President Trump Continues to Call for an Increase in Foreign Workers

President Trump Continues to Call for an Increase in Foreign Workers


https://www.numbersusa.com/sites/def...?itok=pjOm5hWZ

Wed, NOV 14th 2018 @ 7:05 pm EST by Eric Ruark

You’ll find no defense of Jim Acosta here. Quite the opposite. Acosta’s profound ignorance on immigration makes his moral preening on the subject insufferable. No matter one’s view of President Trump, general consensus appears to be that Acosta’s antics have no place in the White House press room.

Lost in last week’s exchange about the migrant caravan resulting in Acosta having his White House press pass suspended is that !important]President Trump continues to insist America needs more foreign workers coming into the United States. Referring to the migrants now making their way to the U.S./Mexican border, President Trump said this:

I want them to come into the country but they have to come in legally. You know they have to come in, Jim, through a process. I want it to be a process, and I want people to come in, and we need the people….You know why we need the people don’t you? Because we have hundreds of companies moving in, we need the people.

Employers in the United States have long called for more foreign workers regardless of the economic and labor market situations. The Gang of Eight made this very same argument on the heels of the Great Recession, introducing a bill that would have added over 30 million new permanent residents to the United States population in just ten years. The unemployment rate at the time was 7.6% and there were 89.8 million people not in the labor force. The labor force participation rate in April 2013, when the Gang of Eight bill was introduced, was 63.4%, down a full three percentage points from its pre-recession level.

The current unemployment rate has dipped all the way down to 3.7%. This is because so many Americans have fallen completely out of the labor market. There are now 95.9 million people not in the labor force, an increase of 6.1 million from April 2013. About 55 million of those not in the labor force are between the ages of 18 and 65. The labor participation rate is down to 62.9% and shows no signs of rebounding to a healthy level.

In October 2018, 6.1 million people were actively looking for work, and another 5.3 million not in labor force indicated they wanted a job. That’s 11.4 million people already in the United States who want a job now.

According to analysis of government data by the Center for Immigration Studies, 38% of U.S.-born Blacks and 36% of U.S.-born Hispanics are not working.President Trump talks a lot about helping put American back to work in good paying jobs, but this will only result from policy changes, not photo ops. The President should focus his attention on ending illegal immigration and cutting legal immigration, not kowtowing to employers’ demands for more foreign workers. Instead, he appears to be aligning himself with Gang of Eight members Sen. Chuck Schumer and Lindsay Graham, and reneging on his repeated promises to put American workers first.

It is clear those traveling in the migrant caravan, and those who have come since the border surge began in the summer of 2015, are economic migrants, not refugees. They are coming to the United States with the hope of finding work, and to take advantage of benefits on offer in this country, including those funded by American taxpayers. There is an on-going crisis at the southern border. No doubt, the President’s failure to lead on this issue (saying he will sign anything Congress sends him on immigration is not leadership), and his insistence that the United States needs more low-skilled workers coming in from Central America is only fueling the problem.

Trump voters who were angry, rightfully, at President Obama’s encouragement and enabling of illegal immigration cannot give President Trump a free pass when he is doing the very same thing. President Trump broke his promise to end DACA on day one of his presidency, and he has prioritized amnesty, even expanding the number of illegal aliens he wants to amnesty beyond those who had DACA status.

As everyone knows, the President wants a wall on the southern border, but he has failed to support mandatory E-Verify, and his administration’s efforts to go after criminal employers who hire unauthorized workers has fallen well short of the mark. This sends a powerful signal to employers that they will be allowed to continue to break the law. Plus, President Trump has signed two appropriation bills that failed to fund a border wall, calling into question whether his call for border security is merely a campaign rallying cry and not a genuine commitment.

Calling for amnesty before enforcement provisions are in place only sets the stage for future amnesties. This is the lesson from IRCA. Any amnesty President Trump signs will be the eighth since 1986, and if the President trades amnesty for wall funding, it won’t be the last. If President Trump is not aware, someone in his administration should tell him that any money appropriated for his wall will be rescinded by the Democratic majority when they take over the House, while the amnesty will remain permanently.

We’ve come a long way since August 2017 when President Trump endorsed the RAISE Act at the White House. He’s now negotiated himself into a position where he may have to sign the largest amnesty in U.S. history in exchange for the promise of a border wall that will never be built. There’s a lot of punditry claiming Trump’s base will forgive him anything, but shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue is not the same as selling out the American people yet again. Polling clearly shows that mid-term voters reject a wall for DACA deal, including 64% of Republicans.

President Trump in 2020 will be judged largely on how he handles immigration. It’s unlikely he’ll be applauded for implementing Jeb Bush’s policies.
ERIC RUARK is the Director of Research for NumbersUSA

Updated: Wed, Nov 14th 2018 @ 7:11pm EST

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.

https://www.numbersusa.com/blog/pres...oreign-workers

That is dishonest. Trump never called for an "increase" in foreign workers, he's called for a major reduction in all immigration. He supports the Raise Act that reduces legal green card immigration by 50%. He supports a reduced immigration system that's based on merit, during the campaign and every single day of his administration. He supports training American Workers to meet the needs of our growing economy and has signed major bills that both fund this as well as partners with private companies to provide this training of American Workers to fill these jobs. He supports the prison reform bill that will help train inmates while in prison so when they are released they can find good jobs to start new and better lives for themselves and their families.

I realize NumbersUSA and some other anti-immigration organizations are in a pickle now because their strategies of focusing on defeating Republicans in a general election resulted in a DemoQuack controlled US House of Representatives, but if they want to maintain any credibility at all for their fund-raising efforts or legislative goals, in my opinion they need to learn that "conservative" principle of taking personal responsibility for the only predictable outcome of attacking Trump and Republicans every day for the past 18 months.

I think that this comment, that he has made in many of his speeches, is giving that impression.

Quote:

---

Mass, uncontrolled immigration is especially unfair to the many wonderful, law-abiding immigrants already living here who followed the rules and waited their turn. Some have been waiting for many years. Some have been waiting for a long time. They’ve done everything perfectly. And they’re going to come in. At some point, they’re going to come in. In many cases, very soon. We need them to come in, because we have companies coming into our country; they need workers. But they have to come in on a merit basis, and they will come in on a merit basis.

---

Complete text of news conference from the whitehouse.

Remarks by President Trump on the Illegal Immigration Crisis and Border Security


IMMIGRATION

Issued on: November 1, 2018

---

---

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-conten...menu-large.svgALL NEWS
Roosevelt Room
4:19 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you very much, everyone. Appreciate it. And good afternoon. I would like to provide an update to the American people regarding the crisis on our southern border — and crisis it is.

Illegal immigration affects the lives of all Americans. Illegal immigration hurts American workers; burdens American taxpayers; and undermines public safety; and places enormous strain on local schools, hospitals, and communities in general, taking precious resources away from the poorest Americans who need them most. Illegal immigration costs our country billions and billions of dollars each year.

America is a welcoming country. And under my leadership, it’s a welcoming country. We lead the world in humanitarian protection and assistance, by far. There’s nobody even close. We have the largest and most expansive immigration programs anywhere on the planet.

We’ve issued 40 million green cards since 1970, which means the permanent residency and a path to citizenship for many, many people. But we will not allow our generosity to be abused by those who would break our laws, defy our rules, violate our borders, break into our country illegally. We won’t allow it.

Mass, uncontrolled immigration is especially unfair to the many wonderful, law-abiding immigrants already living here who followed the rules and waited their turn. Some have been waiting for many years. Some have been waiting for a long time. They’ve done everything perfectly. And they’re going to come in. At some point, they’re going to come in. In many cases, very soon. We need them to come in, because we have companies coming into our country; they need workers. But they have to come in on a merit basis, and they will come in on a merit basis.

The communities are often left to bear the cost and the influx of people that come in illegally. We can’t allow that.

There’s a limit to how many people a nation can responsibly absorb into their societies. Every day, above and beyond our existing lawful admission programs, roughly 1,500 to 2,000 people try crossing our borders illegally. We do a very good job considering the laws are so bad. They’re not archaic; they’re incompetent. It’s not that they’re old; they’re just bad. And we can’t get any Democrat votes to change them. It’s only the Republicans that are — in unison, they want to change them. They want to make strong borders, want to get rid of any crime because of the borders, of which there’s a lot.

And we’ve done a great job with the laws that we have. We’re moving in tremendous numbers of people to get out the MS-13 gangs and others gangs that illegally come into our country. And we’re getting them out by the thousands.
But this is a perilous situation, and it threatens to become even more hazardous as our economy gets better and better. A lot of the cause of this problem is the fact that we right now have the hottest economy anywhere in the world. It’s doing better than any economy in the world. Jobs, unemployment — you look at any number.

Right now, we have more workers than any time in the history of our country. We have more people working, which is a tremendous statement. More people working than at any time in the history of our country. And people want to come in, and in some cases, they want to take advantage of that, and that’s okay. And we want them to come in, but they have to come in through merit. They have to come in legally.

At this very moment, large, well-organized caravans of migrants are marching towards our southern border. Some people call it an “invasion.” It’s like an invasion. They have violently overrun the Mexican border. You saw that two days ago. These are tough people, in many cases. A lot of young men, strong men. And a lot of men that maybe we don’t want in our country. But again, we’ll find that out through the legal process.

But they’ve overrun the Mexican police, and they’ve overrun and hurt badly Mexican soldiers. So this isn’t an innocent group of people. It’s a large number of people that are tough. They’ve injured, they’ve attacked, and the Mexican police and military has actually suffered. And I appreciate what Mexico is trying to do.

So let me begin by stating that these illegal caravans will not be allowed into the United States, and they should turn back now, because they’re wasting their time. They should apply to come into our country. We want them to come into our country very much. We need people to help us, with all of these companies that are coming in. We’ve never had anything like this. We have car companies coming in. We have Foxconn — so involved with the manufacturing of Apple products — coming in in Wisconsin. We have a lot of companies coming in, but they have to apply, and they have to be wonderful people that are going to love our country and work hard.

And we’ve already dispatched, for the border, the United States military. And they will do the job. They are setting up right now, and they’re preparing. We hope nothing happens. But if it does, we are totally prepared. Greatest military anywhere in the world, and it’s going to be, and is now, in great shape. No longer depleted like it was when I took over as the President of the United States.

The government of Mexico has generously offered asylum, jobs, education, and medical care for people within the caravan, but many members of the caravan have refused these offers, which demonstrate that these migrants are not legitimate asylum-seekers. They’re not looking for protection. Because if they were, they’d be able to get it from Mexico. Mexico has agreed to take them in and encouraged them to stay. But they don’t want to stay; they want to come into the United States. So this is no longer safety, and asylum is about safety.

Asylum is not a program for those living in poverty. There are billions of people in the world living at the poverty level. The United States cannot possibly absorb them all. Asylum is a very special protection intended only for those fleeing government persecution based on race, religion, and other protected status.

These caravans and illegal migrants are drawn to our country by Democrat-backed laws and left-wing judicial rulings. We’re getting rulings that are so ridiculous, so bad. They’re writing the laws. Can’t do that. Collectively known as — as an example, catch-and-release. It’s a disgrace that we have to put up with it.

These policies lead to the release of illegal aliens into our communities after they’ve been apprehended. But we’re not releasing anymore. Big change, as of a couple of days ago. We’re going to no longer release. We’re going to catch; we’re not going to release. They’re going to stay with us until the deportation hearing or the asylum hearing takes place. So we’re not releasing them into the community.

We have millions of people that, over the years, have been released into the community. They never show up for the trials. They never come back. They’re never seen again. And those people, they know who they are. And we know a lot of where they are, who they are. And those people will be deported, directly deported.

The biggest loophole drawing illegal aliens to our borders is the use of fraudulent or meritless asylum claims to gain entry into our great country. An alien simply crosses the border illegally, finds a Border Patrol agent, and using well-coached language — by lawyers and others that stand there trying to get fees or whatever they can get — they’re given a phrase to read. They never heard of the phrase before. They don’t believe in the phrase. But they’re given a little legal statement to read, and they read it. And now, all of a sudden, they’re supposed to qualify. But that’s not the reason they’re here.

This merely asserts the need for asylum, and then often released into the United States, and they await a lengthy court process. The court process will takes years sometimes for them to attend. Well, we’re not releasing them into our country any longer. They’ll wait for long periods of time. We’re putting up massive cities of tents. The military is helping us incredibly well.

I want to thank the Army Corps of Engineers. They’ve been so efficient, so good, so talented. And we have thousands of tents. We have a lot of tents; we have a lot of everything. We’re going to hold them right there. We’re not letting them into our country. And then they never show up — almost. It’s like a level of 3 percent. They never show up for the trial. So by the time their trial comes, they’re gone. Nobody knows where they are. But we know where a lot of them are, and they’re going to be deported.

There are now nearly 700,000 aliens inside the United States awaiting adjudication of their claims. Most of these people we have no idea how they got there, why they got there. And the number is actually going to be a much larger number as we look at all of the data. So if you look at just at a minimal number, it’s the size of Vermont, or bigger. And the overall number could be 10 million people; it could be 12 million people; it could be 20 million people. The record keeping from past administrations has not exactly been very good.

As human smugglers and traffickers have learned how the game is played and how to game the system, we have witnessed a staggering 1,700 [percent] increase in asylum claims since the year 2010. They understand the law better than the lawyers understand the law. You have a lot of professionalism there. You have a lot of professionalism involved with setting up the caravans. You take a look at the way that’s happening. Even the countries — you look at Honduras and El Salvador, and you look at what’s happening at the different levels and different countries, and what’s happening on the streets. There’s a lot of professionalism taking place, and there seems to be a lot of money passing. And then, all of a sudden, out of the blue, these big caravans are formed and they start marching up. They got a long way to go.

On average, once released, an asylum case takes three and half years to complete. Think of it. Somebody walks into our country, reads a statement given by a lawyer, and we have a three-and-a-half-year court case for one person, whereas other people tell them, “Out. Get out. Just get out.” Other countries — “Get out. We have a border. Get out.”

We go through years and years of litigation because of the Democrats and the incompetent, very, very stupid laws that we have. They’re the laughingstock all over the world, including the people that are marching up. They understand. But the difference is, we’re not allowing them in, and we’re not releasing, and we’re not doing any of the things that were done for so many years that really are terrible for our country.

The overwhelming majority of claims are rejected by the courts, but by that time, the alien has usually long since disappeared into our country. So they never get to see the judge. They never get to have a ruling. They don’t care because they’re in the country and nobody knows where they are.

All told, there are approximately 1 million aliens who have received final orders of removal. They’ve actually got final orders of removal. You don’t have to go to court anymore. The courts have already issued the orders of removal, and we’ve gotten a lot of them. But who remain at large in our country. So we’ve moving them out.

This endemic abuse of the asylum system makes a mockery of our immigration system, displacing legitimate asylum-seekers — and there are legitimate asylum-seekers — while rewarding those who abuse or defraud our system, which is almost everybody. Everybody is abusing it and just doing things to our system which were unthinkable, I’m sure even by the Democrats who were largely responsible for getting it done.

These individuals disrespect the foundations of American government by voluntarily choosing to break the law as their first act on American soil.

Furthermore, contained within this giant flow of illegal migration to our southwest border is the movement of illicit and deadly narcotics. It’s in the southwest, most of it comes in. Nearly 100 percent of heroin in the United States enters through the southern border– think of that: 100 percent, almost, of heroin comes in through the southern border, along with roughly 90 percent of cocaine, and the majority of meth, and a substantial portion of the ultra-lethal fentanyl killing our youth. Fentanyl is killing our youth.

These drugs destroy the lives and kill much more than 70,000 Americans every single year. And the number goes up. It goes up and up and up, because we are so foolish with our laws that we allow this to happen. A death toll equivalent of the size of an entire American city every year.

The current influx, if not halted, threatens to overwhelm our immigration system and our communities, and poses unacceptable dangers to the entire nation. We have to have our borders. Can’t let drugs come in. Not just — it’s not just people. It’s people; it’s drugs. It’s human traffickers.

Human trafficking is now at the highest level in the world that it’s ever been. And that’s because of the Internet. Think of it — human trafficking. You think back 200 years, 500 years. Human trafficking — where they steal children; in many cases, women, unfortunately. They steal women. The human traffickers, the lowest scum on Earth. The lowest scum on Earth. And it’s at a level that it’s never been. Worldwide — never been at a level like this.

If these caravans are allowed into our country, only bigger and more emboldened caravans will follow. And you see that’s what’s happening now. We have one that’s coming up, and it’s being somewhat dissipated, as they march. But then other people are joining it. And then it gets bigger. And now, if you look back at Honduras, and if you look at El Salvador, other ones are solving and they’re forming. They’re forming. You have new ones that are forming. And we call it “caravan number two” is unbelievably rough people. Very, very hard for the military to stop it. Our military will have no problem. But very, very hard. Mexico is having a very, very hard time with it.

Once they arrive, the Democrat Party’s vision is to offer them free healthcare, free welfare, free education, and even the right to vote. You and the hardworking taxpayers of our country will be asked to pick up the entire tab. And that’s what’s happening — medical and, in many cases, they’ve got some big medical problems before they get here.

No nation can allow itself to be overwhelmed by uncontrolled masses of people rushing their border. That’s what’s happening. They are rushing our border. They are coming up. And even before you get to the caravan, just on a daily basis, people coming in. And it’s a very bad thing for our country. It’s sad in many ways, but it’s a very bad thing for our country. And again, costs us billions and billions and billions of dollars a year.

And I will therefore take every lawful action at my disposal to address this crisis. And that’s what we’re doing. The United States military, great people.

My administration is finalizing a plan to end the rampant abuse of our asylum system — it’s abused — to halt the dangerous influx, and to establish control over America’s sovereign borders. We got borders. And once that control is set and standardized, and made very strong — including the building of the wall, which we’ve already started. $1.6 billion spent last year; $1.6 billion this year. We have another $1.6 [billion] that will be coming, but we want to build it at one time. All it does is turn people in a different direction if you don’t. We want to build it at one time.

Under this plan, the illegal aliens will no longer get a free pass into our country by lodging meritless claims in seeking asylum. Instead, migrants seeking asylum will have to present themselves lawfully at a port of entry. So they’re going to have to lawfully present themselves at a port of entry. Those who choose to break our laws and enter illegally will no longer be able to use meritless claims to gain automatic admission into our country. We will hold them — for a long time, if necessary.

The only long-term solution to the crisis, and the only way to ensure the endurance of our nation as a sovereign country, is for Congress to overcome open borders obstruction. That’s exactly what it is: It’s open border obstruction. No votes. You can come up with the greatest border plan, the greatest immigration plan. You won’t get one vote from a Democrat. They have terrible policy. In many cases, they’re terrible politicians. But the one thing I give them great credit for: They vote as a bloc. They stick together.

And we will end catch-and-release. We’re not releasing any longer. We also must finish the job that we started by being strong at the border. When we’re strong at the border, people will turn away and they won’t bother. You will see, in a year from now, or in certainly a period of time from now, despite our very good economy, which some of them come for that — I can’t blame them for that; you have to do it legally — but you will see that the numbers of people trying to get in will be greatly reduced.

But that can only happen if we’re strong at the border. And the southern border is a big problem, and it’s a tremendous problem for drugs pouring in and destroying our youth, and, really, destroying the fabric of our country. There’s never been a drug problem like we have today. And as I said, much of it comes from the southern border.

So in the meantime, I will fulfill my sacred obligation to protect our country and defend the United States of America. And this is a defense of our country. We have no choice. We have no choice. We will defend our borders, we will defend our country.

Thank you very much.

Q Mr. President, what happens to the children then? If you’re ending catch-and-release, what happens to those children? Do they stay in these tent cities? Or what happens?

THE PRESIDENT: We’re working on a system where they stay together. But I will say that, by doing that, tremendous numbers — you know, under the Obama plan, you could separate children. They never did anything about that. Nobody talks about that. But under President Obama, they separated children from the parents. We actually put it so that that didn’t happen.
But what happens when you do that is you get tremendous numbers of people coming. It’s almost like an incentive to — when they hear they’re not going to be separated, they come many, many times over. But President Obama separated the children, the parents. And nobody complained. When we continued the exact same law, this country went crazy.
So we are going to continue and try to continue what we’re doing. But it is a tremendous incentive for people to try. But it’s going to be very, very hard for people to come into our country. So we think we’ll be able to do that.

Q With the military, do you envision them firing upon any of these people?

THE PRESIDENT: I hope not.

Q Could you see the military (inaudible)?

THE PRESIDENT: I hope not. It’s the military — I hope — I hope there won’t be that. But I will tell you this: Anybody throwing stones, rocks — like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico — we will consider that a firearm. Because there’s not much difference, where you get hit in the face with a rock — which, as you know, it was very violent a few days ago — very, very violent — that break-in. It was a break-in of a country. They broke into Mexico.
And you look at what’s happening in Guatemala, just to mention Guatemala, along with El Salvador and Honduras. It’s disgraceful that those countries aren’t able to stop this. Because they should be able to stop it before it starts.
And the United States pays them a fortune, and we’re looking at not doing that anymore. Because why should we be doing that when they do nothing for us?
Jeff. Jeff, go ahead.

Q Mr. President, how is this plan going to be legal, considering the current law?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, this is totally legal. No. This is legal. We are stopping people at the border. This is an invasion, and nobody is even questioning that.

Q But in terms of your plans to change asylum, are you going to do this via executive order?

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, you don’t have to — you don’t have to release. You have — you can hold. The problem is, to hold people, you need massive facilities. It’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Another country says, “Sorry, you can’t come in.” With us, we take their name, take their phone number, take their everything, and say, “Good luck.” Only because we don’t have the facilities to hold people. But we’re building the facilities now. We’re building massive numbers of tents, and we will hold them in tents. But you don’t have to release them. They released them only because they didn’t have the facilities to hold them.

Q Mr. President, is there like an executive order that you’re going to be releasing today?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, we will be doing an executive order sometime next week, yes.

Q (Inaudible) executive order dealing with ending catch-and-release and asylum?

THE PRESIDENT: It’s going to end — it’s going to be talking about everything. It’ll be quite comprehensive. Many of the things we’ve talked about today.

Q Mr. President, so you’re — so just to clarify, you are speaking of, in the tents, these family units that would arrive (inaudible) the children?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have other facilities also. But what’s happened is we are holding so many facilities — so many people that our facilities are being overrun. They’re being overrun. And we are putting up temporary facilities. Eventually, people won’t be coming here anymore when they realize they can’t get through.

Q So they will hold the children in those tents with their parents?

THE PRESIDENT: We will be holding the family and the children together. Remember this: President Obama separated children from families. And all I did was take the same law, and then I softened the law. But by softening the law, many people come up that would not have come up if there was separation.

Q Mr. President, what do you say to the critics who think this is a political thing before the midterms?

THE PRESIDENT: There’s nothing political about a caravan of thousands of people, and now others forming, pouring up into our country. We have no idea who they are. All we know is they’re pretty tough people when they can blast through the Mexican military and Mexican police. They’re pretty tough people. Even Mexico said, “Wow, these are tough people.” I don’t want them in our country. And women don’t want them in our country. Women want security. Men don’t want them in our country. But the women do not want them. Women want security. You look at what the women are looking for. They want to have security. They don’t want to have these people in our country. And they’re not going to be in our country. It’s a very big thing.

Yes.

Q Mr. President, when you talk about finalizing a plan to end asylum, is this a plan that would be included in that executive order?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, no, people are going to have a chance to go for asylum. But if you look at the records, not very many people are allowed to stay once they go to court. But what happens is they’d go into — they were using asylum — first of all, they were told what to say by lawyers and others. “Read this statement.” You read the statement, and now you’re seeking asylum. The whole thing is ridiculous. And we won’t put up with it any longer.

Q President Trump, U.S. law and international law says that people who have valid claims have a right to seek asylum.

THE PRESIDENT: That’s right.

Q So why would — why would they be —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, they’re going to go to court. They’re going to go to court, as crazy as it sounds. They’re going to go —

Q But the law say that they don’t — they’re not —

THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me. Excuse me. Ready? They’re going to go to court, and a judge is going to determine. But usually, when they go to court, they’re deported. It just seems that most of the people are deported once they go. The problem is they never end up going to court, because when they come in, they’re told to come back in a year, for a court case, and they disappear into the United States never to be seen again.
But we’re going to be —

Q But the current laws doesn’t say about holding people in tent cities.

THE PRESIDENT: And they’re given deportation notices. We will be deporting those people.

Q Mr. President, you’re saying rocks are — rock-throwing, like happened in Mexico, will be considered —

THE PRESIDENT: We will consider that the maximum that we can consider that, because they’re throwing rocks viciously and violently. You saw that three days ago. Really hurting the military. We’re not going to put up with that. If they want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. We’re going to consider — and I told them, consider it a rifle. When they throw rocks like they did at the Mexico military and police, I say, consider it a rifle.
Jeff?

Q A separate topic, sir. Did you offer Heather Nauert the job of U.N. Ambassador?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, she’s under very serious consideration. She’s excellent. She’s been with us a long time. She’s been a supporter for a long time. And she’s really excellent. So she’s under very serious — we’ll probably make a decision next week. We have a lot of people that want the job, and there are a lot of really great people. But we’ll be talking about that next week sometime.

Q Did you see Oprah Winfrey’s comments today?

THE PRESIDENT: I didn’t. What did she say?

Q She was campaigning in Georgia at the same time that Vice President Pence was.

THE PRESIDENT: At the same time as who?

Q Excuse me, at the same time Vice President Pence was, encouraging people to vote and —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, that’s okay. I mean, I was on Oprah’s last week — the last week of her show. Oprah liked me very much. I’ve always liked Oprah. You know, Oprah is good. But the woman that she’s supporting is not qualified to be the governor of Georgia, by any stretch of the imagination.

And I’ll be in Georgia the next few days — the next few days — and we have a tremendous — around Macon — we have a tremendous crowd already. Nobody has a crowd like we have because people want to see a great governor of Georgia. And I think Brian is going to be a great governor of Georgia. I think he’ll be a fantastic governor. He’s totally qualified.

She is not qualified to be the governor of Georgia. She’s not qualified. And Georgia is a great state —

Q Why is she not qualified?

THE PRESIDENT: — it’s a great, great state. Take a — take a look. Take a look at her past. Take a look at her history. Take a look at what she wants to do and what she has in mind for the state. That state will be in big, big trouble very quickly. And the people of Georgia don’t want that.

Question?

Q Mr. President, really quickly, just on election integrity? Can you say for a fact that our elections are secure next week? What can you tell us?

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, yeah. I just met with — I just met with the FBI, with Chris; and the Justice Department; and with Secretary Nielsen. And they’ve spent a lot of time and effort and some money on making sure that everything with respect to the election coming up in five days is going to be perfect and safe. There will be hopefully no meddling, no tampering, no nothing. And we spent a lot —

Now President Obama had the chance to do that in September before ’16, but he chose not to do that because he thought Hillary Clinton was going to win. And while everybody agrees it didn’t affect the vote at all, nevertheless he could have done things that probably would have made it a little more obvious, a little clearer. But he was told by the FBI in September before the election in ’16 about potential meddling or potential Russian meddling, and he did nothing about it. He didn’t do that because he thought that Hillary Clinton would win.

All right, one more.

Q Are you optimistic that you can still get the continuing resolution through December 7th for Homeland Security funded, even if the Democrats take the House?

THE PRESIDENT: I think if — I think we’re going to do very well in the election, I must tell you. If you look at the races, if you look at the Senate, which is very important, obviously. I’m leaving today; I’ll be in Missouri. And I’ll be touching down at a number of places over the next five days. But I think we’re doing very well in the Senate, and I think we’re doing very well in the House.

The only problem is, with the House, there’s so many people. I’d like to stop for every one of them, but there’s so many people. But I think we’re doing very well in the House. I think people want to see strong borders. I think they want to see security. They want to see good healthcare. They want to see the things that we’re providing. They don’t want to have their taxes increased. We’re decreasing their taxes.

We just announced yesterday, you probably heard — Kevin Brady put it out — a reduction of tax. We’re going for a reduction of middle-income tax or 10 percent. The Democrats want to, I mean, double up your taxes. In some cases, you’ll have to pay three times what you’re paying right now in order to get bad healthcare.

And so what we’re doing is something that I think the people want, and I think we’re going to do very well in the election, even though history says that whoever President it — whoever the President may be, it trends the other way. It certainly does seem that way.

But nobody has ever been President that has the greatest economy in the history of our country. This is the greatest economy in the history of our country. These are the greatest unemployment and employment numbers in the history of our country. Nobody has ever had that to campaign with. So I do.

Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Thank you.

END

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...rder-security/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

President Trump Continues to Call for an Increase in Foreign Workers
Lost in last week’s exchange about the migrant caravan resulting in Acosta having his White House press pass suspended is that !important]President Trump continues to insist America needs more foreign workers coming into the United States. Referring to the migrants now making their way to the U.S./Mexican border, President Trump said this:

I want them to come into the country but they have to come in legally. You know they have to come in, Jim, through a process. I want it to be a process, and I want people to come in, and we need the people….You know why we need the people don’t you? Because we have hundreds of companies moving in, we need the people.

President Trump talks a lot about helping put American back to work in good paying jobs, but this will only result from policy changes, not photo ops. The President should focus his attention on ending illegal immigration and cutting legal immigration, not kowtowing to employers’ demands for more foreign workers. Instead, he appears to be aligning himself with Gang of Eight members Sen. Chuck Schumer and Lindsay Graham, and reneging on his repeated promises to put American workers first.

It is clear those traveling in the migrant caravan, and those who have come since the border surge began in the summer of 2015, are economic migrants, not refugees. They are coming to the United States with the hope of finding work, and to take advantage of benefits on offer in this country, including those funded by American taxpayers. There is an on-going crisis at the southern border. No doubt, the President’s failure to lead on this issue (saying he will sign anything Congress sends him on immigration is not leadership), and his insistence that the United States needs more low-skilled workers coming in from Central America is only fueling the problem.

Trump voters who were angry, rightfully, at President Obama’s encouragement and enabling of illegal immigration cannot give President Trump a free pass when he is doing the very same thing. President Trump broke his promise to end DACA on day one of his presidency, and he has prioritized amnesty, even expanding the number of illegal aliens he wants to amnesty beyond those who had DACA status.

As everyone knows, the President wants a wall on the southern border, but he has failed to support mandatory E-Verify, and his administration’s efforts to go after criminal employers who hire unauthorized workers has fallen well short of the mark. This sends a powerful signal to employers that they will be allowed to continue to break the law. Plus, President Trump has signed two appropriation bills that failed to fund a border wall, calling into question whether his call for border security is merely a campaign rallying cry and not a genuine commitment.

Calling for amnesty before enforcement provisions are in place only sets the stage for future amnesties. This is the lesson from IRCA. Any amnesty President Trump signs will be the eighth since 1986, and if the President trades amnesty for wall funding, it won’t be the last. If President Trump is not aware, someone in his administration should tell him that any money appropriated for his wall will be rescinded by the Democratic majority when they take over the House, while the amnesty will remain permanently.

We’ve come a long way since August 2017 when President Trump endorsed the RAISE Act at the White House. He’s now negotiated himself into a position where he may have to sign the largest amnesty in U.S. history in exchange for the promise of a border wall that will never be built. There’s a lot of punditry claiming Trump’s base will forgive him anything, but shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue is not the same as selling out the American people yet again. Polling clearly shows that mid-term voters reject a wall for DACA deal, including 64% of Republicans.

President Trump in 2020 will be judged largely on how he handles immigration. It’s unlikely he’ll be applauded for implementing Jeb Bush’s policies.

---

Excellent article! It was nauseating to hear him say this...

I want them to come into the country but they have to come in legally. You know they have to come in, Jim, through a process. I want it to be a process, and I want people to come in, and we need the people….You know why we need the people don’t you? Because we have hundreds of companies moving in, we need the people.
---------

As I watched him concentrating on jobs, jobs jobs without doing anything at all about immigration, I was thinking he will use this as an excuse to bring in more foreign workers.

What 'are so many of them doing?' 95 million not in US labor force


Jeff Cox | @JeffCoxCNBCcom
Published 12:58 PM ET Fri, 2 Dec 2016 Updated 2:11 PM ET Fri, 2 Dec 2016CNBC.com

https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnb...g?v=1480693287Big difference between the job numbers and perception: Kelly 10:44 AM ET Fri, 2 Dec 2016 | 04:34


The November jobs report looked pretty good on the surface except for one number that popped off the page: 95 million.

That's the number of Americans now counted as not in the labor force, a historic high that has confounded economists and policymakers. The total — 95.06 million to be more exact — has been rising consistently but surged by a gaudy 446,000 last month.

The jump occurred as the U.S. economy added 178,000 jobs and the headline unemployment rate dropped sharply.

Explaining the consistent increase in those leaving the labor force is complicated, with factors divided between an aging and rapidly retiring workforce, a skills gap that leaves job openings unfilled, and the nettlesome problem of too many people who find it's just easier to collect welfare and other transfer payments rather than go back to work.

"WTF are so many of them doing?" Peter Boockvar, chief market analyst at The Lindsey Group, said in a note after the nonfarm payrolls report. Boockvar used a crude online expression that nicely sums up the continued frustration with America's shrinking labor force.

In a subsequent interview, he acknowledged the issue is many pronged and poses a long-term obstacle for economic growth.

"It's a combination. There's no question a lot of them are retirees," Boockvar said. "No one wants to say, 'I want to get fired and sit on my butt.' But when people do lose their jobs, they're not being incentivized enough to go back to work compared to the benefits they get by not being at work."

Indeed, the U.S. saw an explosion in benefits during the Great Recession that has receded only mildly during the recovery.

For example, the level of those enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — food stamps — has remained elevated even with an economic expansion that is nearly 7 ½ years old. SNAP recipients totaled 33.5 million in 2009, the year the recession ended. In 2016, the number is at 45.3 million. The government shelled out $74 billion in benefits last year, about double the level of 2008.


The 'silver tsunami of retirees'

https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnb...g?v=1480697208Don Emmert | AFP | Getty Images

Taken together, the numbers show that there's more to meets the eye than a headline unemployment rate of 4.6 percent, the lowest since August 2007. Because that number ignores those not in the labor force, as well as workers at part-time jobs for economic reasons, it doesn't tell the whole story. A broader jobless measure is at 9.3 percent.

"I have a problem with people saying we're at full employment," said Dan North, chief economist at Euler Hermes North America, a trade credit insurance company. "We have a record 95 million people sitting on the sidelines. To me, that's hardly full employment."

The structural issue is what North calls the "silver tsunami of retirees" or those 10,000 baby boomers a day leaving the workforce and heading for retirement.

But that's only one more part of the problem. Another big issue is the skills gap for employers struggling to find workers to fill positions.

Job openings in September were at 5.5 million, though hires were at just 5.1 million, according to the Labor Department.

"Employers have lots of jobs open but can't find the right people to fill them. That's certainly a part of it as well," North said.

Companies are trying to be creative in that respect. Some strategies they are employing include reducing prerequisites for jobs — allowing, say, associate degree holders for jobs that formerly required bachelor's or master's degrees — while also focusing on job training and flexible hours.

That carries its own risk by allowing workers with a steeper learning curve on the job. But the current labor force condition is mandating innovative solutions, and compromises.

"It's a great thing for the candidate that's getting an opportunity, especially for the millennial who's interested in career growth and job changes every couple of years. For the employers, it's good in a sense to seek a new perspective from the labor pool," said Amy Glaser, senior vice president at Adecco Staffing, a recruitment and workforce solutions firm. "From a change management perspective, it's really difficult for the employer. It requires a lot of patience, creativity and open minds to look at things."

Glaser believes the various factors at play aren't going to go away anytime soon.
"There's not a quick fix," she said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/02/95-m...bor-force.html

FLASHBACK to Trump campaign 2016:


Why do Trump and Rubio still favor cheap foreign labor?



Daniel Horowitz · February 16, 2016

Font Size A A A

https://www.conservativereview.com/w...aordinaire.jpgRepublican presidential candidate, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., right, speaks with Republican presidential candidate, businessman Donald Trump during the CBS News Republican presidential debate at the Peace Center, Saturday, Feb. 13, 2016, in Greenville, S.C. John Bazemore | AP Photo



What is remarkable about the 2016 presidential election process thus far is the sheer volume of important questions that have not been asked. While the leftist media is busy asking candidates about their shoes, the things the American people should know—indeed, need to know—before they vote in the primaries and again in the fall never seem to come up.


In keeping with this pattern of discussing nonsense over substance, two of the candidates running for the Republican presidential nomination, Marco Rubio and Donald Trump, have never been asked to fully explain their position on foreign workers: Why do they both support the importation and use of cheap foreign labor, and the displacement of American employees?


While Rubio is widely known for his comprehensive amnesty bill, his name is also on another atrocious and much more recent immigration bill. He has yet to be asked about it at a debate or in any major forum on the campaign trail. In January 2015, Rubio joined Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) as an original co-sponsor of a bill that is deceptively named the Immigration Innovation (or “I-Squared”) Act. The only original thing about this bill is that its supporters have innovatively prevented the American people from noticing how economically destructive it would be if it ever became law.


As CR’s Michelle Malikin detailed in length, the I-Squared Act calls for a dramatic increase in the number of foreign workers that can be brought into the United States under the H-1B visa program. On paper, the H-1B program is ostensibly designed to allow U.S. employers to find highly educated individuals from abroad to fill highly technical positions that could not be filled by Americans. In reality, however, the H-1B program has been rampantly abused by corporate America to fire experienced American information technology employees and replace them with cheap foreign labor. H-1B visas cover virtually any immigrant with a run-of-the-mill bachelor’s degree in numerous disciplines; it’s hardly limited to rocket scientists.


The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, which represents 235,000 Americans in the electronics and computing industries, came out forcefully against the I-Squared Act shortly after its introduction, stating in no uncertain terms that the bill would “Help Destroy [the] U.S. High-Tech Workforce.”


Despite protestations from the corporate disciples of H-1B visas, story after story after story demonstrate how the program is being abused and is in desperate need of substantial reform or outright elimination.


With that in mind, you will be happy to know that the Hatch-Rubio I-Squared Act … proposes precisely zero reforms to the H-1B program and calls for a more-than-threefold increase in H-1B visas. And while the legislation was technically introduced by Senator Hatch, Rubio is what’s known as an “original co-sponsor,” which is Rubio’s way of saying: If Senator Hatch hadn’t beat me to introducing this job-killing legislation, I would have introduced it myself. Not exactly a pro-jobs position, with almost 100 million Americans either unemployed or under-employed.


Rubio’s continued support of the I-Squared Act is particularly mind-boggling given the public relations meltdown and subsequent class action litigation against ABC-Disney for its termination of literally hundreds of Disney IT workers in Orlando and its subsequent replacement of them with H-1B foreign labor. In what is typical of a lot of other H-1B displacement situations, Disney fired these experienced IT workers en masse, not because they had done anything wrong or were under-performing, but because they were being paid what they were worth and it was cutting into Disney CEO Bob Iger’s martini fund.


As if the mass-firing of Americans for being good at what they do was not enough, these Americans had to suffer the awful indignity of training their foreign replacements in order to receive their severance or retirement pay. Disney’s abuse came to light as a result of the courageous disclosure by a couple of former IT workers who had been let go. But there are other untold stories of H-1B abuse out there, and a lot of them are reportedly in Florida.


Someone needs to ask Rubio why he supports expansion of a job-killing visa program and legislation that would trigger the loss of even more American jobs.


Ted Cruz also got roped into the ridiculous quest for more H-1B visas when he first entered the Senate and signed onto ridiculous legislation to expand the program. But at least he has been moved by the Disney scandal and has sponsored legislation with Sen. Sessions to reform the program. We can ask legitimate questions about whether Cruz’s conversion is part of his broader, strong record on immigration or simply a campaign pander, but the bigger question is which other candidates are still bad on the issue, despite the publically-reported scandals.

Trump’s campaign has lobbed fire at Rubio for the latter’s unapologetic, pro-corporatist support for the H-1B program generally and the I-Squared Act specifically. But Trump himself has used quite a few foreign visa programs in his day to hire cheaper foreign workers instead of Americans, and he needs to be asked about that as well.


More specifically, Trump has been, and continues to be, an all-too-frequent user of several foreign visa programs. This is not conjecture but fact: according to Business Insider, an earlier Reuters investigation determined that U.S. Department of Labor records show that nine companies that are majority-owned by Trump have imported at least 1,100 foreign workers on temporary visas since 2000. While some of these visas are for fashion models, he has brought hundreds of others in to do jobs that Americans would do: waitresses, cooks, event managers, and even an assistant golf course superintendent.


For those who are curious, Trump is still using these visa programs to bring in foreign workers, his campaign rhetoric aside. According to this same report, Trump’s posh Palm Beach, Florida luxury resort, Mar-a-Lago, filed paperwork with the Department of Labor last July—in other words, in 2015—to bring in 70 foreign workers to work at Mar-a-Lago. These are jobs that Americans could have right now. (Mar-a-Lago appears to have brought in as many as 787 foreign workers since 2006, by the way.)


Trump needs to explain his use of foreign worker visa programs, particularly given his chest-thumping but detail-free pronouncements about how he will be the greatest jobs-producing president ever. To his credit, he is critical of the H-1B program on his website, but when asked about Mark Zuckerberg’s quest for more foreign workers last October during the CNBC debate, he echoed the open border talking points:

I was not at all critical of him [Zuckerberg]. I was not at all. In fact, frankly, he’s complaining about the fact that we’re losing some of the most talented people. They go to Harvard; they go to Yale; they go to Princeton. They come from another country and they are immediately sent out. I am all in favor of keeping these talented people here so they can go to work in Silicon Valley.

Later on in the debate, moderator Becky Quick asked Trump about his website and whether he supports the H-1B program. Trump simply said “I’m in favor of people coming into this country legally…. You can call it anything you want,”


If Trump is going to garner a lot of support based on his supposed position on immigration shouldn’t we get some clarity at this late hour in the race?


If Trump’s grand plan to “Make America Great Again” is to replace as many Americans with cheaper foreign workers as possible, he probably should explain this to the 100 million Americans who are looking for work. Bringing jobs back to the United States and imposing Marxist taxes on companies that open offices overseas will do little good if he also imports workers from other countries to fill those jobs.


There are a lot of questions about positions taken by candidates over the course of their career. Those are legitimate questions. But Trump, who sells himself as a pro-American worker candidate, and Rubio, who claims to have seen the light on immigration, have never been taken to task for their existing support of foreign workers. And if our next president doesn’t leadership on this issue, it certainly won’t come from congressional Republicans.

https://www.conservativereview.com/n...foreign-labor/

Hi Newmexican, I saw that interview. Not once as your transcript shows did he ever "call for" or ask for or promote an increase in foreign workers. His comments in that interview were drawing clear lines between illegal workers and legal workers with respect to illegal immigration which he wants to stop and legal immigration which he wants to cut by converting to a merit-based system.

http://www.msnbc.com/sites/msnbc/fil...?itok=f1Eram1U


U.S. President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn of the White House upon his return to Washington, U.S., after spending the weekend in Mar-a-Lago estate...
YURI GRIPAS

Trump’s line on hiring foreign workers gets a little more awkward

07/11/18 08:40 AM—UPDATED 07/11/18 08:51 AM

By Steve Benen

To hear Donald Trump tell it, curtailing illegal immigration to the United States isn’t enough. The president has also argued that the country has to cut legal immigration because foreign workers are taking American jobs and undermining domestic wage growth.

It’s awfully difficult to take this rhetoric seriously when one of Trump’s high-profile businesses keeps hiring more foreign workers. The Washington Post updated its previous reporting on this last night:

President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club has asked permission to hire 78 foreign workers to serve as cooks, waiters and housekeepers during this winter’s social season in Palm Beach, Fla., according to Labor Department data.

The club – a for-profit business, which also serves as Trump’s weekend home and “Winter White House” – submitted applications to hire 21 cooks, 40 waiters and 17 housekeepers from overseas. After working from October to May, the workers would return home.

Initially, Trump’s business applied to hire 40 foreign workers, but that total has gradually increased over the last week, and it’s now slightly higher than last year’s request.

BuzzFeed added, “The workers are being sought under the controversial H-2 visa program, which permits US employers to hire guest workers under temporary visas if no qualified US workers want the jobs.”

And that’s where the story gets a little tricky.

As we discussed last week, Mar-a-Lago, which the president promotes and profits from, caters to very wealthy clients, who can afford an enormous membership fee ($200,000) and hefty annual dues ($14,000).

It used to cost less, but the venue hiked its prices when its owner became president.

If Trump’s club found it difficult to fill the openings for cooks, waiters, and housekeepers – in a Palm Beach County, which has a population of over 1.3 million people – Economics 101 says it should take advantage of its extensive revenue and offer more money.

After all, Trump made a specific commitment to the public: “My administration will follow two very simple rules: buy American and hire American.” Did he mean it or not?

A recent Vox analysis of hiring records for seasonal workers at three Trump properties in New York and Florida “revealed that only one out of 144 jobs went to a US worker from 2016 to the end of 2017. Foreign guest workers with H-2B visas got the rest.”

In other words, Trump wants fewer foreign workers in the United States, but more foreign workers at his own private-sector operation.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-line-hiring-foreign-workers-gets-little-more-awkward




hypocrite

noun

hyp·​o·​crite | \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit

\

Definition of hypocrite

1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Trump's increase in foreign workers is latest broken campaign promise
For National Release: January 16, 202
https://www.alipac.us/f8/trumps-incr...romise-376579/


Video Clip: Laura Ingraham "You (Trump) didn't run on bringing more foreign workers into the United States!"
Laura Ingraham Confronts Trump's plan to import more foreign workers
https://youtu.be/15pjDszl8l0

<font size="4"><a href="https://youtu.be/15pjDszl8l0" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><br>https://youtu.be/15pjDszl8l0

Laura certainly called him to the carpet! Good for her.