Hopefully whoever’s sweeping people off the streets is careful - there’s a tremendous amount of biotech/pharma in San Diego and HN knows all about Silicon Valley. Damaging those two communities “to spite California” is going to do way, way more damage than they realize. The investors can fund companies wherever they want, giving the tax dollars to other locales. And other countries will probably offer similar visas to get their hands on it.
Once gone, it just might stay away. Returning California to an agricultural state will put a huge hole in federal revenue.
It’s bait. People who protest should protest at city hall or someplace other than where Trump is putting the bait.
Trump wants images of confrontation. He wants escalation. Mark Esper, Trump’s SECDEF in his 1st term, said Trump ordered protesters to be shot. Trump wants to kill Americans.
His memorandum yesterday didn’t mention LA or California. He’s asserting control of the guard everywhere. He said yesterday he would deploy troops everywhere.
Veterans are not getting support because Republicans vote against the bills. Fentanyl is claiming lives because both political parties sold out the American people to the Sackler family. I don't feel the need to address your "thug" comment. Most of those undocumented folks are employed. Together they make up 5% of our national workforce. And every undocumented person pays taxes without qualifying for benefits.
It has been 60 years since the national guard has been deployed without consent of the governor. The last time was the Kent State massacre. It's an intentional provocation that will kill Americans, same as last time.
The deployment to Kent State was ordered by Ohio's governor. Maybe you are thinking of the Little Rock Crisis? In 1957, Eisenhower federalized the entire Arkansas national guard and deployed the 101st Airborne Division (regular army) to enforce desegregation of Little Rock Central High School, without the permission of the governor.
The national guard was deployed to Kent State by the governor. The last time the guard was deployed without the governor’s consent was to protect civil rights marchers in Selma in 1965.
You mean to say you want to call it that. But that immigration was non-consensual, and as we see now, mostly peaceful only because it was not resisted.
> it's how US was created
And how did that work out for the previous inhabitants?
It's mostly citizens and residents protesting in solidarity. People who came here the "right" way. Undocumented folks try to minimize interactions with law enforcement.
That immigration is desired by all these red state agribusiness entities that receive no punishment. Curious that we're deploying thousands of soldiers to a blue state to deport... 100 people so far? When they could much more easily go after the people paying these migrants under the table. They wouldn't come here if they couldn't make money doing so. Trump is clearly a television personality and lives for the drama. Makes sense why Obama and Biden managed to deport more people during their terms.
They deported many, and incentivized even more to come, by actions like deportation protection for 5 million [1], or special programs to allow 500k more to come [2]. And while the federal government cut funds to states that set their own drinking age [3], it did nothing when those same states flaunted immigration laws (so-called "sanctuary" states & cities). So long as they permit more immigrants to come. If they tried to enforce immigration laws, i.e. the border, their efforts were swiftly crushed [4].
I don't know how effective Trump is at border control, but to imply previous administrations (Republicans included) were hostile to immigration, legal or illegal, is laughable.
Most illegal immigrants entered the country legally and are overstaying on expired visas.
Given the federal government is actively revoking and eliminating massive amounts of visas, they are essentially creating "illegal" immigrants with the stroke of a pen.
If people actually cared about stopping people entering the country illegally, it would be as easy as extending all resident visas and these communities would be happy to turn on the bad actors they moved here to run from.
No one is arguing that it's legal. But it's unfair and misleading to characterize all illegals as willful lawbreakers when what actually happens is usually just a legal rug pull.
The government can change the terms of the visas on a whim. If you've lived in the US with your family for decades and they decide to deny a renewal with no recourse, what realistically are you going to do?
The reality is that most people are illegal simply because both politicians benefited from slapping the label on people for so long. You get the benefit of immigration, but you can pretend to be tough on it, and also deprive large swaths of your working class from expensive benefits and rights.
The existing laws are unfair, unjust, and immoral. Lumping in a huge portion of the working class together with actual drug runners and criminals is an intentional and preventable error.
Because I care very little about "legality" of what people do to a virtual entity that we all call "the united states", with all its made up rules.
I learned it from the US itself, and how it treats the rest of the world. Legality is optional and subject to political considerations, and desire for money and power.
> A plurality of Americans want literally every illegal immigrant in the country to be removed
The link you shared said no such thing. All it says is 55% of Americans want immigration reduced.
It also says over 70% of Americans are in favor of a legal path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. I wonder why the current administration doesn't support such an overwhelmingly popular position!
You mean the decision that a group could promote and distribute a movie critical of Hillary Clinton before an election? Some real democracy killing stuff there.
reply