Yeah, I think the House is the biggest question here. First we have to get Ryan to let them have a vote on it. I think if he allows a vote, anything out of the Senate will pass. It'll probably get all the democrats that are present and enough republicans. Now if it gets 2/3 or more in each chamber, no question that it passes eventually. I want to say that we probably have those numbers in both chambers, but I've learned to never be surprised by how vile the GOP ends up being.
A clean DACA likely passes both houses fairly easily in an open vote. It's just that leadership will never allow that to happen.
The primary problem has always been the House. Ryan will probably just never let it come up to vote no matter what because there's a good chance it would destroy his speakership. Immigration is the most contentious issue for his caucus and it is, from what I can read on articles and such, really bad. Turns out the "Freedom" caucus elected in reaction to Obama weren't fiscal hawks but just huge fucking racists. Who would have guessed?
But that's impossible, because (as I recall quite clearly) we ended racism forever by electing perhaps the most inoffensive and charismatic black man alive (with the possible exception of pre-scandal Bill Cosby) to clean up the mess left by a disastrous administration. We were all rather pleased with ourselves, that with one bold stroke we'd eradicated, or at least driven forever from the halls of power and civilized public discourse, such backward thinking - driven it into the shadows, small isolated pockets, from which it would surely never... um...
I'm sorry, what's that? You'll have to speak up, I can't hear over my smug white liberalism.
Yeah, I think the House is the biggest question here. First we have to get Ryan to let them have a vote on it. I think if he allows a vote, anything out of the Senate will pass. It'll probably get all the democrats that are present and enough republicans. Now if it gets 2/3 or more in each chamber, no question that it passes eventually. I want to say that we probably have those numbers in both chambers, but I've learned to never be surprised by how vile the GOP ends up being.
A clean DACA likely passes both houses fairly easily in an open vote. It's just that leadership will never allow that to happen.
The primary problem has always been the House. Ryan will probably just never let it come up to vote no matter what because there's a good chance it would destroy his speakership. Immigration is the most contentious issue for his caucus and it is, from what I can read on articles and such, really bad. Turns out the "Freedom" caucus elected in reaction to Obama weren't fiscal hawks but just huge fucking racists. Who would have guessed?
But that's impossible, because (as I recall quite clearly) we ended racism forever by electing perhaps the most inoffensive and charismatic black man alive (with the possible exception of pre-scandal Bill Cosby) to clean up the mess left by a disastrous administration. We were all rather pleased with ourselves, that with one bold stroke we'd eradicated, or at least driven forever from the halls of power and civilized public discourse, such backward thinking - driven it into the shadows, small isolated pockets, from which it would surely never... um...
I'm sorry, what's that? You'll have to speak up, I can't hear over my smug white liberalism.
Racism would have ended forever, except Obama was the most divisive President ever, since he incited a lot of the racism that was present during his term.
By that I mean he made a lot of people think racist thoughts, so it's really Obama's fault that they're forced to act on said thoughts.
I'd say it's an open question still if Ryan brings this up for a vote or not. Hell, it might be an open question if he is even allowed to let it die. It really depends on how beholden to shit fucker caucus he is.
We have a very vocal group of racist assholes in the House and they certainly could likely cause Ryan his position. They have enough votes that if they try to oust him, they can at least get the ball rolling. The democrats obviously have no reason to support him and plenty of reasons to let his leadership collapse.
We also have a very scummy group that realizes their party can't survive on as the wealthy white asshole party. Probably could survive as the wealthy multi-ethnic asshole party. Hell, they have a few minority members that aren't on board with the racism, which make sit really weird they stick around, probably trying to shift the party into a ton that would let it live, since they wouldn't cut it in the democratic party and our system makes it rather hard to start a new party. This is the group that could also fuck Ryan over and probably has enough ground work in that, if they really wanted to they could get a DACA bill through. Pretty much oust Ryan, cut a deal with the democrats to put one of their own in to at least get DACA through and anything else they agree with the democrats on. Yeah, it'll probably drive out a decent chunk of racist assholes, but we might be hitting the point, where this group sees that as a plus. Question is, if Ryan does try to bury a decent Senate bill on DACA, will they finally get the spine to pull the trigger.
We have a very vocal group of racist assholes in the House and they certainly could likely cause Ryan his position. They have enough votes that if they try to oust him, they can at least get the ball rolling. The democrats obviously have no reason to support him and plenty of reasons to let his leadership collapse.
I disagree on this. While a collapse of Ryan as leadership would stop the Republican agenda (and be immensely satisfying for some, me included), it would mean that nothing gets done, including the things Democrats want to see done too.
I'm of the opinion that Democrats should offer to vote for Ryan if there is a challenge, on the condition that DACA and the removal of the debt ceiling (might as well get that stupidity gone too) are immediately legislated. Don't load it up with a wishlist, and you can get back to some degree of "normal". For some value of normalcy.
Any dem rep that would even consider voting for a republican speaker would be primaried faster than Cantor or the like.
Which seems like true "Democrats eat their own" mentality that makes what should be a slam dunk election way closer than it aught to be.
It's simple, Democrats can't gain the speakership before Jan 2019. The only choice for a Speakership is a Republican. And if you don't think you can get a worse Speaker than Ryan, you're not looking hard enough.
So if they can wrangle two significant concessions out of a spineless twerp like Ryan, in exchange for keeping a moderate crazy (instead of a batshit crazy) in charge, who you kind of have by the short hairs, I don't see how the Democrats don't market that as a win, and the promotion of "bipartisanship" (when it's completely partisan).
With a budget and debt ceiling raise in place, I'm not sure a Republican Speaker who can't get shit done is a huge issue for Dems anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting some issue that still needs handling.
With a budget and debt ceiling raise in place, I'm not sure a Republican Speaker who can't get shit done is a huge issue for Dems anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting some issue that still needs handling.
With a budget and debt ceiling raise in place, I'm not sure a Republican Speaker who can't get shit done is a huge issue for Dems anymore. But maybe I'm forgetting some issue that still needs handling.
Like...the main topic of the thread?
Well, no. Because the key presumption of this line of thinking is that Ryan has already gotten his ass tossed out of the Speakership over the immigration vote in the first place. Probably the only real scenario where Ryan is no longer speaker is the scenario where a DACA fix has already passed the House because bringing that up for a vote is what would end it. If DACA is still something that needs to be dealt with then Ryan is still Speaker so the hypothetical scenario doesn't exist.
The basic point here being "But bringing up a DACA vote might cost Ryan his Speakership" should be a huge "Who cares?" for Democrats as far as I can determine.
Senators To Introduce Bill Mirroring President's Immigration Framework
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A group of U.S. Senators tomorrow will introduce a common-sense proposal aimed at providing legal certainty for undocumented children brought to the United States by their parents and preventing others from falling into the same legal limbo in the future. Their proposal, which mirrors the White House framework announced by President Trump, provides a generous opportunity for approximately 1.8 million DACA or DACA-eligible immigrants to earn citizenship while strengthening our nation’s border security and enforcement measures to reduce illegal immigration.
The Secure and Succeed Act, sponsored by Senators Perdue, Grassley, Cornyn, Tillis, Lankford, Cotton and Ernst, appropriates $25 billion for real border security such as physical and virtual fencing, radar and other technologies. It also provides for additional personnel for border control and ends key loopholes in current law that allow dangerous criminals to enter our country. The legislation prospectively limits family-based immigration to the nuclear family and reallocates the Diversity Visa lottery. Their proposal generously grandfathers all pending family-based visa applications in order to reward those who chose to follow the law and immigrate legally. The allotment for the Diversity Visa lottery will be reallocated to reduce this backlog and the employment-based visa backlog.
Like, the Dems signed for a discussion, but not the terms of that discussion. So the GOP can simply say: "We put our price to keep DACA a while ago, take it or leave it".
The freaking comprehensive immigration deal that passed the senate but was killed off without a vote in the House had 30 billion for border security. How is 25 billion for much less in return any sort of decent deal?
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The talk going on about "chain migration" / extended families is bogus; immigrants tend to only bring their immediate family to begin with.
Trump's announced policy wasn't going anywhere with dems, so neither is this bill. Halting legal immigration is not considered a remotely fair trade for dreamers.
The talk going on about "chain migration" / extended families is bogus; immigrants tend to only bring their immediate family to begin with.
Well that works out then, the racists can think they’ve won something when they actually haven’t.
Eh, it's still a shitty thing to legislate because there's always outliers. Plus, letting them pass legislation (even if it effectively does nothing) will embolden the base. And it still normalizes hate.
The point is more that they invented a bullshit talking point to "legitimize" their hate-driven agenda.
+5
Options
MeeqeLord of the pants most fancySomeplace amazingRegistered Userregular
Here's the sad thing: Pretty much everybody would be on board with the trade of updating law enforcement tools with the aim of preventing hard drugs from entering the US in exchange for making sure children who grew up in America get to stay in America. Like, there shouldn't even have to be a fight on either of these issues, but Trump and the GOP's overwhelming racism means that you can't trust a deal from them, mainly because ICE's prejudice means that they can't tell the difference between decent humans who are working to make our country better who should be allowed to and encouraged to stay and criminals who should be who in jail, not the nation's pot smokers. Who are also massively and disproportionately minorities themselves who are also the target of racist law enforcement policies. If right-wing racism didn't exist, none of these other problems would as well, they're almost all 100% the consequence of creating underclasses on the basis of race.
Senators To Introduce Bill Mirroring President's Immigration Framework
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A group of U.S. Senators tomorrow will introduce a common-sense proposal aimed at providing legal certainty for undocumented children brought to the United States by their parents and preventing others from falling into the same legal limbo in the future. Their proposal, which mirrors the White House framework announced by President Trump, provides a generous opportunity for approximately 1.8 million DACA or DACA-eligible immigrants to earn citizenship while strengthening our nation’s border security and enforcement measures to reduce illegal immigration.
The Secure and Succeed Act, sponsored by Senators Perdue, Grassley, Cornyn, Tillis, Lankford, Cotton and Ernst, appropriates $25 billion for real border security such as physical and virtual fencing, radar and other technologies. It also provides for additional personnel for border control and ends key loopholes in current law that allow dangerous criminals to enter our country. The legislation prospectively limits family-based immigration to the nuclear family and reallocates the Diversity Visa lottery. Their proposal generously grandfathers all pending family-based visa applications in order to reward those who chose to follow the law and immigrate legally. The allotment for the Diversity Visa lottery will be reallocated to reduce this backlog and the employment-based visa backlog.
Like, the Dems signed for a discussion, but not the terms of that discussion. So the GOP can simply say: "We put our price to keep DACA a while ago, take it or leave it".
This is not a good picture of what is going on as far as I know.
This is not the bill being introduced by McConnell, this is a potential amendment to that bill that the most racist wing of the Senate GOP (you can tell cause Cotton is there) are throwing on to the table as their bid.
Basically, part of the agreement with McConnell was to start debate on immigration with a "clean" bill. Or at least, a relatively clean one. This was a give to Dems because his original plan was gonna be to introduce Cotton's bill instead. Which would basically be something that looks like the one your link is talking about. Only worse I think.
Anyway, the bill that gets introduced is important because that becomes the base-line that you then amend to get what you want. The worse the base bill is, the more votes Dems have to go through (all while securing GOP help) to strip the white supremacist shit out of there. The less of those votes you have to do, the better.
So McConnell has said he's going to introduce some bill or other that, as far as I've been able to tell from reading, is pretty clean. Then people can do whatever the fuck they want. That includes what these nazi fucks are doing, which is to introduce a horrible bit of white supremacy as their version of what a deal should look like. But afaik nothing obligates the Democrats to consider it and they can work on their own version of what they want to pass with other Republicans willing to vote on a probably-best-you-can-get DACA fix/Border Security trade bill.
The big thing McConnell seems to be doing to fuck with the process, last I read, is basically throwing open the debate to the topic of immigration in general instead of just DACA. One assumes to try and bog down the whole process in random Senators bringing up their own pet immigration issue and wasting time needed to get a DACA fix in place.
And of course, should anything happen this all still has to make it to the floor of the House. Somehow.
Well we'll find out today what McConnell is going to go with.
I'm kind of wondering if Ryan struck a nerve. First there was all the shit where his group was pretty setting things up so that the Senate GOP got shit from the base, when they couldn't pass their incompetence off as being the democrats fault. Now Ryan seems to have forgotten that Trump doesn't get to decide what Congress sends to his desk or not. The rat fucker is said he won't bring anything up for a vote, if it doesn't have Trump's approval. I don't see this going over well with McConnell, since that creates the incorrect impression that the Executive branch has higher standing, rather than equal standing, to the Legislative branch. Passing the most bare bones immigration system that defines dreamers, gives them legal status, ends the lottery system and proves reasonable border security funding, that isn't Trump's dumb fucking wall. Is a great way to shit on Ryan because it punts the issue to the House and forces Ryan to have to make a decision where some group is going to be made beyond belief (also worth noting Ryan is already get flak for the spending bill).
After so many years since he ended it last September and if Republicans wanted to fix it nothing has been stopping them since, and there will never be another opportunity other than every single day after the deadline or before because nothing is stopping you from passing the same EO or Republicans from voting on it in Congress other than yourselves.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday turned up the heat on Democrats seeking protections for young “Dreamer” immigrants as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell embraced President Donald Trump’s demands for broad changes to the country’s immigration policies.
In announcing his support for legislation that would help immigrants who were brought illegally to the United States as children, McConnell also threw his weight behind building a U.S.-Mexico border wall and sharply curtailing visas for the parents and siblings of immigrants living in the United States legally.
“This proposal has my support and during this week of fair debate I believe it deserves support of every senator who’s ready to move beyond making points and actually making a law,” McConnell, a Republican, said in a speech on the Senate floor.
Even some Republicans, however, have expressed skepticism that such broad, fundamental changes in U.S. immigration law can pass the Senate by the Thursday deadline that No. 2 Republican Senator John Cornyn urged late on Monday.
Also on Monday, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who is leading the charge for Dreamers, told reporters that he thought early Senate votes on immigration legislation would begin with “expansive” measures that will fail to win the 60 votes needed to clear procedural hurdles.
Then, Durbin said, senators will be forced to move “toward the center with a moderate approach.”
But at least for now, Republicans were holding a tough line. Republican Senator Tom Cotton, interviewed on Fox News, said Trump’s immigration plan “is not an opening bid for negotiations. It’s a best and final offer.”
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
A second federal judge has issued an injunction barring the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program while litigation plays out in courts.
U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in a court order Tuesday in New York that the administration could not rescind the Obama-era program "pending a decision on the merits of these cases."
"Defendants thus must continue processing both initial DACA applications and DACA renewal requests under the same terms and conditions that applied before September 5, 2017, subject to the limitations described below," he wrote.
A second federal judge has issued an injunction barring the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program while litigation plays out in courts.
U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in a court order Tuesday in New York that the administration could not rescind the Obama-era program "pending a decision on the merits of these cases."
"Defendants thus must continue processing both initial DACA applications and DACA renewal requests under the same terms and conditions that applied before September 5, 2017, subject to the limitations described below," he wrote.
Do these rulings indefinitely delay whatever happens on the March date?
A second federal judge has issued an injunction barring the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program while litigation plays out in courts.
U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in a court order Tuesday in New York that the administration could not rescind the Obama-era program "pending a decision on the merits of these cases."
"Defendants thus must continue processing both initial DACA applications and DACA renewal requests under the same terms and conditions that applied before September 5, 2017, subject to the limitations described below," he wrote.
Do these rulings indefinitely delay whatever happens on the March date?
(Which I am still unclear on)
It won't delay the immediate targeting for deportation of DACA recipients whose coverage lapsed and they weren't/aren't yet able to renew by ICE/racists.
They have keep processing renewals and initial applications (would that be first time ones) until a higher courts dies with them. If this goes up to the Supreme Court and it rules against the administration, I believe that would force them to have to actually go through a process to end DACA. Rather than Trump's bullshit of claiming he knows it's illegal and ending it. Big thing is if it gets upheld by SCOTUS, Trump loses the fig leaf of ending it because of legal reasons and it makes it far easier for the charges of him being a racist fucker to stick.
As for the bill. I guess McConnell decided to be a fucking idiot and make it easier for the democrats to campaign against them this fall. Deporting dreamers is not a popular proposition, it might have shallow support, but ending it will likely prove problematic for the GOP, given that Trump is already unpopular and likely viewed as a racist piece of shit.
Basically these court rulings mean they don’t have an excuse on DACA anymore.
They can no longer say “We have to end the DACA EO because it was illegal”
Because the EO was not illegal.
They can still end it, but they have to do it for another reason.
Which would be inconvenient since they’ve spent all the time between then and now talking about how they wish they could save the Dreamers, they want to save them, but there’s nothing they can do if congress can’t cut a deal.
What If You Could Get Your Own Immigrant?
No, really: a new kind of visa would let individual Americans—instead of corporations—reap the economic benefits of migration.
Here’s how the program would work: Imagine a woman named Mary Turner, who lives in Wheeling, West Virginia. She was recently laid off from a chicken-processing plant and makes ends meet by walking and taking care of her neighbors’ pets. Mary could expand her little business by hiring some workers, but no one in the area would accept a wage she can afford. Mary goes online—to a new kind of international gig economy website, a Fiverr for immigrants—and applies to sponsor a migrant. She enters information about what she needs: someone with rudimentary English skills, no criminal record and an affection for animals. She offers a room in her basement, meals and $5 an hour. (Sponsors under this program would be exempt from paying minimum wage.) The website offers Mary some matches—people living in foreign countries who would like to spend some time in the United States and earn some money. After some back and forth, Mary interviews a woman named Sofia who lives in Paraguay.
What If You Could Get Your Own Immigrant?
No, really: a new kind of visa would let individual Americans—instead of corporations—reap the economic benefits of migration.
Here’s how the program would work: Imagine a woman named Mary Turner, who lives in Wheeling, West Virginia. She was recently laid off from a chicken-processing plant and makes ends meet by walking and taking care of her neighbors’ pets. Mary could expand her little business by hiring some workers, but no one in the area would accept a wage she can afford. Mary goes online—to a new kind of international gig economy website, a Fiverr for immigrants—and applies to sponsor a migrant. She enters information about what she needs: someone with rudimentary English skills, no criminal record and an affection for animals. She offers a room in her basement, meals and $5 an hour. (Sponsors under this program would be exempt from paying minimum wage.) The website offers Mary some matches—people living in foreign countries who would like to spend some time in the United States and earn some money. After some back and forth, Mary interviews a woman named Sofia who lives in Paraguay.
I distinctly remember people in California and NYC being horrified when foreign diplomats were on occasion found to have de facto slave maids in their swanky homes and considering the practice barbaric but hey if there isn’t one more shitty thing we can appropriate into the land of the free and the home of the brave why not bring in domestic indentured servitude
Posts
But that's impossible, because (as I recall quite clearly) we ended racism forever by electing perhaps the most inoffensive and charismatic black man alive (with the possible exception of pre-scandal Bill Cosby) to clean up the mess left by a disastrous administration. We were all rather pleased with ourselves, that with one bold stroke we'd eradicated, or at least driven forever from the halls of power and civilized public discourse, such backward thinking - driven it into the shadows, small isolated pockets, from which it would surely never... um...
I'm sorry, what's that? You'll have to speak up, I can't hear over my smug white liberalism.
Racism would have ended forever, except Obama was the most divisive President ever, since he incited a lot of the racism that was present during his term.
By that I mean he made a lot of people think racist thoughts, so it's really Obama's fault that they're forced to act on said thoughts.
We have a very vocal group of racist assholes in the House and they certainly could likely cause Ryan his position. They have enough votes that if they try to oust him, they can at least get the ball rolling. The democrats obviously have no reason to support him and plenty of reasons to let his leadership collapse.
We also have a very scummy group that realizes their party can't survive on as the wealthy white asshole party. Probably could survive as the wealthy multi-ethnic asshole party. Hell, they have a few minority members that aren't on board with the racism, which make sit really weird they stick around, probably trying to shift the party into a ton that would let it live, since they wouldn't cut it in the democratic party and our system makes it rather hard to start a new party. This is the group that could also fuck Ryan over and probably has enough ground work in that, if they really wanted to they could get a DACA bill through. Pretty much oust Ryan, cut a deal with the democrats to put one of their own in to at least get DACA through and anything else they agree with the democrats on. Yeah, it'll probably drive out a decent chunk of racist assholes, but we might be hitting the point, where this group sees that as a plus. Question is, if Ryan does try to bury a decent Senate bill on DACA, will they finally get the spine to pull the trigger.
I'm of the opinion that Democrats should offer to vote for Ryan if there is a challenge, on the condition that DACA and the removal of the debt ceiling (might as well get that stupidity gone too) are immediately legislated. Don't load it up with a wishlist, and you can get back to some degree of "normal". For some value of normalcy.
It's simple, Democrats can't gain the speakership before Jan 2019. The only choice for a Speakership is a Republican. And if you don't think you can get a worse Speaker than Ryan, you're not looking hard enough.
So if they can wrangle two significant concessions out of a spineless twerp like Ryan, in exchange for keeping a moderate crazy (instead of a batshit crazy) in charge, who you kind of have by the short hairs, I don't see how the Democrats don't market that as a win, and the promotion of "bipartisanship" (when it's completely partisan).
Like...the main topic of the thread?
Well, no. Because the key presumption of this line of thinking is that Ryan has already gotten his ass tossed out of the Speakership over the immigration vote in the first place. Probably the only real scenario where Ryan is no longer speaker is the scenario where a DACA fix has already passed the House because bringing that up for a vote is what would end it. If DACA is still something that needs to be dealt with then Ryan is still Speaker so the hypothetical scenario doesn't exist.
The basic point here being "But bringing up a DACA vote might cost Ryan his Speakership" should be a huge "Who cares?" for Democrats as far as I can determine.
Like, the Dems signed for a discussion, but not the terms of that discussion. So the GOP can simply say: "We put our price to keep DACA a while ago, take it or leave it".
Dems should run with calling it the SS Act and scream about facism as much as they can.
couldn't afford a thesaurus?
Also $25 billion for wall and non-wall shit is ridiculous, but sure, we’ll pay the blood money if we have to.
Well that works out then, the racists can think they’ve won something when they actually haven’t.
Okay, but then what about when their immediate family bring in THEIR immediate family?! :rotate:
The point is more that they invented a bullshit talking point to "legitimize" their hate-driven agenda.
This is not a good picture of what is going on as far as I know.
This is not the bill being introduced by McConnell, this is a potential amendment to that bill that the most racist wing of the Senate GOP (you can tell cause Cotton is there) are throwing on to the table as their bid.
Basically, part of the agreement with McConnell was to start debate on immigration with a "clean" bill. Or at least, a relatively clean one. This was a give to Dems because his original plan was gonna be to introduce Cotton's bill instead. Which would basically be something that looks like the one your link is talking about. Only worse I think.
Anyway, the bill that gets introduced is important because that becomes the base-line that you then amend to get what you want. The worse the base bill is, the more votes Dems have to go through (all while securing GOP help) to strip the white supremacist shit out of there. The less of those votes you have to do, the better.
So McConnell has said he's going to introduce some bill or other that, as far as I've been able to tell from reading, is pretty clean. Then people can do whatever the fuck they want. That includes what these nazi fucks are doing, which is to introduce a horrible bit of white supremacy as their version of what a deal should look like. But afaik nothing obligates the Democrats to consider it and they can work on their own version of what they want to pass with other Republicans willing to vote on a probably-best-you-can-get DACA fix/Border Security trade bill.
The big thing McConnell seems to be doing to fuck with the process, last I read, is basically throwing open the debate to the topic of immigration in general instead of just DACA. One assumes to try and bog down the whole process in random Senators bringing up their own pet immigration issue and wasting time needed to get a DACA fix in place.
And of course, should anything happen this all still has to make it to the floor of the House. Somehow.
And it's still a proposed amendment to the bill McConnell is supposed to be introducing, not the baseline. Which is the whole point, as I said above.
I'm kind of wondering if Ryan struck a nerve. First there was all the shit where his group was pretty setting things up so that the Senate GOP got shit from the base, when they couldn't pass their incompetence off as being the democrats fault. Now Ryan seems to have forgotten that Trump doesn't get to decide what Congress sends to his desk or not. The rat fucker is said he won't bring anything up for a vote, if it doesn't have Trump's approval. I don't see this going over well with McConnell, since that creates the incorrect impression that the Executive branch has higher standing, rather than equal standing, to the Legislative branch. Passing the most bare bones immigration system that defines dreamers, gives them legal status, ends the lottery system and proves reasonable border security funding, that isn't Trump's dumb fucking wall. Is a great way to shit on Ryan because it punts the issue to the House and forces Ryan to have to make a decision where some group is going to be made beyond belief (also worth noting Ryan is already get flak for the spending bill).
But totally the Democrats fault.
Last chance? Never? Um. That sounds kind of foreboding. Like, we're kicking all those people out foreboding.
Sort of curious what the SC is going to think of the court case appeal this week. If they deny the appeal... I'm not sure how that affects anything.
Pretty much.
Also, here's my shocked face, from Reuters:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/373680-second-judge-issues-injunction-barring-trump-administration-from
Do these rulings indefinitely delay whatever happens on the March date?
(Which I am still unclear on)
It won't delay the immediate targeting for deportation of DACA recipients whose coverage lapsed and they weren't/aren't yet able to renew by ICE/racists.
As for the bill. I guess McConnell decided to be a fucking idiot and make it easier for the democrats to campaign against them this fall. Deporting dreamers is not a popular proposition, it might have shallow support, but ending it will likely prove problematic for the GOP, given that Trump is already unpopular and likely viewed as a racist piece of shit.
They can no longer say “We have to end the DACA EO because it was illegal”
Because the EO was not illegal.
They can still end it, but they have to do it for another reason.
Which would be inconvenient since they’ve spent all the time between then and now talking about how they wish they could save the Dreamers, they want to save them, but there’s nothing they can do if congress can’t cut a deal.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/13/immigration-visas-economics-216968
I distinctly remember people in California and NYC being horrified when foreign diplomats were on occasion found to have de facto slave maids in their swanky homes and considering the practice barbaric but hey if there isn’t one more shitty thing we can appropriate into the land of the free and the home of the brave why not bring in domestic indentured servitude
NNID: Hakkekage