President Trump certainly stepped into it this time and I would like to call him to account, not for the same reasons those out there "burning their MAGA hats" are doing so, and not for the reason that "Dreamer" (By the way, I despise that term for those here illegally) proponents are, but because President Trump still has not learned that sitting down with the enemy and having a "discussion" was going to result in said enemy going out and misrepresenting the facts by claiming there is an "agreement," when actually there was simply a discussion, for the sole purpose of dividing the country, and Trump supporters even more. These people truly want a civil war.
What the president did is akin to holding a rally, then inviting a bunch of Antifa members in, after handing them live grenades and just letting them blow the place up.
Steve Bannon recently highlighted one "criticism," which he graciously dubbed more of an observation, when he said "I think if there's one criticism or one observation is that the president in coming here, right, has still thought -- at least in the beginning of his administration -- that it's about personalities, and, "If I can change this personality," or, "If I can get this guy on my side, I can do that." And it's not what the institutional logic is. I think some of that was with the FBI and others in the State Department and how his foreign policy is playing out. But I believe you're gonna see over time he's gonna have a greater appreciation that this is a city of institutions, and you must engage them as institutions, not just as personalities."
The president dealt with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer as if they were people instead of the face and voice of the far left liberal portion of the Democratic "institution."
That is unacceptable and Bannon's assertion that "over time" the President will have a greater appreciation, is also unacceptable, that is a lesson the president better learn right here and right now.
BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE ARE THROWING LIVE GRENADES
The mainstream media, Democrats, and far left liberal progressives always attempt to conflate "immigrants" here legally with "Illegal immigrants" meaning those in the United States illegally, so when the President and courts have seen a 28 percent increase in removal orders (50,000 removal orders from February through July) and a 46 percent decrease of new illegal aliens entering along the southwestern border, while cracking down on sanctuary cities, and adding more border enforcement, all while having to fight congress for funding for the wall, the aforementioned groups start screaming and howling the words "deportatation force" and "anti-immigrant," in order to incite protests and cause conflict.
In the meantime, the right side of the aisle, the die-hard #neverTrumpers, and conservative outlets, do much the same thing with the term "Amnesty."
Amnesty is a pardon of a crime, yet any mention of a "path to citizenship" or a path to stay, by anyone, and the conservative media screams and howls the one term guaranteed to rile the crowd, AMNESTY!!! "Path to citizenship" actually refers to a number of steps and conditions which would allow someone to apply for citizenship, that is all. A path to stay is a set of conditions that must be met (join the military, be in school, get a degree, or be employed and paying taxes, etc...) in order to be allowed to stay in the U.S.
Acting like they are the same when one is just handing citizenship to people here illegally and one is offering a way to submit an application and/or earn the right to stay, is not helping with the issue at hand, which is what to do about people that were brought here by their parents who committed a crime the second they entered the country illegally, but who were underage at the time and did break the law themselves.
Let me be very clear here, I am not in favor of amnesty of any kind, but this conflation of terms is not helping with the issue, and any conservative media that is deliberately attempting to conflate the two issues, should be as ashamed of themselves as liberal outlets conflating "immigration" with "illegal immigration."
BREAKING DOWN THE ISSUES
The Parents: Frankly, while I might have some sympathy with wanting to come to America, millions did so legally using the "front door," so to speak, while the parents of the so-called "Dreamers" deliberately and consciously broke the law to sneak into America and should be deported immediately. Sure I feel for the families facing being split up, but what liberals refuse to acknowledge is it was their choice to illegally enter the country.
This will send a strong message to those even thinking about following their path, that they need to follow the legal methods of coming to the U.S. and not attempt to sneak over the borders.
The Criminals: While entering the country illegally is a crime, so the parents and families that entered illegally are, indeed, criminals, there are also those the administration is more focused on right now, those that have committed further crimes while in the U.S. - They also should be deported immediately.
DACA Criminals: According to Breitbart, "2,139 DACA recipients, out of 800,000 deemed “DREAMers," have had their temporary protected status revoked due to crimes. They are being deported or "repatriated" to their country of origin.
The "Dreamers": I am dividing these up into two separate groups for reasons I will explain below.
The first I call the "Entitlement Illegal Alien Dreamers" who seem to think it is alright to march down the streets holding up "Dreamer" signs because they are somehow "entitled" to be here because their parents broke the law and brought them into America illegally.
They need to sit down, shut up, and stop playing the victim of "the government" card and start acknowledging the people that victimized them were their own parents by putting them in this spot to begin with. It is not the American government's fault, it is not the American taxpayers fault, yet it is now America's job to figure out how to fix a mess their own parents created! They are not "entitled" to demand anything.
The reason they should sit down and shut up is because those of us that understand they did not break any laws, they were dragged here by their parents when they were underage, see those signs, that "entitlement" mindset, and think "deport them" we have enough of our own "entitled little snowflakes" to contend with.
Then you have young men and women like those shown below, all of whom have health care or language skills the U.S. military considers vital, enlisted because Obama offered them a path to citizenship and now since president Trump has rescinded Obama's DACA memorandum, with a six month delay to give Congress time to come up with a law regarding these so-called "Dreamers," have no clue whether they will be allowed to continue to serve or not.
Should they be lumped in with the "entitlement "Dreamers?" It is a legitimate question because frankly, I do not envy President Trump having to sign any law, one way or another where no matter what he does, he will be damned by a significant portion of the population.
So, I am going to ask readers to do one of the hardest things we have ever asked.
Put away party lines, put away the conflations of terms, completely take "amnesty" out of the equation because that is a non-starter to begin with, there are too many criminal illegal aliens in America to even think of considering any type of true "amnesty."
Imagine you are the President, right now, and have already rescinded Obama's DACA, with a six month delay in order for Congress to suggest a way forward for just the "Dreamers" that have never committed a crime, or the men and women who joined the military thinking to serve, and only them.
How do you, as the president, reconcile what is right (enforcing the law) and what is humane. Humane to liberals is let every single illegal immigrant stay, even those still committing crimes while in the U.S., as evidenced by their "sanctuary cities" and refusal to report criminals to ICE. That is not an option, nor acceptable on any level.
What is a humane way to handle this issue to conservatives though?
Two Options: 1) Would you round up every man, woman and child that were brought here when they were underage and mass deport them? 2) Would you set up conditions for them in order to apply for legal citizenship or a path to stay?"
THINK BEFORE YOU ANSWER, because if you would offer any suggestions which would allow any person who was brought here as a child to earn a way to stay, or a "path to citizenship," the conservative media will say you support "amnesty."
If you doubt that in any way, just look at Breitbart, a site I generally like to read, where they are ask whether Trump's base would forgive "amnesty," stating "There seems to be a misconception that the Trump base of supporters will simply move on from an amnesty for DACA recipients." Yet amnesty is being pardoned for a crime you committed, but the so-called "dreamers" never committed a crime, their parents did.
In fact, in that same piece, they highlight president Trump saying "We’re looking at allowing people to stay here. We’re not looking at citizenship, we’re not looking at amnesty."
President Trump is looking at the legal definition of "amnesty," but Breitbart is throwing out one of those live grenades and the hell with actual definitions, scream AMNESTY and incite the crowd by asserting "Though Trump is stern in his statement, allowing illegal aliens to remain in the U.S. in any form is considered “amnesty” by all immigration terms and policies."
I would really like to see their source for that assertion, or what dictionary they are using.
I truly have no magic answers or a way to reconcile what I consider right, which is enforcing the law and deporting illegal immigrants, and what I consider humane by acknowledging that most of these young men and women and some teenagers, never had a choice. Their parents didn't give them one.
I do know that I do not envy the President in having to deal with lawmakers over this issue, because no matter what law shows up on his desk, it isn't going to be enough, it isn't going to satisfy either the conservatives or the liberals and we will either see blaring MSM headlines of Democratic politicians screaming "MASS DEPORTATION" or we will see conservative news outlets and MAGA supporters screaming "AMNESTY," when neither will be "real news" because neither will be using the legal definitions or accurate descriptions.
If the law that shows up on his desk tries to hit the middle of the road somehow, we will see both those terms being blared for years.
So ANP readers, you decide.... what would you do if you were the President of the United States?