Trump’s new immigration plan: Similar to Obama’s plan, but “with a lot more energy”



“The first thing we’re going to do if and when I win,” he assures Bill O’Reilly, “is we’re going to get rid of all of the bad ones.” That’s Obama’s and Hillary’s position too: Hardcore criminals have to go, all other illegals get a pass. But what about the other ones, O’Reilly presses him. Do they go to a detention center at least? They’re not free to move around the country, are they? Trump: “Bill, you’re the first one to mention ‘detention center.’ You don’t have to put them in a detention center. … I’m not going to put them in a detention center. No.”

Serious question: Is the wall the only meaningful difference left between Trump’s and Clinton’s immigration policies? Hillary would do more, presumably, to formally legalize illegals via executive action (assuming she can get the Supreme Court to uphold her order), but Trump distinguishing between criminals and non-criminals implies that he won’t do much to remove the latter and would be open to a deal with Congress on legalization. Mass deportation, the flashy showpiece of his immigration views in a thousand interviews, is seemingly out the window. Which leaves him, as far as I can tell, not just in line with Obama but in line with the current position of a man he once described as “Senator Marco ‘amnesty’ Rubio.” Rubio, post-Gang of Eight, wants the border secured first and then, once illegal immigration has declined, a path to citizenship for illegals who are here. Would Trump rule that out at least? Legalization, but no citizenship? Citizenship is a fait accompli once legalization is granted but it’d be nice to know that there’s still some slight difference between him and the guy who was smashed in the primaries for his immigration heresies.

“The first thing we’re going to do if and when I win is we’re going to get rid of all of the bad ones,” Trump said. “We’ve got gang members, we have killers, we have a lot of bad people that have to get out of this country. We’re going to get them out, and the police know who they are. They’re known by law enforcement who they are. We don’t do anything. They go around killing people and hurting people, and they’re going to be out of this country so fast your head will spin. We have existing laws that allow you to do that.”…

“As far as everybody else, we’re going to go through the process,” Trump said. “What people don’t know is that Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country. Bush, the same thing. Lots of people were brought out of the country with the existing laws. Well, I’m going to do the same thing.”…

O’Reilly said that he suggested detention centers because Trump had previously likened his plans to mass deportations carried out during the 1950s under President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

“I said that it’s something that has been done in a very strong manner,” Trump said, explaining why he had originally referenced the historic deportations. “I don’t agree with that. I’m not talking about detention centers. I have very, very good relationships with a lot of people, a lot of Hispanic people. We’re talking about it.”

He’s now sunk to the point where’s citing Barack Obama and George Bush as models of immigration enforcement. It’s hard to argue with Greg Sargent’s takeaways on how this new position effectively eviscerates Trump’s immigration cred. On the one hand, Trump is undermining his fans’ complaint about “open borders,” i.e. foreigners entering the U.S. with impunity. If Obama’s and Bush’s deportation policies are effective enough that they should be emulated and built upon then obviously enforcement is happening. In Trump’s own words: “Obama got tremendous numbers of people out of the country.” The borders need to be tightened but clearly they’re not “open” in the sense of Obama accepting all comers. Beyond that, says Sargent, Trump is admitting that Obama’s enforcement priorities are correct: Deport the criminals, worry less about everyone else.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


“Lots of people were brought out of the country with the existing laws. Well, I’m going to do the same thing.”…

What Trump left unsaid HERE (in this instance of talking with O’Reilly) is something he has said elsewhere often.

Enforcing laws that Obama ignores and Hillary would ignore will cause many, if not most illegals to SELF-DEPORT.

For instance, we have laws under Obama UNENFORCED that prohibit employers from hiring illegals.
We have laws, under Obama UNENFORCED, prohibiting illegals from obtaining any government welfare with the excepton of Emergency medical care.
We have laws, UNENFORCED by Obama, they allow Visa over-stayers to be deported without delay.
We have laws, UNENFORCED by Obama, that prevent federal money from going to cities, counties and states that ignore immigration laws (Sanctuary cities, counties and states.)
We have laws requiring illegals to appear before judges for deportation but this law is UNENFORCED under Obama.

Get the point?
Sure, on the surface, it looks like Trump is aligned with Obama and even Rubio.

But that’s an illusion.

Obama has made a practice of picking and choosing which laws he will enforce and which he will ignore. He has even gone so far as to re-assign Border Patrol agents AWAY from the borders!

Trump is going to enforce many laws now on the books but ignored my Obama.
There aren’t going to be any detainment camps or gigantic round-ups.
There won’t be the need.

Oh, and the wall will help cut down on the HUGE illegally imported drug problems we keep seeing everyday in our country.

Self-deport? As in, We’re going back to the places we came from, because it’s so much better there now?

I’m not sure that takes fully into account the extremely difficult and sometimes dangerous situations that many people are trying to escape. Would we voluntarily take our own families back to such a place?

IF, and I made it a BIG ”if” the places some illegals came from were really so bad, they could LEGALLY apply for refugee status.
If, on the other hand, they only came for the under-the-table jobs with no deductions, the generous welfare arrangements, the free education, etc., then they must go back.
When Syria was the place all those refugees in Europe were supposed to be from guess what, there are many from Pakistan, many from Egypt, many more from other relatively stable Muslim lands.
And guess what else.
A whole lot of them have become criminals, some even terrorists.

And that’s where these illegals here have an option that will show what is really in their hearts about this country.
They can self-deport, or, they can turn to a life of crime.
If they do become criminals and get caught, back they go.

Their choice.