My Rebuttal to: Trump’s Multi-Front War That Spooks Oil Markets

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 6/5/2019 at 8:12 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

Not going to quote your entire "basket of deplorables" post Jan.  Let's just say I totally disagree with most of what you said. 

U.S. is sliding into South African Apartheid?  Just .... NO.  Playing the race card, Jan?  Really?  

I wouldn't say the US is sliding into Apartheid so much as it's sliding into Post-Apartheid.  I.e. the period where South Africa truly fell apart, and live became nasty, brutish, and miserable for everyone.  @Jan van Eck, is that more what you meant, or am I missing something here?

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 6/6/2019 at 4:29 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

My point was simply that the same result could be achieved with less money. I am 100 % sure that some ID system could be invented and visa rules loosened to achieve what you want to achieve at less cost than a wall. I recall in your other posts you were against government wastefull spending... 

NB! A big reservation here for the potential mis-use application of an ID system.

see above. 

 

I don't understand your above paragraph. I can see following statements: 

1) Trump is wealthy

2) Politics is based on what the wealthy want

3) Trump knows how to figth the wealthy, because he is wealthy

4) Trumps interests are more or less aligned with the people

It seems rather contradictory. Sorry. 

That is not the case. I try to point things out that are contradictory to me; Such as

1) Wastefull leftist spending is bad / wasteful spending on a wall is good

2) Some immigrants are welcome / Some are not. How do you distinguish the 2? 

It was actually meant as a compliment. I meant that you seem intelligent and instead of just playing to win you could probably do more to better you community / country. 

I am sorry that you took it as an insult. 

Less money would be nice.  If only it were politically feasible, and if only it didn't come with grave consequences to our freedom. 

Trump is aligned with his constituents because he needs them to get re-elected.  That's how politics work.  The relationship between Trump and his base is not based on mutual love, a sense of duty, or a desire to do the right thing.  It's based on Trump seeing an advantage for himself in championing his constituents' cause, and his constituents seeing an advantage in lifting him to power.  The US political system is no longer about what's best for the country; it's an all-out war between factions.  Trump was elected specifically because he's powerful, ruthless, and cunning.  He was elected because he revels in the battle and has no mercy.  His constituents want blood, and he's delivering. 

It's possible to find "contradictions" in any argument if you ignore the details & nuance.  It's also possible to find "contradictions" if you simply don't understand what's happening.  This is not intended as an insult; merely an honest assessment:   I don't think you understand current US politics; perhaps we should talk about that more? 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

23 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

One reason this is not going to work is because then you are declaring the entire Border area a free-fire zone.

You will end up with quite a few civilians caught up in the shooting, and predictably the majority of those will be dead. You will be unable to distinguish between a person who did report to an Inspection Station and was passed through (the vast majority of people from Mexico in the Border area) and those who walked across or climbed the fence (which gets done typically at night). Further, quite a few folks in that area are Americans who "look Mexican."  You can have a sixth-generation American whose ancestors were from Mexico, "look Mexican."  What are you going to do, shoot him? 

There are also laws about using the Army in that fashion, but hey, you can dispense with those if you are planning a military occupation of part of the USA, why not, go whole hog. 

This is one of those proposals that "sounds good," but is uniquely unworkable.  I would also point out that most of the flow of drugs is through perfectly legal points of entry.  The Border area down South has had its personnel vastly expanded in a short time, so the candidates are not thoroughly vetted. There is so much money to be made, the cartels simply go buy themselves an Agent - who in turn waves their semi-trailer truck through the checkpoint.  Why bother lugging narcotics through some desert when a bribe gets you 40,000 lbs. of the stuff on a hard-paved road?   

I believe congress declared a "border zone" in which the US military can operate freely.  That being the case, why couldn't the US create a "demilitarized zone" like Korea has?  Simply declare that no one - military or civilian - is allowed into a certain stretch of land.  Then it's unambiguous: if someone is caught in that zone, they're guilty.  Shoot them on sight. 

The zone wouldn't need to be wide either.  A few hundred meters monitored by cameras & remote weapon stations would suffice. 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

21 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Because there are real people living in those failed cities and those real people are suffering, thus if another Party has the ability and the moxy to resolve the issues, it has an obligation as an American political Party to step up to the plate and shoulder the burden.  That's why.

And anybody who seeks to represent that the Democratic Parties that run those cities have done a bang-up job is just being ridiculous.  The Democratic (big-city) Party(ies) have been colossal, stupendous, staggering failures.  I am both disgusted and appalled by what the Democrats have done in America.   

The problem is that when you bail out failing people, they don't learn from their mistakes.  Whatever resources you give them are used to procreate, which leads to even more people suffering in the next generation.  If the Democratic voters in these failing cities were ready to learn, the situation would be different.  As it is, they have no intention of changing and, therefore, must be left to their fate. 

[Marc Savoie + 19]

2 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Less money would be nice.  If only it were politically feasible, and if only it didn't come with grave consequences to our freedom. 

Trump is aligned with his constituents because he needs them to get re-elected.  That's how politics work.  The relationship between Trump and his base is not based on mutual love, a sense of duty, or a desire to do the right thing.  It's based on Trump seeing an advantage for himself in championing his constituents' cause, and his constituents seeing an advantage in lifting him to power.  The US political system is no longer about what's best for the country; it's an all-out war between factions.  Trump was elected specifically because he's powerful, ruthless, and cunning.  He was elected because he revels in the battle and has no mercy.  His constituents want blood, and he's delivering. 

It's possible to find "contradictions" in any argument if you ignore the details & nuance.  It's also possible to find "contradictions" if you simply don't understand what's happening.  This is not intended as an insult; merely an honest assessment:   I don't think you understand current US politics; perhaps we should talk about that more? 

"freedom"  only seems to only exist in one country🤔

 

2 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

The problem is that when you bail out failing people, they don't learn from their mistakes.  Whatever resources you give them are used to procreate, which leads to even more people suffering in the next generation.  If the Democratic voters in these failing cities were ready to learn, the situation would be different.  As it is, they have no intention of changing and, therefore, must be left to their fate. 

One needs resources to pro-create? Can you please send a memo to China, India, and Vietnam? Vietnam, has 100 Million pro creations in a country half the size of Texas, only 331,000sq/km's! (I threw in an Oxford Comma and km's as they are primarily used in "non-free" countries)

 

2 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

I believe congress declared a "border zone" in which the US military can operate freely.  That being the case, why couldn't the US create a "demilitarized zone" like Korea has?  Simply declare that no one - military or civilian - is allowed into a certain stretch of land.  Then it's unambiguous: if someone is caught in that zone, they're guilty.  Shoot them on sight. 

The zone wouldn't need to be wide either.  A few hundred meters monitored by cameras & remote weapon stations would suffice. 

YOU seem to have everything figured out. Not sure if any positions are open for Dictator or Genocidal in Chief are available. Have you ever been to The Hague? Remote weapons stations? Really? Even assassins avoid off*ing kids.  

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

I wouldn't say the US is sliding into Apartheid so much as it's sliding into Post-Apartheid.  I.e. the period where South Africa truly fell apart, and live became nasty, brutish, and miserable for everyone.  @Jan van Eck, is that more what you meant, or am I missing something here?

You have accurately assessed the intent of the comment.  Thank you. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

I believe congress declared a "border zone" in which the US military can operate freely.  That being the case, why couldn't the US create a "demilitarized zone" like Korea has?  Simply declare that no one - military or civilian - is allowed into a certain stretch of land.  Then it's unambiguous: if someone is caught in that zone, they're guilty.  Shoot them on sight. 

The zone wouldn't need to be wide either.  A few hundred meters monitored by cameras & remote weapon stations would suffice. 

Congress has declared nothing along those lines.  The Posse Comitatus Act going back to the 1800's prohibits the use of the U.S. Military within the US.  This is strictly a civilian-police matter.  There is a "Border Patrol" within the Homeland Security Department as set up by George Bush, although personally I think it is on dubious authority.  Also, the govt cannot declare free-fire or occupation zones on US soil.  IN the past they did that anyway, specifically around air bases that had bombers with nuclear bombs, but even then, it was on very shaky authority.  

Governments are notorious in stretching the authorities granted them.  Another reason to have a watchful eye and an active, engaged Congress.  The USA has neither. 

Shooting people on sight is a human rights violation of the greatest magnitude.  It is also terrible govt policy.  I would remind you that, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, those tower guards of the GDR were all arrested and faced murder charges for shooting escapees.  That was good policy. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

14 hours ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

I believe congress declared a "border zone" in which the US military can operate freely. 

 

10 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Congress has declared nothing along those lines.  The Posse Comitatus Act going back to the 1800's prohibits the use of the U.S. Military within the US.  This is strictly a civilian-police matter. 

 

 

U.S. 100 mile Border Zone exists, but its definition is about as clear as mud.  Generally the Border Zone is ignored by the general U.S. population.

 

A couple of older links for your perusal:

Does a Constitution-free zone really exist in America?

Is there really a government law that disallows the Fourth Amendment for 200 million Americans? Some people say it’s true, but the reasoning behind a 100-mile “Constitution-free” zone argument is confusing at best.

 

The ACLU’s Constitution-Free Zone

 

The American Civil Liberties Union has been saying since 2010 that a regulation allowing customs and immigration agents to search electronic devices at America’s borders without cause is wrong. Two years prior to that, the ACLU also warned of a 100-mile-wide U.S. border called the “Constitution-free zone” where such searches could occur.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a two-page review of its policy on searching laptops, cell phones, and other devices at border checks, to clarify the policy that the ACLU had questioned in 2010.

The DHS said that customs and immigration agents can “exercise long-standing constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent.”

 

===================================

U.S. Federal Register related document:

Extension of Border Zone in the State of New Mexico

AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, DHS.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

This final rule amends Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations to extend the distance that certain nonimmigrant Mexican nationals presenting a Border Crossing Card, or other proper immigration documentation, may travel in New Mexico without obtaining a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Form I-94 (Form I-94), Arrival/Departure Record. This change is intended to promote commerce and tourism in southern New Mexico while still ensuring that sufficient safeguards are in place to prevent illegal entry to the United States.

DATES:

This rule is effective July 12, 2013.

Executive Summary

Under current DHS regulations, certain nonimmigrant Mexican nationals presenting a Border Crossing Card (BCC), or other proper immigration documentation, are not required to obtain a Form I-94 if they remain within 25 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border (75 miles in Arizona). This region is known as the “border zone” and includes portions of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. The majority of Mexican nationals who are exempt from the Form I-94 requirement possess and apply for admission to the United States with a BCC. The BCC is one of the most secure travel documents used at the border and allows for faster processing at both the port of entry and interior immigration checkpoints. The currently issued BCC is a laminated, credit card style document with many security features, a ten year validity period and vicinity-read Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology and a machine-readable zone. Using these features, CBP is able to electronically authenticate the BCC against the Department of State (DOS) issuance records.  ...

 

===================================

/ Note, see attached pdf file for the 2MB full resolution map above ^ which was attached to the Federal Register document linked above, or you can download it here:

https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=USCBP-2012-0030-0002&contentType=pdf

 

By the way, this scare tactic map by the ACLU is utter twaddle:

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

On 6/3/2019 at 6:36 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

As long as life is shitty in some places and better in others people will find ways to get to the better places. Walls or no walls. It is just a fact.

 

Then the point for that is LEGAL IMMIGRATION, and a country that faces a tsunami of illegal immigration should do everything in its power legally to make it as uncomfortable as possible so there is very little incentive for that line to be crossed

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

36 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

U.S. 100 mile Border Zone exists, but its defintion is about as clear as mud.  Generally the Border Zone is ignored by the general U.S. population.

Not really.  That "100-mile zone" is nothing more than a wet dream of the Dept. of Homeland Security. 

Here's the real deal:  there are two supreme court cases relating to the Border and the activities of the Border Patrol (not to be confused with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE):  one case had the Justices muse about people slipping over outside of Federal Inspection Stations (a "border post" to ordinary people) in which it was stated that the BP agents would or should have authority to "briefly question" persons up to 100 miles from any Border, and the second relating that such a questioning "even 25 miles" from the Border would be surprising to the COurt.  NOw the DHS people (no surprise here) decided to expand their powers and authority by seizing upon the first case and ignoring the second.  That first case they then took and enshrined into their Regulations, which is something dreamed up by DHS and is NOT a Statute, and then proceeded to use their internal operating funds to start setting up East German-style "checkpoints" at some distance from the Borders.  For example, there is one in Upstate New York about 95 miles South of Plattsburgh, NY, on the Interstate between Montreal and NY City; and there is one on the I-93 about 97 miles from the Canadian Border on the road between Quebec City and Boston.  That latter one is buried inside the White Mountain Range in a pass area where there are no secondary roads, so if you are heading South in that area you have no option but to run down the Interstate through the pass.  And DHS wants to set up a permanent post on the I-91 just South of White river Junction, at a point about 99.6 miles South of the Border, just South of the junction between the 89 and the 91.  

So you can see that DHS is actively moving, with your tax dollars, setting up these mandatory full-stop checkpoints.  One problem is that Interstates are high-speed roads and the traffic from out-of-State, which is all the tourists, comes roaring over some hill crest adn is confronted by three miles of stopped traffic in both lanes, and if that is a truck or tour bus, you end up with a deadly crash.  So far, at least 7 have died in such wrecks on the 87 - New York Thruway on the stretch South of Montreal, about 90 miles from the Border, where there is nothing and no houses or exits and you don't anticipate any activity. 

The idea that the ACLU "map" is nonsense, or rubbish, also fails under examination.  For example, the B.P. is notorious for boarding Greyhound Buses at various points.  They do that at Erie, Pennsylvania, the excuse being that Erie is a port on Lake ONtario and if you take a speedboat across that Lake then somewhere roughly in the middle is the Border with Canada.  For obvious reasons that Border is unmarked, and unknown, although DHS stridently claims it knows exactly where it is since they have those Garmin GPS devices.  I think that is ridiculous as the actual Border location has never been established, having been laid out centuries ago by men who were habitually drunk, and wandering around in the bush with their whiskey, and nobody really knows where they staked the Border. But moving past that, the nearest land border to Erie would be Buffalo, New York, hundreds of miles away, and on the other end would be Detroit, Michigan, more hundreds of miles away.  Yet using this fiction of the Lake and the speedboat they go force their way onto those Greyhound buses, intimidating the drivers.  And anyone who "looks Hispanic" will be removed, papers or no papers, on the rhetoric that lots of "papers" are forged or belong to someone else. 

The bottom line is that what the B.P. does is all legally tenuous, or for your rough and ready oilrig roughneck types, is pure bullshit.  But that is what happens when you let government types go run wild.  They will. 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

5 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Then the point for that is LEGAL IMMIGRATION, and a country that faces a tsunami of illegal immigration should do everything in its power legally to make it as uncomfortable as possible so there is very little incentive for that line to be crossed

All very nice and neat, except that for entering the USA, there is effectively no legal immigration.  And that is the problem.  You put your name down on the list and the queue is over 40 years.  You will likely be dead before your name gets to the head of the list. 

It is because the system is so irrational and so totally screwed up that you end up with these waves of people running at the border.  If the people were issued "Bracero" agricultural work permits then they would come and go with the seasons, as has been the historical pattern, the US would get its stoop labor, and the solo workers would head home after the season back to family.  Now you have this bizarre situation where there are no visas and so the workers sneak in, and then send for their families to sneak in, because they don't dare go back any more at the end of the season as they might not be able to sneak in again the next year.   It is a stupid system. 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

10 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

All very nice and neat, except that for entering the USA, there is effectively no legal immigration.  And that is the problem.  You put your name down on the list and the queue is over 40 years.  You will likely be dead before your name gets to the head of the list. 

It is because the system is so irrational and so totally screwed up that you end up with these waves of people running at the border.  If the people were issued "Bracero" agricultural work permits then they would come and go with the seasons, as has been the historical pattern, the US would get its stoop labor, and the solo workers would head home after the season back to family.  Now you have this bizarre situation where there are no visas and so the workers sneak in, and then send for their families to sneak in, because they don't dare go back any more at the end of the season as they might not be able to sneak in again the next year.   It is a stupid system. 

The problem we face now is not from illegal immigrants (majority) from Mexico , so I dont think they would have been given the seasonal worker permits to begin with in large numbers. I believe in May the gov issued 30k additional seasonal worker permits. If people qualify for these they will get them, and we know that there are many many more applicants than there are visas, but that is part of the immigration process and the US just cant keep taking unstoppable flow of people wanting to come in.

The tsunami of illegals coming over is now from Honduras, Guatemala etc.

I know thousands  of people who have come over to the US for immigration legally over the decades, and most of them didnt have to wait a lifetime, the process was slow and getting slower but still it worked for most of them.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, ceo_energemsier said:

I know thousands  of people who have come over to the US for immigration legally over the decades, and most of them didnt have to wait a lifetime, the process was slow and getting slower but still it worked for most of them.

That was then.  This is now.  The process and the procedures have dramatically changed.  Now, as a practical matter, nobody comes in, unless you are a parent or child of an existing US person.  Ordinary outside  workers?  Not much.

The refusal of Congress (and the President, of course) to engage in immigration reform has led to this complete mess.  The only person who seems to like the current mess is Mr. Trump, as it gives him a ready-made excuse to yell at the Democrats,  tweet out hysterical rabble-rousing, and chant at his rallies.  Trump himself has no real concerns about undocumented migrants.  He married one, and he hired lots on his Queens, NY construction projects.  Everything you hear on the TV is totally cynical.  

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

2 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

The tsunami of illegals coming over is now from Honduras, Guatemala etc.

Don't forget Africa (heckuva trip from Congo to Mexico to Texas, who is organizing this?)

At US-Mexico border, migrants from Africa, Haiti wait to seek asylum

LAREDO, Texas – Congolese in Nuevo Laredo. Cubans in Ciudad Juarez. Haitians in Tijuana.

Encouraged by Mexico’s lax immigration rules and held up by President Donald Trump’s border policies, refugees from countries other than Central America and Mexico are streaming to the U.S.-Mexican border at a rising clip, often to be kept in asylum limbo.

In Nuevo Laredo, across the border from this South Texas city, more than 1,500 Central and West African refugees have massed at the border, trying to seek asylum but stuck while U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents slowly process only a handful of migrants a day, said Mike Smith, a Methodist pastor who runs a migrant shelter in Laredo. Some have been there for more than two months, he said.

===============================
 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Trump: Deal Reached With Mexico "To Stem The Tide Of Migration", Tariffs Suspended

It would appear that Trump's tariff threat worked.

"I am pleased to inform you that The United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico," President Trump tweeted Friday.

"The Tariffs scheduled to be implemented by the U.S. on Monday, against Mexico, are hereby indefinitely suspended."

Mexico has agreed to "strong measures to stem the tide of Migration through Mexico, and to our Southern Border," Trump wrote.  ...

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

U.S. Department of State    U.S.-Mexico Joint Declaration MEDIA NOTE

JUNE 7, 2019

The United States and Mexico met this week to address the shared challenges of irregular migration, to include the entry of migrants into the United States in violation of U.S. law. Given the dramatic increase in migrants moving from Central America through Mexico to the United States, both countries recognize the vital importance of rapidly resolving the humanitarian emergency and security situation. The Governments of the United States and Mexico will work together to immediately implement a durable solution.

As a result of these discussions, the United States and Mexico commit to:  ...

(See link above for full text)

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

5 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

That was then.  This is now.  The process and the procedures have dramatically changed.  Now, as a practical matter, nobody comes in, unless you are a parent or child of an existing US person.  Ordinary outside  workers?  Not much.

The refusal of Congress (and the President, of course) to engage in immigration reform has led to this complete mess.  The only person who seems to like the current mess is Mr. Trump, as it gives him a ready-made excuse to yell at the Democrats,  tweet out hysterical rabble-rousing, and chant at his rallies.  Trump himself has no real concerns about undocumented migrants.  He married one, and he hired lots on his Queens, NY construction projects.  Everything you hear on the TV is totally cynical.  

Back in the day, we had Ellis Island. My grandparents came thru there on one side. On the other side I go back before the Daughters of the American Revolution. I'm not convinced about the 40 years since I know dozens of Chinese who've assiduously followed the rules and eventually (7 years  worst case) got their permanent residence followed like clockwork with their citizenship 5 years later. It certainly could be better, but as we know Chinese have been on a racist quota system implemented by the Democrats since the early 60's. 

This country needs a new Ellis Island, where you can show up, WITH PAPERS and they can vet you quickly, then stamp your ticket and you're a permanent resident. It by no means needs to be 100% approval and Ellis wasn't either. Illegal is defined as not coming through the proper entrance. 

Walls work, because they funnel you through the entrance they want to have you come in. Then you can be properly vetted. 

[Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas + 96]

On 6/3/2019 at 3:10 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

I support Trump's actions on both fronts, and my only minor quibble would be that the 25% ceiling on tariffs against Mexico is probably too low.

When Trump first started threatening and implementing tariffs in 2017/2018, there was one thing he did which indicated to me that he knows what he is doing.  Trump is very careful about the tariff percent.  His tariffs are usually 10-25% which seems weak, but they are low for a good reason.  In order to fight a war, ammo is needed.  The goal of a trade war is not to destroy/kill/nuke the enemy, but to get concessions.  Trump slowly, cautiously ramps up the threats/pressure/tariffs.  He tries to use as little force as necessary.  He's not perfect.  Sometimes he uses too little or too much force, but I have yet to see any major US politician who is better at getting concessions than him.  Most politicians are shit at making deals.  Most politicians just want their name on the deal and they want the media to praise them for the deal and don't give a shit about the actual real-world outcome/results.

[Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas + 96]

On 6/3/2019 at 2:48 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Watch how fast Mexico will magically be able to do something to improve the situation when they get slapped with 25% tariffs.

This is a "hotspot" for illegal border crossing, two months ago.  Only one Mexican border patrol officer in sight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLZB_EkgFBQ

This is the same location, a few days ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZMLl8Eishc

https://d2g8igdw686xgo.cloudfront.net/35400806_1559655538689442_r.jpeg

Two things are changed:

(1) New border wall thanks to "We Build the Wall"

(2)  Mexican Military is now present on the Mexican side thanks to Trump's recent deal with Mexico.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1137155056044826626

[Uvuvwevwevwe Onyetenyevwe Ugwemuhwem Osas + 96]

On 6/5/2019 at 1:27 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Not at all.  Entire families are found entering the USA, including without presenting themselves at a Federal Inspection Station, and they have no intention of "working."  You call them illegals anyway.  A Canadian yachtsman sailing from Nassau to Halifax wrecks on Cape Fear, or at Nantucket, and manages to swim ashore; is he now an "illegal."  He is here without papers and without having been to a Federal Inspection Station.  The reality is that this is all Regulations, and up to the broad discretion of an or any Immigration Agent.  In theory such a person could be detained; in reality, it is out of the question. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_entry

The illegal entry of non-nationals into the United States is a misdemeanor according to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which prohibits non-nationals from entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place which has not been designated by an immigration officer, and also prohibits non-nationals from eluding inspection by immigration officers.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 6/7/2019 at 1:55 PM, Jan van Eck said:

You have accurately assessed the intent of the comment.  Thank you. 

I doubt that.

I suspect one of you is: "the US is turning into similar crap" the other is "the world was better off when entirely ruled by whites."

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Don't worry Mexico is now part of the moon. Problem solved. #TrumpLogic #FactsDontMatter

Edited June 9, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 6/7/2019 at 6:01 PM, Jan van Eck said:

That was then.  This is now.  The process and the procedures have dramatically changed.  Now, as a practical matter, nobody comes in, unless you are a parent or child of an existing US person.  Ordinary outside  workers?  Not much.

Under the old free-trade agreement chemists and engineers were considered "commodities."  The US was, and perhaps still is, essentially required to at least grant me a work permit. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

22 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

U.S. Department of State    U.S.-Mexico Joint Declaration MEDIA NOTE

JUNE 7, 2019

The United States and Mexico met this week to address the shared challenges of irregular migration, to include the entry of migrants into the United States in violation of U.S. law. Given the dramatic increase in migrants moving from Central America through Mexico to the United States, both countries recognize the vital importance of rapidly resolving the humanitarian emergency and security situation. The Governments of the United States and Mexico will work together to immediately implement a durable solution.

As a result of these discussions, the United States and Mexico commit to:  ...

(See link above for full text)

You love trump no matter what he does - you wanted Mexico to pay. Mexico didn't pay for a wall, Mexico didn't pay any tariffs (related to this). All this required was two reasonable people to have a talk - aka diplomacy... thankfully one of his advisors must have helped.

Hot air blowhard with no substance - the world will listen less and less to the old man who cries wolf. 

[David H Prichard + 1]

Bravo, Mr. Kirkman.