Eric Trump: My dads immigration plan includes amnesty after deportation

Eric Trump: My dads immigration plan includes amnesty after deportation

southernconstitutionalist (Diary)/Dec 6, 2015


Flip this into…
Like
Leave a comment

Share on

Last month, Marc A. Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute published the article Message to the GOP: Trump supports amnesty.

In it, he highlights Eric Trump’s description of his father’s immigration plan:

“The point isn’t just deporting them, it’s deporting them and letting them back in legally. He’s been so clear about that and I know the liberal media wants to misconstrue it, but its deporting them and letting them back legally.”

Which echoes Donald’s previous comments:

“I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal…. A lot of these people are helping us … and sometimes it’s jobs a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.”

The key word is expedited. An expedited process is another way of saying that illegals are going to cut in line of those who have been waiting for years.

There is no question about it: that constitutes amnesty. Ron Fournier has describedTrump’s plan as “gold-plated amnesty.”

Thiessen mentions the fact that this basic idea has been proposed before by moderates and met strong opposition:

“This is a policy called “touchback” and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX). She offered a “touchback” amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special “Z visa” that would allow them to reenter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.”

It is unclear, however, whether Trump would give the illegals a legal status or citizenship. And it is a critical distinction, as citizenship involves welfare and voting privileges. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) 100% and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) 89% have supported a legal status, while Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 94% and Jeb Bush have supported citizenship. Ben Carson has wavered between both. All of the major, if not all, of the candidates support some form of amnesty. The appeal to Trump’s supporters was that their candidate didn’t support any amnesty whatsoever.

Whether Trump supporters educate themselves about his immigration position will be key to whether he maintains his lead or falters.

https://flipboard.com/topic/erictrum...2Fredstate.com

Quote:

---

It is unclear, however, whether Trump would give the illegals a legal status or citizenship. And it is a critical distinction, as citizenship involves welfare and voting privileges. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) 100% and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) 89% have supported a legal status, while Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 94% and Jeb Bush have supported citizenship. Ben Carson has wavered between both. All of the major, if not all, of the candidates support some form of amnesty. The appeal to Trump’s supporters was that their candidate didn’t support any amnesty whatsoever.

---

What is clear is that Trump can't give illegal aliens legal status or citizenship. He's not a member of Congress like Cruz who wanted to give them legal status or like Rubio who wanted to give them citizenship, noting please that neither Cruz nor Rubio want to deport illegal aliens, they want to give them legal status and/or citizenship, something as Senators they can do.

Trump on the other hand is not a member of Congress and if elected President Trump would have no authority to let any illegal alien deported back into the country for at least 10 years. For any President who has deported all the illegal aliens which Trump says he'll complete in 2 years, there would need to be an Act of Congress for any type of earlier return.

Quote:

---

The appeal to Trump’s supporters was that their candidate didn’t support any amnesty whatsoever.

---

What appeals to Trump supporters is that he's going to deport all of them and "move 'em out of here", "in family units", no child left behind, with no amnesty, citizenship or legal status, and what happens to them after that is up to Congress and the American Voter.

If this is indeed Trump's plan, it will eventually wear down and end his popularity among conservatives while liberals will never appreciate him... leaving him as the most despised President in US history... worse than Bush or Obama.

Donald Trump is #1 in the polls because GOP voters believe he will deport all illegals and Syrian refugees. If they find out that he plans to simply perform a touch back like Mike Pence or Mike Huckabee the Huckster then its game over.

W

8/17/15

TRUMP: I’LL TRY TO BRING BACK ‘GOOD’ ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ‘RAPIDLY’

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

If this is indeed Trump's plan, it will eventually wear down and end his popularity among conservatives while liberals will never appreciate him... leaving him as the most despised President in US history... worse than Bush or Obama.

Donald Trump is #1 in the polls because GOP voters believe he will deport all illegals and Syrian refugees. If they find out that he plans to simply perform a touch back like Mike Pence or Mike Huckabee the Huckster then its game over.

W

---

What in this post with its false headline misquoting Eric Trump has gotten you upset with the first Presidential candidate in over 60 years who can and will deport all illegal aliens? Trump has said from day one and over and over again that he is open to some plan to allow some "really good ones", "exemplary ones", "well-educated ones like doctors", "ones who are working hard and not causing us any problems", "good people who are helping us", to come back legally. This is a very small number of people and even this would require an Act of Congress.

87% of illegal aliens are on some form of welfare. That's causing us a lot of problems, so rule all those out. That leaves 13%. About half of all illegal aliens are visa overstays, the other half came in illegally, which causes us a lot of problems. So rule those out. That leaves 6.5%. Rule out the % of those who came in on a tourist visa but are working instead, that causes us a lot of problems. So rule those out. Take the ones who came in on work visas but are terrorists and terrorist sympathizers, drug runners and so forth, so rule all those out, so this is a very very small group of people, and even this small group would have other requirements to meet as well as an Act of Congress.

Trump's plan is not the touch-back legislation introduced by former US Senator Kay Bailey-Hutchinson in 2007. It's not anything remotely like it. It's also not the make them go home and come back in legally self-deportation, start over plan of Mike Huckabee, nothing at all like it.

Trump is going to deport them to get them out of here, because he doesn't want them here. In is official plan on his website, there is no initiative or plan to propose any legislation to allow illegal aliens deported to return to the US. Instead there are plans to shut down the H1B visa program by raising the wage paid and beefing up proof they can't find US workers and freeze green cards until Americans are back to work. He is allowing for "a door" to control the hysteria. Can't you see that?

There's 30 million or more of these people in the United States. We know that and more importantly Trump knows that. You want riots in the streets by 30 million illegal aliens?

This requires very careful "management" and Trump supporters know that.

https://www.aei.org/publication/mess...ports-amnesty/

And who is the author of the article, redstate is quoting, that MW is so impressed with?

Quote:

---

Marc Alexander Thiessen (born January 13, 1967[1]) is an American author, columnist and political commentator. He served as a speechwriter for United States President George W. Bush (2004–2009) and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (2001–2004). Thiessen's articles have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, National Review, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Weekly Standard, USA Today and other publications. He has also appeared on Fox News, CNN, NPR, and other media outlets. In its January 11, 2010 issue, The Daily Telegraph named Thiessen number 97 of the "100 Most Influential Conservatives in America".

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Thiessen

He's a Bush Boy who now writes a weekly column for the Washington Post.

Quote:

---

About

Marc Thiessen writes a weekly column for The Post on foreign and domestic policy and contributes to the PostPartisan blog. He is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/marc-a-thiessen

You can see how the Trump supporters feel about the article from the comments. I guess it got so bad for Thiessen, they closed it for comments after 8. But like one of them said, we're sure going to increase the "clicks" for this garbage article planted by the Bush campaign. Sad.

https://www.aei.org/publication/mess...ports-amnesty/

Quote:

---

Discussion: (8 comments)

Randy Tuggle November 13th, 2015

Of course they’ll come back if they want to be LEGALIZED CITIZENS! The US allows that! This article is BS and LINK BAIT. How dare you accuse Trump of amnesty with this crap! I’m calling you out!

Share
john November 13th, 2015

GO TRUMP! Kick those f…s OUT!

Share
Matt Osterndorf November 13th, 2015

Yeah, because AEI is in it for the clicks.

Clown.

Share
Eric November 28th, 2015

Yeah, but the point is that it will be possible for them to immigrate here legally, which it is not possible for them to do now. It is just as easy for illegal immigrants to become legal under Trump’s plan as it is for anyone else who supposedly supports amnesty. Under Trump’s plan illegal immigrants are rewarded with legal status much more easily than those who never came here illegally.

Share
Eric November 28th, 2015

And no, it’s not just for those who want to be citizens, as you say. Trump has you idiots wrapped around his little finger. It doesn’t matter what his position actually is. As long as he uses the right rhetoric, you dufuses gobble it up.

Share
Gerald November 15th, 2015

Ready the cattle cars! Lol.

Share
Matt Miller November 18th, 2015

It’s not amnesty! It is what most Republicans want. 1) Stop illegal border crossings. 2) If you came here illegally, you must leave and go through the legal process, if you wish to return. 3) Make the legal process more streamlined, efficient; however, we must have criminal record checks and health screening. 4) No welfare or social services for non-citizens. [You want our benefits, you need to be one of us.] 5) Create and administer a guest worker program for those who do not wish to actually immigrate. 5) Have a program for tracking EVERY individual that comes into the country and if they overstay. 6) Heavy penalties for companies that hire illegal aliens. This is called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” and Republicans SUPPORT IT. But stopping the flow and pumping out the flood has to come first. THEN you worry about cooking dinner. Priorities.

Share
Mark Vande Pol November 20th, 2015

Dear Mr. Thiessen,
You are first and only mass media commentator I have heard who gets it about Donald Trump. For the life of me, I cannot understand how conservatives could be so desperate as to believe this dissembler. He is portraying a caricature of a conservative, it seems with the intent of disparagement toward the general election. My concern is that it appears to be working.
I hope the editors of FoxNews haven’t made this too difficult for you. It must be bad enough watching this clown act while Rome smolders.
Please do check the web address; I think you’ll find it edifying.
Mark Vande Pol

Share

Comments are closed.

---

Trump supporters are all-in to win. And that's the vast majority of our forum. And I mean, vast vast. 66% some weeks ago, probably over 80% by now. Not sure where you guys are trying to go with posting Bush plant articles as Trump positions and then treating them as gospel. I would seriously reconsider that stance.

Judy, your blindness to the truth is absolutely astounding where Trump is concerned.

Judy wrote:

Quote:

---

And who is the author of the article, redstate is quoting, that MW is so impressed with?

---

Why do you always insist on attacking the messenger when you don't agree with a story or article? The truth is the truth and attacking the supplier of said information doesn't do anything to change the facts or give your argument credibility. Very few people impress me, and there are no bloggers, journalist, or writers on my small list of those that impress. I post stories I find and let the reader be the judge of the content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Judy, your blindness to the truth is absolutely astounding where Trump is concerned.

---

I'm a Trump Supporter who is all-in to win. It's a shame you and some others don't know what that means. This is a garbage article written by a former Speech writer for GW Bush and planted on redstate by a Bush supporter.

But hey, if Jeb Bush and the Washington Post anti-Trump columnists are your new best friends, have at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Judy wrote:



Why do you always insist on attacking the messenger when you don't agree with a story or article? The truth is the truth and attacking the supplier of said information doesn't do anything to change the facts or give your argument credibility. Very few people impress me, and there are no bloggers, journalist, or writers on my small list of those that impress.

---

Then don't worry about it. The fact is you reposted a post from redstate pertaining to an article written by an author who was a speechwriter for GW Bush and who writes a weekly column for the Washington Post that isn't true.

Trump never said they "all" come back, Trump never said "all but criminals" come back. What Trump said was "only the really good ones", "exemplary people", "who work hard and don't cause us any problems", "well-educated ones like doctors", and "those who are helping us" may be able to be brought back legally under some expedited process. Those of us in the know, know even that would require an Act of Congress to accomplish. The objective is to gain public support for the plan to deport, win the election, deport and solve the problem of illegal immigration. Why you or anyone else here at ALIPAC would have a problem with that is beyond me.

But hey, you're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else, just as you're free to post Bush Anti-Trump Propaganda and call me "blind" when I call it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

I'm a Trump Supporter who is all-in to win. It's a shame you and some others don't know what that means. This is a garbage article written by a former Speech writer for GW Bush and planted on redstate by a Bush supporter.

But hey, if Jeb Bush and the Washington Post anti-Trump columnists are your new best friends, have at it.

---

Okay, but the questions remains, did Trump's son say what is quoted as saying? Honestly, I suspect he did.

Newsweek

WHO KNEW? TRUMP FAVORS AMNESTY FOR UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS

BY MARC THIESSEN ON 11/17/15 AT 1:27 PM

http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.news...mmigration.jpgU.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump listens to a question from the audience at one of the New England Council's 'Politics and Eggs' breakfasts in Manchester, New Hampshire, November 11. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay in America, the author writes.

BRIAN SNYDER/REUTERS

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

Trump’s supporters loved his promise last week to create a “deportation force” to remove all 11 million illegal immigrants living in America, and his repeated declaration that everyone here illegally will “have to go.”

But his supporters tend to overlook his other promise—repeated in the Fox Business debate in Milwaukee on November 10—that under his immigration plan “they will come back.” (Click for transcript of debate.)

That’s right. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens (save for a small minority with criminal records) will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay here in America.

Trump supports amnesty.

On Fox News on November 12, Trump’s son Eric expressed frustration that the media overlooks this:

The point isn’t just deporting them, it’s deporting them and letting them back in legally. He’s been so clear about that and I know the liberal media wants to misconstrue it, but it’s deporting them and letting them back legally.

Eric Trump is right. His father has been crystal clear that he wants all the illegals to return and live in America.

Listen closely to what Trump is actually proposing. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash earlier this year, Trump explained his plan this way:

I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal….

A lot of these people are helping us … and sometimes it’s jobs a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.

This is a policy called “touchback” and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas). She offered a “touchback” amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special “Z visa” that would allow them to re-enter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.

Her amendment lost by a relatively close margin, 53-45. It was supported by most Republicans and even got five Democratic votes—senators Claire McCaskill, Max Baucus, Jon Tester, Byron Dorgan and John Rockefeller all voted for it.

The idea was considered so reasonable that in an April 22, 2007, editorial entitled “Progress on Immigration,” The New York Times declared:

It’s not ideal, but if a touchback provision is manageable and reassures people that illegal immigrants are indeed going to the back of the line, then it will be defensible.

So what Trump is proposing today—sending illegal immigrants back to their home countries and then allowing the “good ones” to return in an “expedited” fashion—was endorsed by the liberal New York Times!

In fact, the idea even got the support of—wait for it—illegal immigrants.

In 2007, the Los Angeles Times did the first telephone poll of illegal immigrants and asked whether they would go home under a “touchback” law that allowed them to return with legal status. Sixty-three percent said yes, 27 percent said no and 10 percent were undecided. If they were promised a path to citizenship when they returned, the number who said they would leave and return legally grew to 85 percent.

Donald Trump’s detractors were aghast at his invocation during the Fox Business debate of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Operation Wetback,” which forcibly removed 1.5 million illegal immigrants, and his promise the following day to establish a “deportation force” to remove the 11 million illegal immigrants living in America today.

Never mind the fact that we already have a “deportation force”—it’s called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The fact is, Trump won’t need a “deportation force” or an “Operation Wetback” to get illegal immigrants to go home—because he has promised that they can return quickly with legal status.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants say they would voluntarily cooperate with Trump’s plan.

If anything, the “touchback” plan Trump endorses was attacked by conservatives back in 2007. In an editorial, National Review called touchback a “fraud” that gives illegal aliens “their own privileged pathway” ahead of “applicants who have complied with US immigration laws.”

That is precisely what Trump is proposing. Under his plan, illegal aliens don’t have to go to the end of the line behind those who have complied with our immigration laws. They get an “expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal.” They get to cut the line and then stay in America.

So if you get past Trump’s bluster, the plan he is proposing is so liberal that it earned the support of The New York Times and the opposition of National Review.

The reason is simple: Trump’s plan is in fact a form of amnesty—you just have to leave the country briefly to get it.

So when Trump says of illegal immigrants “they all have to go,” don’t overlook the fact that under his plan almost all would be able to immediately return—and stay.

This means there is very little difference between his plan and what John Kasich and Jeb Bush are supporting.

And most of his supporters don’t even realize it.

http://www.newsweek.com/who-knew-tru...igrants-395512

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Okay, but the questions remains, did Trump's son say what is quoted as saying? Honestly, I suspect he did.

---

It's one sentence of a much larger conversation. So it's not the whole quote but a sentence plucked out of it, which usually means it's not true, otherwise they would have recited the entirety. Either way, it's not Trump's plan.

There are more than ample comments about Trump's position by Trump himself on deportation of illegal aliens and who he thinks could possibly be allowed back in legally at some point. And so, the article does not accurately relate Trump's plan, which makes it garbage. It's reciting provisions from old legislation as Trump's plan, when that is not his plan at all.

But have fun with your new best friends!!

Text of the fourth Republican debate in Milwaukee

. . . BARTIROMO:
Can we just send 5 million people back with no effect on economy?

TRUMP:
You are going to have to bring people — you are going to have to send people out. Look, we’re a country…

BARTIROMO:
So what will you do?

TRUMP:
Maria, we’re a country of laws. We either have a country or we don’t have a country. We are a country of laws. Going to have to go out and they will come back but they are going to have to go out and hopefully they get back.

But we have no choice if we’re going to run our country properly and if we’re going to be a country.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

BARTIROMO:
Thank you, sir. . .

http://time.com/4107636/transcript-r...-in-milwaukee/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Newsweek

WHO KNEW? TRUMP FAVORS AMNESTY FOR UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS

BY MARC THIESSEN ON 11/17/15 AT 1:27 PM

http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.news...mmigration.jpgU.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump listens to a question from the audience at one of the New England Council's 'Politics and Eggs' breakfasts in Manchester, New Hampshire, November 11. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay in America, the author writes.

BRIAN SNYDER/REUTERS

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

Trump’s supporters loved his promise last week to create a “deportation force” to remove all 11 million illegal immigrants living in America, and his repeated declaration that everyone here illegally will “have to go.”

But his supporters tend to overlook his other promise—repeated in the Fox Business debate in Milwaukee on November 10—that under his immigration plan “they will come back.” (Click for transcript of debate.)

That’s right. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens (save for a small minority with criminal records) will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay here in America.

Trump supports amnesty.

On Fox News on November 12, Trump’s son Eric expressed frustration that the media overlooks this:

The point isn’t just deporting them, it’s deporting them and letting them back in legally. He’s been so clear about that and I know the liberal media wants to misconstrue it, but it’s deporting them and letting them back legally.

Eric Trump is right. His father has been crystal clear that he wants all the illegals to return and live in America.

Listen closely to what Trump is actually proposing. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash earlier this year, Trump explained his plan this way:

I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal….

A lot of these people are helping us … and sometimes it’s jobs a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.

This is a policy called “touchback” and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas). She offered a “touchback” amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special “Z visa” that would allow them to re-enter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.

Her amendment lost by a relatively close margin, 53-45. It was supported by most Republicans and even got five Democratic votes—senators Claire McCaskill, Max Baucus, Jon Tester, Byron Dorgan and John Rockefeller all voted for it.

The idea was considered so reasonable that in an April 22, 2007, editorial entitled “Progress on Immigration,” The New York Times declared:

It’s not ideal, but if a touchback provision is manageable and reassures people that illegal immigrants are indeed going to the back of the line, then it will be defensible.

So what Trump is proposing today—sending illegal immigrants back to their home countries and then allowing the “good ones” to return in an “expedited” fashion—was endorsed by the liberal New York Times!

In fact, the idea even got the support of—wait for it—illegal immigrants.

In 2007, the Los Angeles Times did the first telephone poll of illegal immigrantsand asked whether they would go home under a “touchback” law that allowed them to return with legal status. Sixty-three percent said yes, 27 percent said no and 10 percent were undecided. If they were promised a path to citizenship when they returned, the number who said they would leave and return legally grew to 85 percent.

Donald Trump’s detractors were aghast at his invocation during the Fox Business debate of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Operation Wetback,” which forcibly removed 1.5 million illegal immigrants, and his promise the following day to establish a “deportation force” to remove the 11 million illegal immigrants living in America today.

Never mind the fact that we already have a “deportation force”—it’s called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The fact is, Trump won’t need a “deportation force” or an “Operation Wetback” to get illegal immigrants to go home—because he has promised that they can return quickly with legal status.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants say they would voluntarily cooperate with Trump’s plan.

If anything, the “touchback” plan Trump endorses was attacked by conservatives back in 2007. In an editorial, National Review called touchback a “fraud” that gives illegal aliens “their own privileged pathway” ahead of “applicants who have complied with US immigration laws.”

That is precisely what Trump is proposing. Under his plan, illegal aliens don’t have to go to the end of the line behind those who have complied with our immigration laws. They get an “expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal.” They get to cut the line and then stay in America.

So if you get past Trump’s bluster, the plan he is proposing is so liberal that it earned the support of The New York Times and the opposition of National Review.

The reason is simple: Trump’s plan is in fact a form of amnesty—you just have to leave the country briefly to get it.

So when Trump says of illegal immigrants “they all have to go,” don’t overlook the fact that under his plan almost all would be able to immediately return—and stay.

This means there is very little difference between his plan and what John Kasich and Jeb Bush are supporting.

And most of his supporters don’t even realize it.

http://www.newsweek.com/who-knew-tru...igrants-395512

---

Same old article, by same Bush Plant author, Marc Thiessen, former speech writer for GW Bush and weekly columnist for the Washington Post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Newsweek

WHO KNEW? TRUMP FAVORS AMNESTY FOR UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS

BY MARC THIESSEN ON 11/17/15 AT 1:27 PM

http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.news...mmigration.jpgU.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump listens to a question from the audience at one of the New England Council's 'Politics and Eggs' breakfasts in Manchester, New Hampshire, November 11. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay in America, the author writes.

BRIAN SNYDER/REUTERS

This article first appeared on the American Enterprise Institute site.

Trump’s supporters loved his promise last week to create a “deportation force” to remove all 11 million illegal immigrants living in America, and his repeated declaration that everyone here illegally will “have to go.”

But his supporters tend to overlook his other promise—repeated in the Fox Business debate in Milwaukee on November 10—that under his immigration plan “they will come back.” (Click for transcript of debate.)

That’s right. Under Trump’s immigration plan, almost all of the 11 million illegal aliens (save for a small minority with criminal records) will get to return and get permanent legal status to stay here in America.

Trump supports amnesty.

On Fox News on November 12, Trump’s son Eric expressed frustration that the media overlooks this:

The point isn’t just deporting them, it’s deporting them and letting them back in legally. He’s been so clear about that and I know the liberal media wants to misconstrue it, but it’s deporting them and letting them back legally.

Eric Trump is right. His father has been crystal clear that he wants all the illegals to return and live in America.

Listen closely to what Trump is actually proposing. In an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash earlier this year, Trump explained his plan this way:

I would get people out and then have an expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal….

A lot of these people are helping us … and sometimes it’s jobs a citizen of the United States doesn’t want to do. I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.

This is a policy called “touchback” and it was first proposed in 2007 by moderate Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas). She offered a “touchback” amendment on the Senate floor that would have required illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for a special “Z visa” that would allow them to re-enter the United States in an expedited fashion and work here indefinitely.

Her amendment lost by a relatively close margin, 53-45. It was supported by most Republicans and even got five Democratic votes—senators Claire McCaskill, Max Baucus, Jon Tester, Byron Dorgan and John Rockefeller all voted for it.

The idea was considered so reasonable that in an April 22, 2007, editorial entitled “Progress on Immigration,” The New York Times declared:

It’s not ideal, but if a touchback provision is manageable and reassures people that illegal immigrants are indeed going to the back of the line, then it will be defensible.

So what Trump is proposing today—sending illegal immigrants back to their home countries and then allowing the “good ones” to return in an “expedited” fashion—was endorsed by the liberal New York Times!

In fact, the idea even got the support of—wait for it—illegal immigrants.

In 2007, the Los Angeles Times did the first telephone poll of illegal immigrantsand asked whether they would go home under a “touchback” law that allowed them to return with legal status. Sixty-three percent said yes, 27 percent said no and 10 percent were undecided. If they were promised a path to citizenship when they returned, the number who said they would leave and return legally grew to 85 percent.

Donald Trump’s detractors were aghast at his invocation during the Fox Business debate of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Operation Wetback,” which forcibly removed 1.5 million illegal immigrants, and his promise the following day to establish a “deportation force” to remove the 11 million illegal immigrants living in America today.

Never mind the fact that we already have a “deportation force”—it’s called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The fact is, Trump won’t need a “deportation force” or an “Operation Wetback” to get illegal immigrants to go home—because he has promised that they can return quickly with legal status.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants say they would voluntarily cooperate with Trump’s plan.

If anything, the “touchback” plan Trump endorses was attacked by conservatives back in 2007. In an editorial, National Review called touchback a “fraud” that gives illegal aliens “their own privileged pathway” ahead of “applicants who have complied with US immigration laws.”

That is precisely what Trump is proposing. Under his plan, illegal aliens don’t have to go to the end of the line behind those who have complied with our immigration laws. They get an “expedited way of getting them back into the country so they can be legal.” They get to cut the line and then stay in America.

So if you get past Trump’s bluster, the plan he is proposing is so liberal that it earned the support of The New York Times and the opposition of National Review.

The reason is simple: Trump’s plan is in fact a form of amnesty—you just have to leave the country briefly to get it.

So when Trump says of illegal immigrants “they all have to go,” don’t overlook the fact that under his plan almost all would be able to immediately return—and stay.

This means there is very little difference between his plan and what John Kasich and Jeb Bush are supporting.

And most of his supporters don’t even realize it.

http://www.newsweek.com/who-knew-tru...igrants-395512

---

Well, I guess this story pretty much removes all doubts of what Trump's son said and where he stand on amnesty!

JohnDoe, is this story in ALIAPC's archives? I don't remember seeing it here before. If it is fine, if not, it probably needs its own thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

Well, I guess this story pretty much removes all doubts of what Trump's son said and where he stand on amnesty!

JohnDoe, is this story in ALIAPC's archives? I don't remember seeing it here before. If it is fine, if not, it probably needs its own thread.

---

LOL!! Hilarious!! This is the same old article you posted about from redstate, the one written by Marc Thiessen for AEI, former GW Bush speechwriter and weekly columnist for the Washington Post. Don't you even read yhe Bush Planted Anti-Trump garbage you post enough to recognize it??!!

This is getting funny enough to be our own SNL show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

LOL!! Hilarious!! This is the same old article you posted about from redstate, the one written by Marc Thiessen for AEI, former GW Bush speechwriter and weekly columnist for the Washington Post. Don't you even read yhe Bush Planted Anti-Trump garbage you post enough to recognize it??!!

This is getting funny enough to be our own SNL show.

---

I can do without your personal attacks, insults, and demeaning attitude, Judy. This article may be by the same writer with some of the same facts but it is much more in-depth than the article I posted. Even a casual glance would tell you that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

I can do without your personal attacks, insults, and demeaning attitude, Judy. This article may be by the same writer with some of the same facts but it is much more in-depth than the article I posted. Even a casual glance would tell you that.

---

LOL!! Oh my God, so you didn't even click on the link in your redstate post to read the actual article it was quoting that was on the AEI site written by Marc Thiessen, former Bush speechwriter and weekly columnist for the Washington Post??!! It's the same "in-depth" article. Word for word.

Hilarious!!

And if you don't mind, I'm remaining in my "fantasy world", with my "blind loyalty" and "hero worship", "rah-rah cheerleading the pep squad", for Donald J Trump all the way to the White House, because I am a:

TRUMP SUPPORTER.

None of your "personal attacks, insults and demeaning attitude towards me" as shown in the quotes above will change that hard core, hard line reality, because we're all-in to win.

So if you want to take Trump down, you're going to have to do far better with your googling, then "casual glances" of what you post and learn to bear the Agony of Defeat.

:p

No one can win support for their candidate by attacking people on the internet.

They can make enemies for their candidate by attacking people on the internet.

Wow - not good. Thought they would have to apply and be at the bottom of the list, not expedited. And hopefully get lost in the scuffle.

I don't think they should have top of the list preference. They are here illegally, having babies and taking jobs. I do not understand how anyone rents to them, gives them a job etc - aiding and abetting.

Mr Trump's plan will be questioned for clarification in the near future, I would assume. It is understandable if he does not spell letter for letter, THEY ARE LEAVING AND WILL NOT BE BACK. He gets in enough trouble for blunt statements.

If he would have prefaced the ban muslims statement with 'As Pres Carter felt it necessary to ban Iranians during that turmoil etc'....he never would have had such a todo.

His mother was born in Scotland and unbelievably they pulled all his golf awards or whatever, un-endorsed him...way over the top; not as if Scotland is not experiencing runaway islamism either.

Hard to believe EU men are allowing this raping of their daughters. Understand they can lose their job and be fined for making reference to immigrants negatively but STILL! 10,000 school girls raped by muslim pakistanies in Britain or UK and the TEACHERS WERE AFRAID TO BE CALLED RACISTS< SO THEY DID NOT REPORT THE RAPES OF UNDERAGE GIRLS!!!!!??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artist

Wow - not good. Thought they would have to apply and be at the bottom of the list, not expedited.

I don't think they should have top of the list preference. They are here illegally, having babies and taking jobs. I do not understand how anyone rents to them, gives them a job etc - aiding and abetting.

---

artist, this is a hit piece by the Bush campaign mixing a limited statement by Trump's son with a piece of legislation introduced years ago. It is not Trump's position. He has said that once they're all out, he would work on a plan to allow some to come back in quickly if a) they're wonderful exemplary people b) they are needed and helping us c) they are working hard and not causing any problems c) they were working at jobs that for some reason Americans didn't want to do d) they're well educated like doctors.

That is frankly an impossible list of conditions for any illegal alien to meet. The article written in the title thread was concocted and written by Marc Thiessen who is a former GW Bush speechwriter, who wrote the lies about going to war, and has a weekly column with the Washington Post. It was also written over 6 weeks ago. What Trump is doing is edging this issue to the top of the charts, by coming out with the policy but with caveats as he goes, and as public support is gained, then he tightens the belt and goes to the next level. That's the strategy and it's working. So he'll tighten the belt a little more next debate, then tighten it a little more for New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Don't feel discouraged by a Bush hit piece written by the same guy who wrote the Iraq War Propaganda for both GW Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, that's trying to bring him down on a false representation of what his son said, that isn't true picture of what even the son said, they cut one sentence out of a long interview, because it's not what Trump has said and it's not what's in his immigration plan, not even close.

STAY TRUE!! STAY TRUMP!!

I hope when questioning him they don't force him to say things that will backfire on him when elected. But once he is in, he could do whatever he wants, just like O.

Seriously, people would rather not go thru that crap again. I think Mr Trump has more credibility and honor but I do not blame him for NOT giving every detail and creating more reason for the illegals to plot and scheme. They are hot headed and it is nothing to them to kill a person. A life is not revered in their country, which is another reason they should not be here. They cannot and will not assimilate to American ways which is a criteria to be here in the USA - so they have to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artist

I hope when questioning him they don't force him to say things that will backfire on him when elected. But once he is in, he could do whatever he wants, just like O.

Seriously, people would rather not go thru that crap again. I think Mr Trump has more credibility and honor but I do not blame him for NOT giving every detail and creating more reason for the illegals to plot and scheme. They are hot headed and it is nothing to them to kill a person. A life is not revered in their country, which is another reason they should not be here. They cannot and will not assimilate to American ways which is a criteria to be here in the USA - so they have to go.

---

Remember too that there are 30 million illegal aliens in the US. There were 20 million or more in 2005, ten years ago, and they've been pouring in every day since. We have to be very careful about how to get deportation done without riots and harm to Americans. Trump is smart enough to know how to coax criminals off your property without confrontations or violence. Illegal aliens are not nice people, they're criminals and almost all of them work for some foreign drug cartel or other criminal enterprise that paid their way in here to begin with.

artist wrote:

Quote:

---

Wow - not good. Thought they would have to apply and be at the bottom of the list, not expedited. And hopefully get lost in the scuffle.

I don't think they should have top of the list preference. They are here illegally, having babies and taking jobs. I do not understand how anyone rents to them, gives them a job etc - aiding and abetting.

Mr Trump's plan will be questioned for clarification in the near future, I would assume. It is understandable if he does not spell letter for letter, THEY ARE LEAVING AND WILL NOT BE BACK. He gets in enough trouble for blunt statements.

---

We've been here before. Trump's current plan sounds very similar to Mike Pence's "no amnesty" amnesty. Pence's plan involved the illegals going home and immediately returning with legal status, that was assuming they had a job waiting for them. Yep, the illegals had their own special line that entitled them to an "expedited return. He was trying to pass it off as a non-amnesty program by having them leave and immediately return legally. The American public saw it for what it was, amnesty.

Quote:

---

TRUMP: I’LL TRY TO BRING BACK ‘GOOD’ ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ‘RAPIDLY’

---

I think he is smoothing things over with those words. A settling down of the tremendous reaction to "they gotta go". Saying "he will TRY" is not in any way a firm commitment to bringing them back. But it lowers the heat a little.

Main thing is he said they gotta go - no one else has done that! It would take a very long time to organize a come back of the "good ones" if any are able to come back at all. He has to be careful of the groups that tag "hate" etc on him. Better to show a nice engaging likable by all side. I don''t see him changing what he believes and he has made that clear.

He would have more security as President and be able to take more risks. The illegals are not nice people, one has to be wary of wearing a Trump shirt, ha , sign in your window or bumper sticker. They operate as gangs, sneaky and little cowards if alone, can't even look you in the eye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Same old article, by same Bush Plant author, Marc Thiessen, former speech writer for GW Bush and weekly columnist for the Washington Post.

---

So what? Truth is truth no matter whose mouth it comes out of!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imblest

So what? Truth is truth no matter whose mouth it comes out of!

---

It matters because it isn't true.

Americans are soon going to the polls to cast votes in the Republican primary for either a candidate like Trump who plans to deport all 34 million illegal aliens within 2 years using a deportation force or other Republican candidates who won't deport a soul unless they happen to be apprehended by police officers for other crimes.

If there is no plan to deport illegal aliens at a faster rate than they're pouring in, then they are still here with numbers growing every year, and if they are still here, then the problem has not been solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

It matters because it isn't true.

Americans are soon going to the polls to cast votes in the Republican primary for either a candidate like Trump who plans to deport all 34 million illegal aliens within 2 years using a deportation force or other Republican candidates who won't deport a soul unless they happen to be apprehended by police officers for other crimes.

If there is no plan to deport illegal aliens at a faster rate than they're pouring in, then they are still here with numbers growing every year, and if they are still here, then the problem has not been solved.

---

What exactly are you saying isn't true?

He's not giving them amnesty. He's not giving them "touchback". He's not bringing "all 11 million illegal aliens back". He's not doing any of that. Why would you think he is? All he has said is that some very good ones who are helping us and doing jobs that Americans don't want to do who aren't hurting us may come back legally and for those he would try to expedite their return. That is a very small group of people and existing law may not even allow it.

As I understand it, if they are deported by the government they can't even apply to come back for 10 years. If they leave on their own, then they would have to get in line behind everyone else. If they're Muslim, they aren't coming back until they can be properly vetted. If they're on welfare, they won't be coming back because that is hurting us. If they're working at jobs that are undercutting American wages or stealing jobs from Americans, they aren't coming back because those are jobs Americans want to do. So once you rule all those people out and all the ones who have committed crimes or broken other laws, serious or otherwise, they aren't coming back.

So, it's a very very small number of people who would even meet those general requirements. So, to claim that Trump is mirroring the 2007 "touchback" deal is just simply untrue or to claim he's bringing them all back is untrue or claim he's giving them amnesty is untrue. It's just untrue.

Marc Thiessen didn't work as a speech writer for the Bush Administration because he wrote truth, he worked for the Bush administration because he's a skilled paid political liar.

But that said, there's no problem if you or others want to support other candidates who have no mass deportation plans and have said straight-forwardly that they do not believe in mass deportation plans to remove illegal aliens from the country. I don't understand why anyone would support such candidates, but everyone is entitled to their own view on this matter.

The main reason we have 30 million illegal aliens in the country is because we haven't had a candidate for President willing to deport illegal aliens. Now we do, and I'm sticking on him like a bee making honey.

Judy wrote:

Quote:

---

So, it's a very very small number of people who would even meet those general requirements. So, to claim that Trump is mirroring the 2007 "touchback" deal is just simply untrue or to claim he's bringing them all back is untrue or claim he's giving them amnesty is untrue. It's just untrue.

---

I understand why you want to take everything Trump says as the gospel. Well, so do I, but unfortunately we've been down this path too many times before. His plan, the way he spoke on it, sounds just like the old touchback policy pushed by Pence. If you believe everything Trump says, it isn't a far stretch to say his deportation plans don't differ much from some of his competitors. Yes, Trump has promised to deport all illegals, but on the flip side he says he will expedite the return of the good ones, of which there are many. You can't deny that he said that, nor can you deny that his son has said as much. Allowing illegal aliens to return in an expedited manner is amnesty. As for returning all of them, no one to my knowledge has made such a claim. Just like Obama, he wants to get the bad ones out and figure out a way for the so-called good ones to be here. Sure, Trump words things differently, but wording things differently doesn't necessarily mean his plan is that much stronger than someone else's.

Trump talks a great game and I want to believe him, I truly do. however, the many things he has flipped on and his prior support of many Democrats and their policies make me very cautious. Being a "great deal maker" could also mean being a great concession maker.

Top Trump Surrogate Says Border Wall and Mass Deportation Will Be "Virtual"

Just remember Trump Surrogate Ben Carson stated a few days ago that there were 5 people whose names were on the list for VP who were not on the list for VP. Some surrogates get it wrong.