The List: Republican Senators Demanding Trump End Border Enforcement


#21

From AS’ source above…

"That number comes from Rep Steve King. He got that figure from a Government Accountability Office report issued in April 2005. It read:

“At the federal level, the number of criminal aliens incarcerated increased from about 42,000 at the end of calendar year 2001 to about 49,000 at the end of calendar year 2004 — a 15 percent increase. The percentage of all federal prisoners who are criminal aliens has remained the same over the last 3 years — about 27 percent.”

So, King figured (admitting that the number would go up or down a percentage point or two):

” That means then that criminal aliens are committing 28 percent of the crimes in the United States. And so that means 28 percent of the murders, 28 percent of the rapes, 28 percent of the violence and the assaults and battery, first- and second-degree murder and also manslaughter attacks are committed by criminal aliens.”

In other words, since 28 percent of the prisoners were immigrants in the country illegally, they must also therefore have committed 28 percent of each and every crime! Quod erat demonstratum. Recognizing that this sounded like a lot even at the time, King rationalized it by asserting that for every undocumented immigrant in the country we know about, two or three sneak in without our knowing it. Here’s how we know that’s not true.

There is an almost impossibly large number of problems with King’s argument.

The first is that, of course, crime is not evenly distributed among populations. If 10 percent of prisoners are named John, that doesn’t mean that people named John commit 10 percent of murders. Many of those undocumented immigrants in federal custody were probably there for a very specific type of crime: felony immigration violations. Very, very few native-born Americans were there for that. In fact, in 2014, half of criminal arrests were for immigration violations. Since the GAO data are only for federal prisoners, that’s significant. (It’s also worth noting, as a reader did, that federal prisoners make up only a small percentage of the entire prison population.)

What’s more, the GAO data dealt with “criminal aliens” — defined in the report as “noncitizens convicted of crimes while in this country legally or illegally,” emphasis again added. In other words, King’s 28 percent number included people who weren’t even immigrants who had entered the country illegally.

Put simply, King seems to have basically made the number up more than a decade ago and, since there isn’t good data on the number of crimes committed by people who immigrated illegally, it was embraced by those looking to put a number to it. There’s simply no credible reason to believe that there have been 63,000 killings committed by undocumented immigrants since 9/11, and plenty of reason to think that the homicide rate among members of that group is lower than for native-born Americans.

What’s really remarkable, though, is that this is a bit of data that was just presented as a matter of fact by the president of the United States. This was a number so impossibly useful for Trump that when he first heard it, even he was a bit wary about its provenance. And yet, three months later, he’s presenting it as accurate without a hint of an asterisk.

In 2011, King presented a resolution that offered a different calculus.

“According to the Government Accountability Office,” it read, “there have been 25,064 homicide arrests of criminal aliens since 1955.”

That’s about 1.2 per day."


#22

There are RF bracelets and GPS based systems. The RF systems suffer the limitations you’re talking about.


#23

A number of problems are going completely unaddressed in the discussion.

First, we lack border security. A much more secure border is theoretically possible. I say theoretically because border security is ONLY POSSIBLE if members of congress are interested in physical and electronic border enhancements augmented by a drastic increase in Border Patrol Agents, with the goal to be to keep people from entering the US illegally. Once they are here it seems we are willfully helpless to deal effectively with the issues they present. Sadly, at least 1/2 of our elected officials are not interested in maintaining our border, but only in maintaining the wedge issue created, furthered and enhanced by the cleuster fleuken currently on display at various locations along our southern border.

As an aside, in-depth, honest and objective reporting of the issues involved would be welcome. Unfortunately, most media outlets are to busy crying, bitching, moaning while blasting Trump for everything from the “Original Sin” as “reporters” praise the owner of the restaurant who threw Sarah Sanders out for working in the Trump White House.

As for “asylum seekers” - Can someone explain why these caravans of people attempting to enter the US supposedly seeking asylum don’t stop their trek once they have left the claimed hostile confines of their home country and have entered Mexico? After all, Mexico shares their language and most aspects of their culture.

Of course, the reason is that most (about 85% according to government figures) don’t meet the qualifications required of those seeking asylum. In other words, their claim of asylum is BS. They crash the border seeking jobs.

So, I ask - instead of allowing ourselves to be overwhelmed by the numbers showing up at our southern border why don’t we simply suspend granting asylum. Let Mexico deal with the problem. Oh, sure, some would get across our borders, but we are nuts to establish a huge and entirely unworkable apparatus to deal with what amounts to a calculated onslaught of humanity. Getting caught up, as we are, in attempting to superimpose a logical “patch” over a near-completely illogical immigration system is a losing proposition. Yet, without a 60 vote Senate majority that’s what we’re stuck with. Sadly, unlike Democrats, House Republicans can’t get together on what day of the week it is.

Of course, the Left is all too happy to willfully ignore reality. All too happy to demagogue the issue of illegal immigration. One world, no borders = tons of new Democrat voters. That’s their calculus.

Congress, of course, is presenting us with their usual routine - lip service while performing like two chimps attempting intercourse with a football.

And Trump, who can’t let a day go by without stepping on his member is sadly getting little help from congressional Repubs. What he has achieved he’s achieved largely on his own.

In case some of you haven’t guessed - If we lose either branch of congress in November, we are screwed. Trump has done about all he can on his own.


#24

Should we build a wall on the Canadian side too?

No? Why? Because Canadian’s are happy to stay at home?

Do you think it’s possible that US intervention and past policies might have had some impact on the situation in some or all of the countries where people are coming from?

Do you think that we could use the $20ish billion dollars proposed for a border wall and the 10’s of millions of yearly costs to upkeep a wall and pay an increased number of border agents to increase incentives in the nation’s immigrants are fleeing from?

Just an idea…

That’s rich coming from someone on the right.

There is very little mainstream objectivity on either side. Sadly that’s the situation we find ourselves in in the US and devicive policies like the ones you advocate only make the problem worse.

I suspect there is little opportunity there and a greater chance they will be exploited there vs here.

Opportunity is a big motivator.

Because that’s not a principle America was founded on. I mean, if you can identify some real threat, sure we can consider it. Again, if the illegal migrations were coming from Canada or “Norway” I doubt there would be a crisis.

But you have people like Trump lying his arse off about the kinds of people that come here and the crime they are perpetrating. Of course, if you watch too much Faux News it’s no wonder you feel this way. All that fear mongering over things like MS13 and rapists and murderers.

It’s propaganda fear mongering designed to put you in fear and it’s worked. Of course, you cloak your fear in “it’s the law” and “border security”.

It’s so ironic because people on the right come off as so tough, but deep down most of the people I encounter on the right are driven by fear and emotion.

More fear. Imagine if people of Spanish or Hispanic descent were to become the majority of the population. Shutter the thought!!!

Just fear, plain and simple.

Now look, I’m not against securing our border, I’m just not for doing it in an inhumane way. I mean, the punishment should fit the crime. Should you be taken from your kids and shipped back to El Salvadore without your kids? It’s already happened.

That’s immoral.

Are there solutions? Sure, but they require compromise and neither side is willing to let the other side have half a victory, so we stagnate.


#25

“Should we build a wall along the Canadian border”? Typical Leftist response. But, I’ll answer - we have no demonstrable problem along that border, so why would a rational being pump precious resources there? More precisely, why/how could a rational individual even pose the question and pretend to be serious.

As for the remainder of the poppycock contained in your response - when did middle class America sign on to be the world’s tit??


#26

They are altering the deal. Pray they do not alter it further


#27

You act as though immigrants add nothing to the economy, that they are just leaches that take more than they give…Yet, we are a nation of immigrants.

Do you think that in the past when there were influxes of immigrants, do you think they were all highly educated and ready to work?

Yet those people and their children became Americans and have contributed just like others.

People are a resource, not a burden.


#28

Border agents have already reached the point of diminishing returns, even CIS acknowledges that.

Technology only escalates how actors defeat them. If the Taliban can work around satellite imaging & drone strikes, why would coyotes, tunnel diggers, and submersibles not find a way past these things you suggest?

The (black) economy getting people to America, is bigger than the agency or the money we spend enforcing it.

As such, they will always find ways around what we build. Time & resources are on their side, because of how big the demand for drugs & migrant labor is.

Human nature is at work here; you can’t defeat it through brute force. You have to make strategic alliances with it.

Most do. It really comes down to where you have connections or family, or if the place in Mexico you flee to is itself stable.

Which should make you stop and think; we have a visa for migrant workers, so why aren’t they using that instead?

Is it that the system is… dysfunctional, possibly? Could that be creating problems for us & them?

Sure, but that’s only true when the law is dysfunctional, and you turn these people into an open sore that’s been attacked by all comers. Which the left wants.

When you instead welcome immigrants en masse, like we did with the Vietnamese, the Cubans, and the Eastern Bloc; they all vote Conservative.

Do you know why this is Mike? Because there’s nothing cultural about these people that would have predicted that, but there is something else that does.

Something that goes consistently overlooked when it comes to this issue, and is the single most predictive element of individual voting behavior.


#29

This doesn’t honestly analyze the issue.

The economy was bringing in migrant workers long before there was welfare.

Welfare or not, the demand for the labor is something that would be here regardless. It’s a natrual outgrowth of our own economic needs.

We knows jobs are the primary reason people come here, because their numbers fluctuate with economic cycles. In good years they grow, in bad years they shrink.

And if Mexicans were the primary labor force in the 1920s to do railroad work and man meat packing plants, why would we not need their labor today?

Why would Americans be anymore likely today to do the jobs migrants do, than they were nearly a century ago?


#30

BS. (As usual). We aren’t importing “workers.” We’re importing welfare recipients…and their children, AS. 80% of all illegals here are drawing SOME sort of government assistance at OUR expense…even if it’s just freely educating their kids.


#31

Then why do they produce over 10x what they consume in unpaid benefits?

Why do they move from California to Texas and North Carolina?

Why does their presence fluctuate with labor demand in our economy?

You just never seem to answer this Dave. If welfare is their primary motive, why doesn’t their aggregate behavior reflect it? Why are they going after jobs, and why are they disproportionately moving to places that have them more than benefits?

Can you answer this or not?


#32

Don’t conflate immigration with aliens coming across the border illegally.

Immigration is a legal and organized process. It requires those seeking entry adhering to our legal requirements. Running across our border like you are part of a jail break is not what immigration is supposed to look like.

Foreign nationals streaming across our border without regard for our laws of entry is not immigration - it’s an INVASION…

Of course. brown and slim completely disregard and ignore this point, along with our nation’s authority and justifications for controlling the flow of human traffic into the US.

On top of that, they deride the motives of those of us who are “guilty” of nothing more than requiring those seeking entry to obey our laws of entry - to “check in” at a port of entry and seek permission to enter the country.

We can legitimately discuss all day long how many immigrants we need or don’t need, what skill sets we need, what jobs need filling, etc.

But, in my opinion, it is insane to advocate that we should be OK with being invaded.


#33

They are being encouraged, by the organizers, to not cross at a port of entry in order to magnify the crisis. It is a de facto organized invasion.


#34

Mike, they were migrant workers before they were illegals.

We had a cyclical relationship of workers coming & going from Mexico, decades before the law stepped in and tried to limit there numbers below that of demand.

I’m sorry Mike, but you can’t change history or our demographics, both of which explain why were having this problem.

The law has practical limits, and when it acts in defiance of those limits, it creates the dysfunction we see.

It’s cause & effect. We had illegal distillers, and today, illegal “assault weapon” owners, for the same reason.
Need I even mention that people are harder to control or regulate than mere objects?

The DMV is a legal and organized process; wanna bet that we have unlicensed drivers, because the DMV makes it so much of a hassle to get a license in the first place?


#35

Exactly, unless your motive is too assemble an insurmountable Democrat majority voting base that will insure permanent power for the Left via complete dependency; if that’s your motive it is a genius idea!

That is exactly how California was conquered and that is exactly how the Left wants to take the rest of the U.S.


#36

That’s not how humans work RET.

Again, when we’ve given broad access to immigrants, they vote for US.

The Cubans, the Vietnamese, the Polish, the Russians, the Czechs, etc.

None of you have an explanation for this, because it isn’t cultural that they vote this way.
Rather it is endemic to the mindset of an immigrant.

Endemic to the most highly predictive quality of voting behavior.

You are giving Democrats voters, because you are allowing them to keep immigration as a dysfunctional open sore that they can swoop on in, and act all “compassionate” for.

Something that wouldn’t happen, if you simply gave people the same access we gave the Cubans.
What they’ve gone through is a better version of our immigration system, none of you can deny this, and none of you have a reason for why we don’t offer this more broadly to people coming from places like Nicaragua, or Argentina, or Venezuela.


#37

None of those groups came here illegally and then IMMEDIATELY signed up for welfare, AS. The Mexicans and more frequently, the Central Americans do PRECISELY that as a matter of routine. Those taking advantage of ALL of the “benefits” available through our stupid welfare system, are making the equivalent of almost $60K per year! Not all of it in “cash”, of course, but it COSTS taxpayers in California, for example, about $20K per year to educate one child–and it doesn’t make any difference if that child is here illegally or not. You’d be hard-pressed to find a single illegal family that pays anywhere NEAR that much in taxes to the State of California, and so far we’ve not even discussed medical care, WIC, AFDC, “energy assistance”, rent subsidies, etc. etc. etc.


#38

The arrived here no differently than the Mexicans or Central Americans; most of the Vietnamese were refugees.

The difference was in how we treated them. We gave them different paperwork, and different court proceedings to move through.

“Illegal” and “legal”, wasn’t made through their own actions, it was made through ours, in response to them showing up on our doorstep, and accepting one group, while rejecting the other.

And once again Dave, you can’t defend why we didn’t just treat them all the same. The Cubans & co got a better immigration system to move through, everyone can see that.


#39

BS, AS. You KNOW that’s not true. WHY do you persist in posting this nonsense? The Vietnamese, Eastern Europeans, Cubans, etc. did NOT “show up at the border asking for refuge.” They were INVITED here and given aid by PRIVATE entities such as some churches. I PERSONALLY helped settle dozens of Hmong refugees back in the 70’s through the auspices of a local, Texas church.


#40

Nope, the Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, legalized people who were already here, in addition to people we brought over ourselves.