5,000 per day

[Deluge]

Is how many illegal aliens the hair sniffer wants. 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/speaker-mike-johnson-house-gop-members-react-bipartisan/story?id=106944092

Edited February 6, 2024 by Deluge

[Rebound]

I just never hear much in the way of specifics in these laws and bills. Lots of vague generalities and it’s difficult to know what’s what. 

[Rebound]

FACT CHECK:

No, the border deal won’t allow 5,000 unauthorized immigrants a day:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/05/us/politics/border-deal-immigration.html

“The legislation, which links additional funding in military aid for Ukraine with immigration policy, would more aggressively tamp down on illegal crossings at the U.S. border with Mexico.

The claim has become a popular talking point, reflecting broader pushback by Republicans who have seized on the border security provisions in the $118.3 billion bill and derided them as too lax.

But the bill does not, in fact, authorize immigrants to cross the border illegally. Instead, among other provisions, it would give officials the authority to summarily remove migrants, with little recourse, after a certain number cross: an average of 5,000 encounters per day for a week, or 8,500 in a single day.

 

The legislation seeks to make it harder for people to claim asylumand expedite that process; expand federal detention capacity; and provide funding for other border investments, including hiring asylum officers and border security agents, among other things. It does not say that 5,000 immigrants are allowed to illegally enter per day.

Instead, the bill uses that number to help determine when a new, stringent emergency authority can take effect to more easily expel migrants, regardless of whether they intend to seek asylum.“

[CdnFox]

48 minutes ago, Rebound said:

FACT CHECK:

No, the border deal won’t allow 5,000 unauthorized immigrants a day:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/05/us/politics/border-deal-immigration.html

“The legislation, which links additional funding in military aid for Ukraine with immigration policy, would more aggressively tamp down on illegal crossings at the U.S. border with Mexico.

The claim has become a popular talking point, reflecting broader pushback by Republicans who have seized on the border security provisions in the $118.3 billion bill and derided them as too lax.

But the bill does not, in fact, authorize immigrants to cross the border illegally. Instead, among other provisions, it would give officials the authority to summarily remove migrants, with little recourse, after a certain number cross: an average of 5,000 encounters per day for a week, or 8,500 in a single day.

 

The legislation seeks to make it harder for people to claim asylumand expedite that process; expand federal detention capacity; and provide funding for other border investments, including hiring asylum officers and border security agents, among other things. It does not say that 5,000 immigrants are allowed to illegally enter per day.

Instead, the bill uses that number to help determine when a new, stringent emergency authority can take effect to more easily expel migrants, regardless of whether they intend to seek asylum.“

So that's some pretty bullshit wording to end up at '5000 a day will likely be let in'.

Technically if the border people go get them and bring them across it's not 'illegal'.

Then they register them and say 'you have to come back in a month for a hearing".   Still not illegal.

A monnth later they're gone and in the country illegally but the dems will claim it was NOT an 'illegal border crossing".

This is the same as saying "It isn't burlgary till the thief actually sells what he stole form you because he MIGHT still give it back".

nope. This bill means more illegal immigrants inside the US period full stop and no wonder they dont' want to support it,

[Rebound]

53 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So that's some pretty bullshit wording to end up at '5000 a day will likely be let in'.

Technically if the border people go get them and bring them across it's not 'illegal'.

Then they register them and say 'you have to come back in a month for a hearing".   Still not illegal.

A monnth later they're gone and in the country illegally but the dems will claim it was NOT an 'illegal border crossing".

This is the same as saying "It isn't burlgary till the thief actually sells what he stole form you because he MIGHT still give it back".

nope. This bill means more illegal immigrants inside the US period full stop and no wonder they dont' want to support it,

The bill is a huge improvement over the system we have, better in every way, and your side is throwing all that away because they don’t think it’s perfect.  Perhaps the 5,000 number is because the Constitution requires due process; I do not know, but perhaps they want to pass a Constitutional law. Trump says no law change is needed because he has promised to assume dictatorial power if he’s elected. How will that go? He violates the law, there’s a lawsuit, the SCOTUS tells him he must stop because he’s violating the law. Will he ignore the SCOTUS? Why not take the improvement we can get RIGHT NOW? There’s no downside to improving what we have. 

Edited February 6, 2024 by Rebound

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, Rebound said:

The bill is a huge improvement over the system we have, better in every way, and your side is throwing all that away because they don’t think it’s perfect.  Perhaps the 5,000 number is because the Constitution requires due process; I do not know, but perhaps they want to pass a Constitutional law. Trump says no law change is needed because he has promised to assume dictatorial power if he’s elected. How will that go? He violates the law, there’s a lawsuit, the SCOTUS tells him he must stop because he’s violating the law. Will he ignore the SCOTUS? Why not take the improvement we can get RIGHT NOW? There’s no downside to improving what we have. 

It is a worsening of what is there,  and passing it will make the republicans equally 'guilty' of the disaster at the border in the eyes of the public.

the 5000 will be the number per day that can be processed based on the manpower the bill provides for.

and no - that's not what trump said.  ANd biden can reinstate 'remain' if he wanted to and most of the problem would go away.

[Deluge]

11 hours ago, Rebound said:

I just never hear much in the way of specifics in these laws and bills. Lots of vague generalities and it’s difficult to know what’s what. 

It'd be a lot less difficult if Biden left the border alone in the first place, but the old man has zero interest in keeping things secure down there, so of course it's confusing as f*ck. It will be until the democrats secure enough brown faces to keep them in power indefinitely. 

[Deluge]

10 hours ago, Rebound said:

FACT CHECK:

No, the border deal won’t allow 5,000 unauthorized immigrants a day:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/05/us/politics/border-deal-immigration.html

“The legislation, which links additional funding in military aid for Ukraine with immigration policy, would more aggressively tamp down on illegal crossings at the U.S. border with Mexico.

The claim has become a popular talking point, reflecting broader pushback by Republicans who have seized on the border security provisions in the $118.3 billion bill and derided them as too lax.

But the bill does not, in fact, authorize immigrants to cross the border illegally. Instead, among other provisions, it would give officials the authority to summarily remove migrants, with little recourse, after a certain number cross: an average of 5,000 encounters per day for a week, or 8,500 in a single day.

 

The legislation seeks to make it harder for people to claim asylumand expedite that process; expand federal detention capacity; and provide funding for other border investments, including hiring asylum officers and border security agents, among other things. It does not say that 5,000 immigrants are allowed to illegally enter per day.

Instead, the bill uses that number to help determine when a new, stringent emergency authority can take effect to more easily expel migrants, regardless of whether they intend to seek asylum.“

Sorry, NYT is an official left-wing rag. Listen to the speaker; he's actually read the bill. 

[Deluge]

9 hours ago, Rebound said:

The bill is a huge improvement over the system we have, better in every way, and your side is throwing all that away because they don’t think it’s perfect.  Perhaps the 5,000 number is because the Constitution requires due process; I do not know, but perhaps they want to pass a Constitutional law. Trump says no law change is needed because he has promised to assume dictatorial power if he’s elected. How will that go? He violates the law, there’s a lawsuit, the SCOTUS tells him he must stop because he’s violating the law. Will he ignore the SCOTUS? Why not take the improvement we can get RIGHT NOW? There’s no downside to improving what we have. 

Sorry, letting 15,000 illegal aliens pour into the county every goddamn day and then drawing up a bill to only let 5,000 illegal aliens into the country every goddamn day is not an improvement; it's complete bullshit.

No, Texas needs to continue what it's doing and the rest of us will step in as necessary. This will continue until Trump is back in the White House. Donald Trump will show the old hair sniffer how to secure our borders.

[ironstone]

Under The Senate's Atrocious Border Bill, Everybody Gets Asylum (thefederalist.com)

[Deluge]

3 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Under The Senate's Atrocious Border Bill, Everybody Gets Asylum (thefederalist.com)

No surprise. These a$$holes want globalism for everyone. George Orwell's 1984 is a wet dream for leftoids everywhere. 

[Legato]

Congress should insist on renaming the Mexican border to the Hot Gates and send in 300 Spartans.

Problem solved.

[Deluge]

11 minutes ago, Legato said:

Congress should insist on renaming the Mexican border to the Hot Gates and send in 300 Spartans.

Problem solved.

300 Marines would be better. 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

Under The Senate's Atrocious Border Bill, Everybody Gets Asylum (thefederalist.com)

Existing law gives the President no authority to close the border or to immediately return immigrants. This law does. Thus, it is an improvement. 
 

Why are you against making things better?

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Rebound said:

Existing law gives the President no authority to close the border or to immediately return immigrants. This law does. Thus, it is an improvement. 
 

Why are you against making things better?

He can ractivate 'remain'  no problem and he could do it immediately.  Just like he was the one who shut it down.  Sorry sparky - but it just makes you look worse when you parrot lies like that,  Biden has every ability to get things under control at the border.

[Deluge]

51 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Existing law gives the President no authority to close the border or to immediately return immigrants. This law does. Thus, it is an improvement. 
 

Why are you against making things better?

The commander in chief has all the power necessary to protect our borders. This has turned into an invasion, thanks to you woke cultists. 

[Rebound]

On 2/5/2024 at 10:25 PM, CdnFox said:

It is a worsening of what is there,  and passing it will make the republicans equally 'guilty' of the disaster at the border in the eyes of the public.

the 5000 will be the number per day that can be processed based on the manpower the bill provides for.

and no - that's not what trump said.  ANd biden can reinstate 'remain' if he wanted to and most of the problem would go away.

In other words, you don’t actually know anything about this proposal, you’re just parroting what jerkoff-wing media told you.  
 

The 5,000 figure triggers a new authority which the Republicans wanted which did not exist before.  So how can that be worse? And those 5,000 can still be rounded up and deported.  

[Rebound]

22 hours ago, Deluge said:

The commander in chief has all the power necessary to protect our borders. This has turned into an invasion, thanks to you woke cultists. 

That is patently false.  The Constitution and the law does not give the President such power. The courts already ruled that Biden had to open the border when the Covid epidemic ended. 

I get that your plan is to elect a man who says he will be a dictator.  Meaning, he thinks the President can violate any law he wants and any court order he wants, and stay in office as long as he wants. Where the President has any power that he says he has.   Thats what you want.  
 

I don’t want to live in a dictatorship. I want a President who follows the law and the courts and is accountable to them.  That’s what I want. 

[QuebecOverCanada]

5000 * 365 days = 1,825,000

18,250,000 in a decade, 5% of the population.

It's a rate I would deem acceptable. But it has to be through a legal pathway.

[Deluge]

1 minute ago, Rebound said:

That is patently false.  The Constitution and the law does not give the President such power. The courts already ruled that Biden had to open the border when the Covid epidemic ended. 

I get that your plan is to elect a man who says he will be a dictator.  Meaning, he thinks the President can violate any law he wants and any court order he wants, and stay in office as long as he wants. Where the President has any power that he says he has.   Thats what you want.  
 

I don’t want to live in a dictatorship. I want a President who follows the law and the courts and is accountable to them.  That’s what I want. 

The "courts" you simpleton? Nobody tells the commander-in-chief to not secure the goddamn border - it's his job. 

Besides, Biden WANTS illegal immigration, and so do your wokejob "courts". 

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

5000 * 365 days = 1,825,000

18,250,000 in a decade, 5% of the population.

It's a rate I would deem acceptable. But it has to be through a legal pathway.

The operative word is "legal", which has nothing to do with Biden's program. He wants simple, undereducated illegals to groom into mindless democrat residents. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

In other words, you don’t actually know anything about this proposal, you’re just parroting what jerkoff-wing media told you. 

IN other words, i understand it just fine and you're angry about it

Quote

The 5,000 figure triggers a new authority which the Republicans wanted which did not exist before.  So how can that be worse? And those 5,000 can still be rounded up and deported.  

Nope it does not require that.   And it gives more discretionary power to biden. The guy who went to court to end 'remain'.

At a quick glance it looks like it caps illegals at 5000 a day (which is still freaking horrible) but it doesn't, and leaves the door open for serious abuses and workarounds.

Nope.  Fix the problem. Put remain back in and 80 percent of the issues go away.  This is just a back door so the dems can pretend they fixed the problem in an election year while still allowing the flood to continue.

You can lie to the stupid people bud, but unfortunately i don't vote democrat     (actually in fairness i don't vote in the states at all sooo.. but you get the idea )

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

5000 * 365 days = 1,825,000

18,250,000 in a decade, 5% of the population.

It's a rate I would deem acceptable. But it has to be through a legal pathway.

The proposed law does not say that 5,000 people a day are allowed to enter the United States. It says that the President has the authority to immediately deport illegal immigrants if the level of illegal entries reaches 5,000 people a day. It does not make those entries legal. 

[Deluge]

On 2/7/2024 at 1:19 PM, Rebound said:

The proposed law does not say that 5,000 people a day are allowed to enter the United States. It says that the President has the authority to immediately deport illegal immigrants if the level of illegal entries reaches 5,000 people a day. It does not make those entries legal. 

And you can bet your a$$ that it's going to be 5,000 every goddamn day. In other words, Biden wants 5,000 illegal aliens every day and the Republicans are telling him to go f*ck himself. 

The bill SHOULD read that Trump's wall should be finished, that the border patrol keeps illegal aliens from crossing the border, and that the President can immediately deport every f*cking illegal the government gets its hands on. 

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, Deluge said:

And you can bet your a$$ that it's going to be 5,000 every goddamn day. In other words, Biden wants 5,000 illegal aliens every day and the Republicans are telling him to go f*ck himself. 

The bill SHOULD read that Trump's wall should be finished, that the border patrol keeps illegal aliens from crossing the border, and that the President can immediately deport every f*cking illegal the government gets its hands on. 

So here's how that works.

You throw 5000 at the border all at once screaming and kicking. Easy to do - you tell all the immigrants the first 5000 get in free.

you now KNOW the border guys are completely swamped. Cross with as many illegals as you want on ungarded parts of the border.

My understanding is that this is what is already happening.  So this would not improve that.

but answer me this. If it's possible to send the rest back AFTER 5000 - why isn't it possible to send them back at 4000? Or 1000. Or 1.  Why can't he just do remain?