. Trump's open border policy is now a welcome policy.

Not in this part of Texas. We aren’t a sanctuary city, if they come here, they will be greeted by ICE.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

until illegals can be prevented from entering (build the wall) the next best option is to release them to sanctuary cities who want them and adore them.

Why would sanctuary cities not want all of these people that are available?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

until illegals can be prevented from entering (build the wall) the next best option is to release them to sanctuary cities who want them and adore them.

Why would sanctuary cities not want all of these people that are available?

Sure, but you realize, you still need to help pay for them with your tax dollars. You guys have completely flipped, now not only do you want them in the country, you want to pay to relocate them to sanctuary cities where they generally end up blending into society, working jobs you don't want to, and reproducing children that you think are evil.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

that was a hypothetical question that we know the answer to. Even die hard liberal entertainer Cher knows this. (crazy typing is hers, not mine). So its basically talk until they are expected to do something, then hide behind our homeless veterans as a shield while doing nothing for them.

I Understand Helping struggling Immigrants,but MY CITY (Los Angeles) ISNT TAKING CARE OF ITS OWN.WHAT ABOUT THE 50,000+ Citizens WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS .PPL WHO LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE,& HUNGRY? If My State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

BlacklabelToday  10:30 am JST

that was a hypothetical question that we know the answer to. Even die hard liberal entertainer Cher knows this. (crazy typing is hers, not mine). So its basically talk until they are expected to do something, then hide behind our homeless veterans as a shield while doing nothing for them.

I Understand Helping struggling Immigrants,but MY CITY (Los Angeles) ISNT TAKING CARE OF ITS OWN.WHAT ABOUT THE 50,000+ Citizens WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS .PPL WHO LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE,& HUNGRY? If My State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More

I don't care what Cher thinks....lol. Only you and Trump do.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Also, you realize Cher is in the 1% and doesn't spend any of her time in LA (and if she does, its far far far away from where the poor happen to be). What does her opinion matter? Shouldn't real American's opinions be regarded with higher consideration?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Deadforgood - Sure, but you realize, you still need to help pay for them with your tax dollars.

U.S. taxpayers are already paying for these illegal aliens. Sending illegal aliens to sanctuary cities seems like a perfect match. Illegal aliens want to be in the U.S., and sanctuary cities used to welcome them with open arms.

It now appears that the Democrats who created these sanctuary cities have changed their mind about welcoming illegal aliens.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

U.S. taxpayers are already paying for these illegal aliens. Sending illegal aliens to sanctuary cities seems like a perfect match. Illegal aliens want to be in the U.S., and sanctuary cities used to welcome them with open arms.

Yea, I think so too. But remember, you're going to be paying for a wall, and sanctuary cities to house more immigrants now.

It now appears that the Democrats who created these sanctuary cities have changed their mind about welcoming illegal aliens.

Yes, I'm actually ok with it. Which Democrat has changed their mind btw? Cher does not count.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"Trump says..." always introduces a lie. This is just throwing more fetid red meat to his base, and paper towels at a problem he is unable to grasp, much less solve. His solution, as always, is to blame others. He will be stopped by the courts, again, and have to walk back this blunder. His job is not leadership, of which he is incapable, it is buffoonery and distraction whle the GOP raids the till.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Sending them back would be best but if the Dems have open arms for illegals then they shouldn't have a problem with it. Showing their true colours when being called out.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Whoops! I added "being" on the end by mistake! Kirsten Gillibrand said, There is no such thing as an illegal human." Pretty much the same meaning. It's not fake:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/03/18/gillibrand_there_is_no_such_thing_as_an_illegal_human_immigration_not_a_security_issue.html

Democrats' message to illegal Immigrants: Come here, but not here.

So who said the second quote? You?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

until illegals can be prevented from entering (build the wall) the next best option is to release them to sanctuary cities who want them and adore them.

Why would sanctuary cities not want all of these people that are available?

Until illegals can be prevented from entering (build the wall with a Trump employee door), the next best option is to release them to employers who want them and adore them, i.e., Trump Golf Courses and Mar-A-Lago...

Why would Trump not want all these people that are available - as has been documented, he loves them - they work cheap...

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-trump-organization-employed-illegal-immigrants-2019-01-30

2 ( +4 / -2 )

No border policy, no health care policy, trade policies beginning to fail, tax the poor, pay the rich, name call, hide in his bedroom Trump. The GOP is the no policy party.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

A president who thinks he’s an emperor!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

A president who thinks he’s an emperor!

And/or perhaps thinks the US is his (and his family's) privately held and managed corporation.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The current administration, as well as the previous two congresses - both entirely Republican - have been a complete and utter failure at border protection, due to their ongoing open-border policies, and encouragement of illegals to enter America.

All immigration problems are their responsibility, and theirs alone. This current border issue wouldn't exist if it weren't for their open-border policies.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Sure, but you realize, you still need to help pay for them with your tax dollars. You guys have completely flipped, now not only do you want them in the country, you want to pay to relocate them to sanctuary cities where they generally end up blending into society, working jobs you don't want to, and reproducing children that you think are evil.

Pretty much, I do admit it’s a good plan, but why are liberals so mad?? This is what they wanted. I will happily pay and use my tax dollars to make sure these people thrive in sanctuary cities. It’s the sensible thing to do.

Yes, I'm actually ok with it. Which Democrat has changed their mind btw? Cher does not count.

Cher counts, she’s as liberal as can get and deeply supports all liberal causes, not to mention she’s highly influential in liberal circles.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Cher counts, she’s as liberal as can get and deeply supports all liberal causes, not to mention she’s highly influential in liberal circles.

You know, kind'a like David Duke and Roy Moore in Conservative circles....

2 ( +3 / -1 )

No border policy,

Blame the Democrats, now Trump wants to set it right and they oppose. Smh...

no health care policy, trade policies beginning to fail,

The Democrats don’t have one either, nothing at least is less costly or allows them the freedom to choose how they want to be treated.

tax the poor, pay the rich,

The Democrats are the party of taxes, taxes and more taxes and all the power elite and wealthiest or Americans are mostly liberal.

The GOP is the no policy party.

It’s been 100 days now, so what exactly have the Democrats passed as far as real policy and that joke of the New Green Deal?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Pretty much, I do admit it’s a good plan, but why are liberals so mad??

Whose mad? You keep saying liberals are mad, but can't even name one (outside of Cher)...lol

How is Cher "highly influential"? I didn't even know she was a liberal until today.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

bass: [they think] America is country that shouldn’t have borders and walls are meaningless.

But no one actually thinks that.

Here, let me put it to you like this: Do you support Obamacare? No? Oh, well then you think America is a country that should have no healthcare.

See how that works? Just because you don't agree with the solution doesn't mean you support the problem. The Right has made up this position that unless you support a wasteful wall then you just want open borders and embrace illegal aliens and illegal voters and yadda yadda yadda. Except none of those things are true.

We're against the wall because it's a stupid waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. Is that so difficult to understand? Believe it or not we don't meet in secret to discuss the success of the illegal voter initiative and the need to keep open borders. No one does that.

Enough with the useless and costly troop movements and BS statistics on drugs and anecdotes on the border from ranchers spouting the same, "I live here and see it and those other people don't know what they're talking about" narrative over and over and over again.

Want to help the problem? Spend a billion on more judges to speed up legitimate and legal asylum seekers. That alone would be more effective than the $24 billion more you want for concrete.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Last I heard, Kings and Emperors have no power.

@Strangerland,

Open border policies have to be changed. Whatever any congress did or didn't do doesn't matter as it is a serious problem today.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Whatever any congress did or didn't do doesn't matter as it is a serious problem today.

I agree there are many problems. Trump and his backers have to back off on the 'wall' as sole solution and work with Congress to ensure realistic steps are take to deal with the all the different immigration related issues.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

it also should be made a federal offence ( punishable by house forfiture to immigrants and jail) to decline inhouse residency of illegal immigrant if you identify politically as a liberal.

lead by example as they say ;-)

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Sure, but you realize, you still need to help pay for them with your tax dollars. You guys have completely flipped, now not only do you want them in the country, you want to pay to relocate them to sanctuary cities where they generally end up blending into society, working jobs you don't want to, and reproducing children that you think are evil.

Pretty much, I do admit it’s a good plan

Trump supporters, 2016: We're going to build a wall, and Mexico's gonna pay for it!

Trump supporters, 2019: We're going to let in every immigrant, and I'm going to pay for it!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

it also should be made a federal offence ( punishable by house forfiture to immigrants and jail) to decline inhouse residency of illegal immigrant if you identify politically as a liberal.

lead by example as they say ;-)

Yes, America should start creating laws that only apply to individuals who align to a certain political party...

1 ( +3 / -2 )

As usual, Democrats want others to pay for their mistakes.

No personal responsibility for actions and always an open wallet for everyone EXCEPT legal immigrants and citizens.

Always blaming others ... er ... just like the Republicans.

Uncontrolled immigration is the issue. Let's not forget that. Please.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

But no one actually thinks that.

And yet, the Democrats aren’t doing anything about it except saying, they’re against open borders which mean nothing if you don’t take action, but we are used to this, nothing new.

Just because you don't agree with the solution doesn't mean you support the problem. 

Then why do they just bloviate? I would go on the record and apologize if they would come up with any real solution to solve this problem, but again, they won’t and we all know why.

The Right has made up this position that unless you support a wasteful wall then you just want open borders and embrace illegal aliens and illegal voters and yadda yadda yadda. Except none of those things are true.

Of course it’s all true, turn on your TV, listen to the people from ICE and CBP they’ll tell you and as i said before, i could care less what any Washington political hack says, I go by what DHS or people like Jeh Johnson say over the idiots in Washington, both sides.

We're against the wall because it's a stupid waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere. Is that so difficult to understand? Believe it or not we don't meet in secret to discuss the success of the illegal voter initiative and the need to keep open borders. No one does that.

Ok, thank you for the Democrat talking points, so now for the real reality and according to the CBP and even the IDF, they claim that it works, so I believe them over what Pelosi, Schumer, Lemon, Cooper, Scarborough or any of these people say.

Enough with the useless and costly troop movements and BS statistics on drugs and anecdotes on the border from ranchers spouting the same, "I live here and see it and those other people don't know what they're talking about" narrative over and over and over again.

As do I, maybe we see different things, I have been enough times along the border and it’s definitely out of control and no amount of spin will change that, really.

Want to help the problem? Spend a billion on more judges to speed up legitimate and legal asylum seekers. That alone would be more effective than the $24 billion more you want for concrete.

Or how about the Democrats sucking in some of their foolish pride and do the right thing, go to the border on camera and talk to the CBP and ICE officials, man up and listen to their complaints, this goes way beyond pride or hatred of Trump.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Uncontrolled immigration is the issue. Let's not forget that.

The problem is that no immigration legislation can be passed, as the Republicans - the party in charge - won't let it happen due to their open-borders policies.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Liberals trying to disavow Cher now, it’s hilarious. Loved her all the times she was attacking Trump though. Wonder what Avenatti thinks about all this so you can pretend you never loved him either.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The Dems especially under Obama has caused this situation, so don’t try to blame Trump and the GOP as that’s just deflecting, you only have to look at Democrats policies and their leaders to realise this, Obama allowed Illegals to flow over the border and even gave them free healthcare while trying to sell the idea they were good for America, the GOP has been trying to clean up Obama’s mess for 2 yrs.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The problem is that no immigration legislation can be passed, as the Republicans - the party in charge - won't let it happen due to their open-borders policies.

If they don’t end Chain migration, birthright citizenship, visa lottery program, catch and release, deport visa overstayers, it probably won’t pass.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

If they don’t end Chain migration, birthright citizenship, visa lottery program, catch and release, deport visa overstayers, it probably won’t pass.

The Republicans refuse to pass border legislation because it would go against their policy of open-borders. Simple as that.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The Republicans refuse to pass border legislation because it would go against their policy of open-borders. Simple as that.

Yea, its pretty wild how they have flipped and gone more extreme than the so called "open border libs" and they still attack them like they have already forgotten their new policy.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

No one is pretending anything, the Democrats had in the 8 years of Obama’s reign, they could have STOPPED illegal crossings, they couldn’t, they wouldn’t. Even now.

You guys had 2 years to stop it when you controlled both house and senate. You could have taken action then but you didnt.

Obama didn’t have the caravan sizes Trump is having, also the Obama WH tried to keep secret the caged children and separated families as well and yet, not a single outcry from the partisan Trump hating crowd.

Sure he did, I was at the border, huge caravans coming in during Obama's presidency.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

 just because the GOP controlled both houses and want illegal immigration stopped they couldn’t just vote it in, doesn’t work that way mate, they still need a certain number of Democratic votes, we’re has to agree to disagree on this one but I think I’m right.

You are right, they need the votes, and had they voted on this they would have got their policies for border control. But they didn't vote on it, because it wasn't an issue until dems took house and it magically became one...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

With all the to and fro about illegal immigration has anyone thought that the solution would be for them to apply legally with passport and documented criminal histories at immigration centres, instead of doing a midnight flip over a dry river bed, now ponder why they don’t, something to hide maybe.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites