Don't those programs end with them not convicted though? If its dismissing charges for completion that leaves him innocent in the eyes of the law doesn't it?
I'm not wild about defending a DUI offender. A lot of countries will deport a non-citizen for that.
I don't give a shit. We should not deport someone for that alone.
To be less harsh : this person was allowed into a standard diversion program that everyone else gets as first time duii offenders. If he completes it the charge is dismissed after a year. I don't see how his crime is something we should deport someone over. He made a mistake and he didn't avoid accountability for it at all and went through our system just like anyone else.
that said, the requirement is that it has to be a conviction. if there was a diversion, that by definition means no conviction.
DACA also has a general "public safety" ground, meaning that if someone is deemed a risk to public safety, they can be denied DACA. ICE may try to get this person on that ground.
i would hope he gets to defend himself in immigration court, because he likely has an argument. DACA itself is...not strong as a defense. i'd like to think that Obama included the "significant misdemeanor" restrictions because if he really pushed on DACA, some of the States would sue the administration like they did with the DACA expansion for parents.
Don't those programs end with them not convicted though? If its dismissing charges for completion that leaves him innocent in the eyes of the law doesn't it?
In my state, you plead guilty up front and are not sentenced. You enter the diversion program. If, at the end of one year, you have completed all the required treatment and followed the rules, the charge will be dismissed and there will be no conviction.
If you break the rules, fail to complete treatment, or don't pay off your fines in time, then you will proceed to a hearing where the diversion is revoked and you are sentenced at that point, having already admitted guilt.
If he completes his diversion. in December 2017 he will have no conviction at all.
I'm not wild about defending a DUI offender. A lot of countries will deport a non-citizen for that.
I don't give a shit. We should not deport someone for that alone.
To be less harsh : this person was allowed into a standard diversion program that everyone else gets as first time duii offenders. If he completes it the charge is dismissed after a year. I don't see how his crime is something we should deport someone over. He made a mistake and he didn't avoid accountability for it at all and went through our system just like anyone else.
that said, the requirement is that it has to be a conviction. if there was a diversion, that by definition means no conviction.
DACA also has a general "public safety" ground, meaning that if someone is deemed a risk to public safety, they can be denied DACA. ICE may try to get this person on that ground.
i would hope he gets to defend himself in immigration court, because he likely has an argument. DACA itself is...not strong as a defense. i'd like to think that Obama included the "significant misdemeanor" restrictions because if he really pushed on DACA, some of the States would sue the administration like they did with the DACA expansion for parents.
no way to know now.
Thanks for this information.
Sounds to me like hunting down folks who are four months into their diversion process, and are NOT fully convicted, is not supported by that DACA rule.
There is no way that I can tell, from what I've read, that this person would be deemed a risk to public safety.
I'm not wild about defending a DUI offender. A lot of countries will deport a non-citizen for that.
I don't give a shit. We should not deport someone for that alone.
To be less harsh : this person was allowed into a standard diversion program that everyone else gets as first time duii offenders. If he completes it the charge is dismissed after a year. I don't see how his crime is something we should deport someone over. He made a mistake and he didn't avoid accountability for it at all and went through our system just like anyone else.
that said, the requirement is that it has to be a conviction. if there was a diversion, that by definition means no conviction.
DACA also has a general "public safety" ground, meaning that if someone is deemed a risk to public safety, they can be denied DACA. ICE may try to get this person on that ground.
i would hope he gets to defend himself in immigration court, because he likely has an argument. DACA itself is...not strong as a defense. i'd like to think that Obama included the "significant misdemeanor" restrictions because if he really pushed on DACA, some of the States would sue the administration like they did with the DACA expansion for parents.
no way to know now.
Thanks for this information.
Sounds to me like hunting down folks who are four months into their diversion process, and are NOT fully convicted, is not supported by that DACA rule.
There is no way that I can tell, from what I've read, that this person would be deemed a risk to public safety.
ICE under Obama would have agreed with the bold part and would've targeted someone else.
ICE under Trump? yeah, they're pretty much going after anyone and everyone now.
I'm not wild about defending a DUI offender. A lot of countries will deport a non-citizen for that.
I don't give a shit. We should not deport someone for that alone.
To be less harsh : this person was allowed into a standard diversion program that everyone else gets as first time duii offenders. If he completes it the charge is dismissed after a year. I don't see how his crime is something we should deport someone over. He made a mistake and he didn't avoid accountability for it at all and went through our system just like anyone else.
that said, the requirement is that it has to be a conviction. if there was a diversion, that by definition means no conviction.
DACA also has a general "public safety" ground, meaning that if someone is deemed a risk to public safety, they can be denied DACA. ICE may try to get this person on that ground.
i would hope he gets to defend himself in immigration court, because he likely has an argument. DACA itself is...not strong as a defense. i'd like to think that Obama included the "significant misdemeanor" restrictions because if he really pushed on DACA, some of the States would sue the administration like they did with the DACA expansion for parents.
no way to know now.
Thanks for this information.
Sounds to me like hunting down folks who are four months into their diversion process, and are NOT fully convicted, is not supported by that DACA rule.
There is no way that I can tell, from what I've read, that this person would be deemed a risk to public safety.
ICE under Obama would have agreed with the bold part and would've targeted someone else.
ICE under Trump? yeah, they're pretty much going after anyone and everyone now.
A flimsy fig leaf that the ACLU is going to keep attacking, I'm sure.
An agent for Immigration and Customs Enforcement shot and wounded a man after authorities said he pointed a gun at agents serving an arrest warrant at a home on the Northwest Side Monday morning.
But an attorney for the wounded man, who is 53, said the shooting was "without cause."
Family members of Torres claim he did not have a gun and is in the United States legally. His daughter, Carmen Torres, told NBC 5 the family was not told why agents were at the home Monday. She said her father was shot as three children, including a 5-month-old, stood nearby.
Supposedly they were there for one of his sons? Trying to find a reputable source on that part.
There's no plan, there's no race to be run
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
What action will they even take against sanctuary cities other than withholding funding?
That's it, it seems.
OJP is the Office of Judicial Programs, which gives grants and advice to local law enforcement.
And that's pretty much the only funding they can withhold. I sense a lot more bark than bite on this issue.
That might be all that the DoJ can do, but there's a lot of other funds that sound like they might be held hostage. That's not even getting into what they'll do in the event of a natural disaster.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
MuddBudd on
There's no plan, there's no race to be run
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
What action will they even take against sanctuary cities other than withholding funding?
That's it, it seems.
OJP is the Office of Judicial Programs, which gives grants and advice to local law enforcement.
And that's pretty much the only funding they can withhold. I sense a lot more bark than bite on this issue.
That might be all that the DoJ can do, but there's a lot of other funds that sound like they might be held hostage. That's not even getting into what they'll do in the event of a natural disaster.
ICE went to the home of a DACA recipient yesterday and banged on the door repeatedly until the family felt they had to let them in. They arrested him. No warrant.
He got a duii in December 2016 and is in the diversion program, having no priors.
Infuriating, un-American bullshit.
Since I'm off today I'm going down to a protest in front of the ICE offices later.
He was released on bond within 24 hours (note this is not normal, usually people are held)
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
ICE went to the home of a DACA recipient yesterday and banged on the door repeatedly until the family felt they had to let them in. They arrested him. No warrant.
He got a duii in December 2016 and is in the diversion program, having no priors.
Infuriating, un-American bullshit.
Since I'm off today I'm going down to a protest in front of the ICE offices later.
He was released on bond within 24 hours (note this is not normal, usually people are held)
i remember this being a terrible problem in San Diego. ICE would detain someone there, hold them in a lockup either in downtown San Diego or San Ysidro, and then transfer them east to Arizona or other random locations. families are often left never knowing where their relatives are being held.
edit: because i forgot how to direction for a second.
ICE went to the home of a DACA recipient yesterday and banged on the door repeatedly until the family felt they had to let them in. They arrested him. No warrant.
He got a duii in December 2016 and is in the diversion program, having no priors.
Infuriating, un-American bullshit.
Since I'm off today I'm going down to a protest in front of the ICE offices later.
He was released on bond within 24 hours (note this is not normal, usually people are held)
i remember this being a terrible problem in San Diego. ICE would detain someone there, hold them in a lockup either in downtown San Diego or San Ysidro, and then transfer them west to Arizona or other random locations. families are often left never knowing where their relatives are being held.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
What's the disadvantage to just blaming Democrats whether or not they cooperate?
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
They're going to do that regardless of how the Dems vote. Might as well block some shitty policy along the way.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggle of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc.. Turn it into the new Bridge to Nowhere and just hammer the Republicans over the head with it over and over again.
"The current measures are not an acceptable long-term solution to whatever threat they are trying to mitigate. Even in the short term it is difficult to understand their effectiveness. And the commercial distortions they create are severe. We call on governments to work with the industry to find a way to keep flying secure without separating passengers from their personal electronics," said Alexandre de Juniac, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
The only worthwhile spend MIGHT be offering to pay the amount Trump said the wall would cost during the campaign and not a penny more. So like , $10000 per mile, with an insistence that construction start in the most challenging region to build a wall in. The money will come in 4 yearly payments with the first payment being enough for 100 miles of wall. Then subsequent payments will ramp the amount of miles paid for when the Trump administration shows the capacity to get the job done at the rate they described.
Then when they get like, 1/2 a mile of crumbling mess built in 4 years, it would be a good investment in PR.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
+3
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
The rest of the GOP was never interested in the wall and the wall isn't a weapon the Dems can really use on them. If they refuse to fund it and the Dems try to use it as a talking point for 2018 or 2020 where do they go with it? "Trump failed to build the wall he promised that we oppose to begin with?" Maybe Trump wants the wall to be real but the base that wants it will probably be satisfied with the ramp up in deportations and phony treaty negotiations anyway.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
I don't want us to get off topic into general congressional strategy here, suffice it to say that I totally disagree one, that your assertion follows from my previous post and two, that the strategy you lay out will be effective in any way.
+6
Options
I ZimbraWorst song, played on ugliest guitarRegistered Userregular
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
You can miss me with that Sun Tzu bullshit. These 'mistakes' have real, human consequences for real people and to abandon them so you can maybe score political points later is a really good way to lose your base and lose elections.
The left should articulate clear, definable principles and do everything they can to defend them instead of getting caught up in this 12th dimensional chess nonsense.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
You can miss me with that Sun Tzu bullshit. These 'mistakes' have real, human consequences for real people and to abandon them so you can maybe score political points later is a really good way to lose your base and lose elections.
The left should articulate clear, definable principles and do everything they can to defend them instead of getting caught up in this 12th dimensional chess nonsense.
And pray tell, what are these horrible consequences this wall is going to have for people/American voters?
Also, if you want to talk about clear, definable principles that the Left should articulate, maybe not getting bogged down in procedural budgetary shenanigans and causing a government shutdown over the stupid wall is one. You can't concurrently argue that the Left should be principled and articulate and worthy of governing while suggesting that they engage in the traditional chicken shenanigans over the debt ceiling. If you're going to play 12 dimensional chess anyways, you should at least admit you're playing it.
Keep in mind that Trump voters will see a wall as a victory. Any defects or shortcomings of the wall is just going to be blamed on the Democrats anyway.
Do not let them have that victory. Blocking funding for the wall gives Trump 0 for 2 - he'll have whiffed on both healthcare and The Wall. Him very obviously failing to pull through on his big campaign promises will depress turnout with his base for 2020.
With the GOP consumed by its own divisions, the White House and Hill Republicans will have to rely on Democratic votes to avoid a government shutdown next month in what would be another disaster for Trump’s fledgling presidency.
Republican leaders, wary of this, are considering a plan that would not directly tie the border wall money to the April 28 government funding deadline. Some Republican insiders worry that the president cannot afford another major legislative setback — and they believe a shutdown showdown would result in just that.
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggles of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc..
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Congress paying for the wall means huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support.
Not worth.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
You can miss me with that Sun Tzu bullshit. These 'mistakes' have real, human consequences for real people and to abandon them so you can maybe score political points later is a really good way to lose your base and lose elections.
The left should articulate clear, definable principles and do everything they can to defend them instead of getting caught up in this 12th dimensional chess nonsense.
And pray tell, what are these horrible consequences this wall is going to have for people/American voters?
Also, if you want to talk about clear, definable principles that the Left should articulate, maybe not getting bogged down in procedural budgetary shenanigans and causing a government shutdown over the stupid wall is one. You can't concurrently argue that the Left should be principled and articulate and worthy of governing while suggesting that they engage in the traditional chicken shenanigans over the debt ceiling. If you're going to play 12 dimensional chess anyways, you should at least admit you're playing it.
If you want a clear, definable principle "Trump's immigration policy is un-American, racist, wasteful, and counter-productive and we will do everything within our power to stop it" is pretty decent. Might need a little tightening up to fit on a bumper sticker.
One could point out that Trump supporters are already saying he fulfilled all his promises, so actually building the wall would not change that. While there are people who will keep being told the sky is green and believe it, it is important to make it as clear as possible that Trump and his goals are weak and ineffective. Feeling and emotion are what drive the administration and its hardcore supporters, and defying those emotions are the best way of fighting this movement.
+7
Options
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
"The current measures are not an acceptable long-term solution to whatever threat they are trying to mitigate. Even in the short term it is difficult to understand their effectiveness. And the commercial distortions they create are severe. We call on governments to work with the industry to find a way to keep flying secure without separating passengers from their personal electronics," said Alexandre de Juniac, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
Yep, my job is tangentially related to the airline industry and we got a very testy company wide email about the policy. It pretty much boiled down to, "This policy is dumb as balls but for the time being we can't use these airlines or those airports because as you know, company policy mandates you keep control of your company laptop at all times or have it locked securely away."
Fuck Trumps shitty ass wall, that a bunch of racist fuckers want. Fuck giving them that win and fuck wasting tax payer money on it. I would very much like the crumpling infrastructure in this country to be addressed ASAP because that actually critical to the US economy, while Trump's shitty racist policies towards immigration are actively harmful. All the resources that fucking wall would need would be better spent on infrastructure projects.
Keep in mind that Trump voters will see a wall as a victory. Any defects or shortcomings of the wall is just going to be blamed on the Democrats anyway.
Do not let them have that victory. Blocking funding for the wall gives Trump 0 for 2 - he'll have whiffed on both healthcare and The Wall. Him very obviously failing to pull through on his big campaign promises will depress turnout with his base for 2020.
And Lock Her Up, which he has shown no interest in taking any action for besides attempts to throw suspicion off his own scandals
I'm honestly worried that if the scandals keep getting traction he might make a move on this front.
How? Congress spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars trying to pin something on her and couldn't find a thing. If Trump et al try to make something up a judge will overturn it, the same way they have the Muslim ban.
And Lock Her Up, which he has shown no interest in taking any action for besides attempts to throw suspicion off his own scandals
I'm honestly worried that if the scandals keep getting traction he might make a move on this front.
How? Congress spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars trying to pin something on her and couldn't find a thing. If Trump et al try to make something up a judge will overturn it, the same way they have the Muslim ban.
Besides, he'd have to find a prosecutor willing to throw their career away on it.
Posts
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
DACA is really strict about DUIs. persons applying for DACA are ineligible if they have been convicted of a "significant misdemeanor", and unfortunately, DUIs are defined as "significant" under the DACA regs.
that said, the requirement is that it has to be a conviction. if there was a diversion, that by definition means no conviction.
DACA also has a general "public safety" ground, meaning that if someone is deemed a risk to public safety, they can be denied DACA. ICE may try to get this person on that ground.
i would hope he gets to defend himself in immigration court, because he likely has an argument. DACA itself is...not strong as a defense. i'd like to think that Obama included the "significant misdemeanor" restrictions because if he really pushed on DACA, some of the States would sue the administration like they did with the DACA expansion for parents.
no way to know now.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
In my state, you plead guilty up front and are not sentenced. You enter the diversion program. If, at the end of one year, you have completed all the required treatment and followed the rules, the charge will be dismissed and there will be no conviction.
If you break the rules, fail to complete treatment, or don't pay off your fines in time, then you will proceed to a hearing where the diversion is revoked and you are sentenced at that point, having already admitted guilt.
If he completes his diversion. in December 2017 he will have no conviction at all.
Thanks for this information.
Sounds to me like hunting down folks who are four months into their diversion process, and are NOT fully convicted, is not supported by that DACA rule.
There is no way that I can tell, from what I've read, that this person would be deemed a risk to public safety.
ICE under Obama would have agreed with the bold part and would've targeted someone else.
ICE under Trump? yeah, they're pretty much going after anyone and everyone now.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
A flimsy fig leaf that the ACLU is going to keep attacking, I'm sure.
Lawyer says man was shot by ICE agent 'without cause'
Other local sources add more details:
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/1-Shot-in-Belmont-CraginNeighborhood--on-NW-Side-Police-417181913.html
Supposedly they were there for one of his sons? Trying to find a reputable source on that part.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
That might be all that the DoJ can do, but there's a lot of other funds that sound like they might be held hostage. That's not even getting into what they'll do in the event of a natural disaster.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-sanctuarycities-idUSKBN1592V9
And is this particular sub-topic a fit for the Muslim Ban, Cabinet, or Congress threads?
Congress may stiff Trump on wall funding
I would laugh real hard if this happens.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Withholding funds to punish sanctuary cities is on topic for this immigration policy thread.
He was released on bond within 24 hours (note this is not normal, usually people are held)
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2017/03/portland_dreamer_to_be_release.html
It's exactly what Democrats should do to the continuing resolutions and debt-ceiling hikes going forward: no money for the wall.
hell they're not only just held, they're usually transferred to another of the private-contract prisons, often in another state.
i remember this being a terrible problem in San Diego. ICE would detain someone there, hold them in a lockup either in downtown San Diego or San Ysidro, and then transfer them east to Arizona or other random locations. families are often left never knowing where their relatives are being held.
edit: because i forgot how to direction for a second.
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
What. The. Fuck.
Unclear this would be strategically smart. Would just allow Republicans to continuing to pin illegal immigration problems on Democratic intransigence.
What's the disadvantage to just blaming Democrats whether or not they cooperate?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Better than a wall.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
They're going to do that regardless of how the Dems vote. Might as well block some shitty policy along the way.
Democratic intransigence is why the AHCA failed, why the Muslim ban was struck down again, and why Trump's cereal tasted bad this morning. It literally matters not what they actually do, Trump will continue to blame them for anything and everything. That should not be the motivating factor on whether or not the Dems move to block funding for the wall.
Not all intransigence is the same. Democrats aren't trying to get TRUMP to vote for them. At some point, you have to let the idiots demonstrate that their idiot ideas are idiotic, or you're going to be fighting this spectre of a wall for the next 50 years, and honestly, if it's between the idiotic idea to build a wall or the idiotic idea to see if maybe trickle-down economics works this time, I'd rather give them the wall. The wall's not going to directly harm people in the way the AHCA might, and it's going to last as an enduring multibillion dollars boondoggle of incompetence. Democrats should then use the stupid wall for their own photo-ops for the next 2 election cycles, find where it ends and take pictures of that, find gaps in the wall and have crews film them walking back and forth across the border, highlighting that illegal immigration numbers haven't changed, engage in ocean crossing stunts, etc.. Turn it into the new Bridge to Nowhere and just hammer the Republicans over the head with it over and over again.
The first sentences are pretty damning:
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
"We're going to let this shitty, expensive, racist policy happen so we can use it for a campaign photo-op" is both terrible politics and terrible governance.
Not worth.
1. If you refuse to let your enemy make mistakes, then you're just helping them.
2. Democrats are not currently governing.
Using your rhetoric from earlier: Trump is going to implement huge, massive budget cuts to all the programs Democrats support anyways. Also, $22B out of a $3.8T US federal budget is a pindrop. Half a percent (and a multi-year infrastructure project versus annual budget). In fact, I'd suggest letting Trump and Republicans say they can build it for $15B or whatever, and then hang the other $8B on them too. "They can't even build a fucking wall on budget!" Put up a token fight in Congress to drain the Republicans' political capital and force them to commit publicly to the wall and its importance, then turn and work out a compromise to give them the wall in exchange for something, like continued funding for Planned Parenthood or something, and then turn all those public statements about how important the wall is into ads four years from now. "This wall was their #1 priority. And now, it's over budget, over time, and doesn't even work."
The only worthwhile spend MIGHT be offering to pay the amount Trump said the wall would cost during the campaign and not a penny more. So like , $10000 per mile, with an insistence that construction start in the most challenging region to build a wall in. The money will come in 4 yearly payments with the first payment being enough for 100 miles of wall. Then subsequent payments will ramp the amount of miles paid for when the Trump administration shows the capacity to get the job done at the rate they described.
Then when they get like, 1/2 a mile of crumbling mess built in 4 years, it would be a good investment in PR.
I don't want us to get off topic into general congressional strategy here, suffice it to say that I totally disagree one, that your assertion follows from my previous post and two, that the strategy you lay out will be effective in any way.
You can miss me with that Sun Tzu bullshit. These 'mistakes' have real, human consequences for real people and to abandon them so you can maybe score political points later is a really good way to lose your base and lose elections.
The left should articulate clear, definable principles and do everything they can to defend them instead of getting caught up in this 12th dimensional chess nonsense.
And pray tell, what are these horrible consequences this wall is going to have for people/American voters?
Also, if you want to talk about clear, definable principles that the Left should articulate, maybe not getting bogged down in procedural budgetary shenanigans and causing a government shutdown over the stupid wall is one. You can't concurrently argue that the Left should be principled and articulate and worthy of governing while suggesting that they engage in the traditional chicken shenanigans over the debt ceiling. If you're going to play 12 dimensional chess anyways, you should at least admit you're playing it.
Normalizing backwards, useless anti-immigration policy?
Giving Trump a win for no reason thus stabilizing his out of control administration?
Do not let them have that victory. Blocking funding for the wall gives Trump 0 for 2 - he'll have whiffed on both healthcare and The Wall. Him very obviously failing to pull through on his big campaign promises will depress turnout with his base for 2020.
You can't give someone a pirate ship in one game, and then take it back in the next game. It's rude.
If you want a clear, definable principle "Trump's immigration policy is un-American, racist, wasteful, and counter-productive and we will do everything within our power to stop it" is pretty decent. Might need a little tightening up to fit on a bumper sticker.
Yep, my job is tangentially related to the airline industry and we got a very testy company wide email about the policy. It pretty much boiled down to, "This policy is dumb as balls but for the time being we can't use these airlines or those airports because as you know, company policy mandates you keep control of your company laptop at all times or have it locked securely away."
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Don't forget the twice-failed Muslim ban!
Steam: adamjnet
I'm honestly worried that if the scandals keep getting traction he might make a move on this front.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
How? Congress spent thousands of hours and millions of dollars trying to pin something on her and couldn't find a thing. If Trump et al try to make something up a judge will overturn it, the same way they have the Muslim ban.
Besides, he'd have to find a prosecutor willing to throw their career away on it.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy