The Trump Crime Family

[sambuca]

Excellent Rumple. You learned from the master Sun Tzu. If the battlefield is not to your liking, do not engage and find another field of battle to fight on another day.

So we went from talking about Conservative and not so Conservative commentators to talking about some members of the Federalist society.

 

[Valcazar]

Re: The Avenatti thing. I still haven't heard anything on who it was who accused him, except that it wasn't Stormy and it wasn't his ex-wife. The fact that Jacob Wohl implied Surefire Intelligence was involved doesn't give one much confidence in the accusation. But who knows, this could be legit.


Re: Who is a "real Conservative". I have remarkably little interest in that argument. It is just going to be a case of No True Scotsmanning and goalpost shifting, I expect. I admit defeat on the 80% article, can't find it in the thicket of studies since (most of which don't bother with pulling out the overall patterns. It is either the reporters themselves, or the owners and publishers, no one seems to track assignment editors and break them out anymore.) I only track your specific statements because you shift the goal posts around a lot when you argue. Without pinning down specifics, it is hard to tell what you actually are claiming. For example, your immigration comments. Now suddenly you are specifically saying "The US system should be more like the Canadian system" and claiming everyone who criticizes the current US system is accused of being a white nationalist. But wanting white nationalist policies and wanting to reform the US immigration system are not the same thing and no one is saying that.

So if you want to discuss policy, when you say you want the US system to resemble the Canadian system more, what do you actually mean? What elements do you feel should be adopted and why?

I mean, look at you parroting conservative media outrage machine talking points about Kamela Harris. I am going to assume you didn't actually bother to watch the exchange. Or maybe you did, in which case I would love to hear you describe how it was offensive and divisive?
(And since you like polls: here is one from a few months later about American mood on immigration. Helpful since yours was primarily on whether or not a deal with specific tradeoffs would be acceptable.)
http://www.people-press.org/2018/06/28/shifting-public-views-on-legal-immigration-into-the-u-s/


@Sol Tee Nutz - no, while it is disappointing that Trump has %40 support, it isn't really shocking.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

Excellent Rumple. You learned from the master Sun Tzu. If the battlefield is not to your liking, do not engage and find another field of battle to fight on another day.

So we went from talking about Conservative and not so Conservative commentators to talking about some members of the Federalist society.

And it seems that you have learned from the master, DJ Trump. When the argument fails, insult. Well learned.

Apparently you are unfamiliar with the Federalist Society. They are probably the most articulate group of conservatives out there, many of whom, including George Conway, are regularly seen in the opinion sections of most major news outlets.

By the way, it's nice that you have the authority to decide who is conservative and who is not. Methinks Douthat, Brooks, Boot, Rubin et al might think thou dost protest too much. Suffice it to say, that they are singly and as a group considerably more influential in conservative circles than the estimable (to his own self) Sambuca. One person we know, however, is not the least bit conservative and that would be one DJ Trump, mob boss.

 

[sambuca]

Rumple, if you want to discuss the Federalist Society, we can have that discussion. I, however, think it's somewhat of a leap from discussing the Conservative media.

 

[sambuca]

I mean, look at you parroting conservative media outrage machine talking points about Kamela Harris. I am going to assume you didn't actually bother to watch the exchange. Or maybe you did, in which case I would love to hear you describe how it was offensive and divisive?

I have watched the exchange. She is a very clever questioner like a prosecutor should be. I however thought it was just hammering home the message that ICE has a racist mandate. The use of the operative word "perception" of ICE was a legal maneuver to basically hammer her point.

Back to ICE, I have seen them deport Eastern Europeans and Asians with the same vigilance as Hispanics. I don't agree with her view on immigration and ICE. We have an underground immigration system that is now so ingrained and considered normal that we can't have an intelligent discussion about legal and illegal immigration without calls of racism.

 

[Valcazar]

Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. To me, the plain meaning interpretation requires less convoluted special pleading.

Do you work in immigration, since you have sent ICE do this personally?

Oddly, I see lots of intelligent discussion about immigration that doesn't degenerate into accusations of racism. (Admittedly, rarely on the web, because the internet isn't great for discourse.)

 

[Valcazar]

Ok, we will have to agree to disagree. To me, the plain meaning interpretation requires less convoluted special pleading.

Do you work in immigration, since you have sent ICE do this personally?

Oddly, I see lots of intelligent discussion about immigration that doesn't degenerate into accusations of racism. (Admittedly, rarely on the web, because the internet isn't great for discourse.)

 

[sambuca]

Without going into detail, I know many people in the immigrant community. I have not seen the banging down the door variety ICE action that so many liberal politicians and media demonize. ICE performs many actions that the media doesn't report because they don't stir the emotions that other ICE stories do. Perhaps my phrase "same vigilance" can be misconstrued. My bad.

I'm going to go out on a potentially on a racist limb and say that Hispanic illegals are more likely to get into trouble with the law. This is where most of teeth gnashing arises over ICE apprehensions, detainers and certain sanctuary policies. California politicians, like Kamala Harris, must be keenly sensitive to the Hispanic community both legal and illegal.

 

[sambuca]

Valcazar

I have mentioned the Canadian immigration system many times here. It seems to be a very poignant reference point on this forum where we have Canadian eyeballs.

I believe the Canadian system focuses on merit, ability to contribute to the economy and not being dependent on Canada's social services. The Canadian system has less focus on extended family members. So there's no visa lottery and limited chain migration. Throughout U.S. history, our immigration system has had an economic agenda. From what I can tell, Canada's immigration system is also more diverse because you don't have the problem with illegal border crossings which skews our immigration from Mexico and Central America.

"The biggest contrast between the U.S. and Canada," says Chris Alexander, Canadian minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship from 2013 to 2015, "is that we have reformed our immigration system continuously, intensively, for a decade at a time when the U.S. has been facing gridlock."

 

[Sol Tee Nutz]

^^^^^^^ But we do have an illegal border crossing problem, we do have parasites living off our social services.

 

[jalimon]

our immigration problem is not dramatic because usa only borders canada. it would be a different issue is mexico was... there is no comparison possible.

 

[Sol Tee Nutz]

^^^^^^^^ Our illegal immigration problem started when Trump put his foot down to illegals and our POS welcomed them with open arms, the ones who knew their free ride is over came to Canada. We do have a problem, the feds handed them over to the provinces and said to deal with it. Ontario is asking for millions for past bills and future ones. The US does not house them in hotels and feed them like we do, probably get a nice cell plan also.... to look for work.. Not.

 

[sambuca]

Valcazar, instead of relying on U.S. politicians and media, we could all learn a lot about immigration and mainstream people's views on such, just listening to Canadians here discuss the subject.

Rumple, you're probably too far gone in the rhetoric. If you want to pull yourself back from it, you might be able to announce a mea culpa.

 

[Valcazar]

I'm going to go out on a potentially on a racist limb and say that Hispanic illegals are more likely to get into trouble with the law. This is where most of teeth gnashing arises over ICE apprehensions, detainers and certain sanctuary policies. California politicians, like Kamala Harris, must be keenly sensitive to the Hispanic community both legal and illegal.

Citation needed.
You may be right, I honestly have no idea.
However, if you are going to make a statement like that, please specify what you are comparing to? "More likely to get in trouble with the law" than... who? Other immigrants? Other undocumented immigrants? What? Also, are you talking about them committing more crimes/illegal activities other than the immigration itself? Or are you claiming that they get in more trouble with the law because ICE targets them more, therefore they are arrested more? This is what I am talking about, there are any number of interpretations here, so you can pick the one that has any data to back you up and claim that's what you meant all along.

 

[jalimon]

STN this "problem" was popularized by mainstream media when the clown trumpet was elected and causing concerns to illegal US citizen. Few thousand of them "invaded" canadian borders and were offered lodging and fed. Have you recently look at the actual number that are still here or were awarded citizenship? No you did not because you would then not have written this post.

Cheers,

 

[Valcazar]

"Valcazar, instead of relying on U.S. politicians and media, we could all learn a lot about immigration and mainstream people's views on such, just listening to Canadians here discuss the subject."

Yes, polls exist, we have both cited them.

And thank you for answering specifically. If I understand above, you feel that the "economic test" approach Canada focuses on would be better for the US as well. (Something similar to the RAISE act, perhaps.) I'm not sure what you mean about chain migration, since proportionally the countries seem about the same, but I suppose there is an element of how these things are judged that may be of note. In other words, at core, you would like to see a shift in emphasis towards skilled worker migration and a reduction of refugee migration in the US. Is this correct?

(For the record - I have no objection to that as a general position. As with most policy, the devil is in the details on how things are weighted and how the system is laid out.)

 

[Sol Tee Nutz]

jalimon

Please show a link with the numbers, you must have one or you would not have posted this.
This is what I found, show me what you are referring to.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4150878/danielle-smith-illegal-immigration/

Again, show numbers awarded " citizenship ", should be none as it take someone 3 years to become a citizen, but you must have already known that.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

Rumple, you're probably too far gone in the rhetoric. If you want to pull yourself back from it, you might be able to announce a mea culpa.

Thank you, Mr Trump. Adam Schitt, eh?

It's one of the oldest truisms in book. When you run out of argument, insult. You have shown your hand. I have no further need to engage your nonsense. Have a nice day.

 

[sambuca]

Valcazar

I phrased my comment as an opinion (no citation). I believe illegal Hispanic immigrants are younger, perhaps more male and more likely to get into real criminal activities large and small, gangs and no gangs. As opposed to Eastern Europeans, Asians and Africans who come here and stay illegally. My opinion might be based on the sheer fact that Hispanics make up a large share of illegal immigrants. You certainly also have cartel activity traveling up from Mexico.

As far as ICE apprehensions, detainers and deportations, it appears to me that the focus is on those who commit crimes beyond being here illegally. Of course, there are sanctuary cities that do thwart that effort. If someone has more that anecdotal evidence that law-abiding illegal immigrants are being targeted by ICE in great numbers, I would be interested in seeing it.

This later point seems to me about how the liberal media has created their pro-immigration campaign. They try to obfuscate Republican rhetoric on legal vs, illegal, criminal activity vs. law-abiding. This is just a matter of my opinion. I remember CNN, MSNBC having a shit-fit a few months back about a father was being separated from his wife and family. They did not report he was wanted for murder in Mexico and were essentially shamed by Fox News and other outlets. (That's why you want a press with different perspectives than your own. They're all selling an agenda.) By the way, anyone who knows anything about international treaties knows we cannot easily object to deporting an alleged murderer.

 

[sambuca]

I heard yesterday that the "caravan" was mentioned 11 times last Friday on Fox and Friends, 10 times on Monday, 11 times on Tuesday. Not a mention of it since. They must be too busy licking their wounds after the shellacking their lord and master took on Tuesday.

I still hear about the caravan all the time. Just sayin'.