Avatar feed
Responses: 2
SPC Jacob Shepherd
2
2
0
What Trump did was a long established bargaining/negotiation technique. Demand something that you know that they won't go for, which is more than you want, but which forces the other side to you side of the negotiation. The party that leads the negotiation always has the upper hand in this.

A full-scale border wall would be a terrible idea. This is better.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Dave Beran
1
1
0
This was what he said all along. That they,Congress, needed to pass a law to protect these people. What BHO did was illegal and was subject to be overturned. This way these people do not have to worry. Unless they are a felon.
(1)
Comment
(0)
SSG William Bowen
SSG William Bowen
7 y
Most, if not all, DACA recipients also receive an Employment Authorization Document and are issued a tax payers ID#. They can legally work and should be paying taxes. That doesn't mean some of them may work under the table and their pay is not recorded, but that also happens with Americans. Just FYI, even adults that are flat out illegal and have a deportation order but may have an appeal can get work authorization. There are many reasons non-immigrants, including those that are illegal, can get work authorization.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSG William Bowen
SSG William Bowen
7 y
SFC Dave Beran - Children born in the US of illegal parents are US citizens. Many do not agree but it is covered in the 14th Amendment, regardless of what is thought to be the intent. DACA covers kids that were brought here as kids either illegally from the get go, and those that came legally and are visa overstays.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SFC Dave Beran
SFC Dave Beran
7 y
SSG William Bowen - sad. Sit there and correct people who support things Glad I am not you.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG William Bowen
SSG William Bowen
7 y
I am not even sure what you mean? Your statement of "Congress would not pass a law making children born here of illegal immigrants parents" is confusing. I was just pointing out that DACA does not refer to children born here. Maybe you meant something else and it didn't come out like you meant? Maybe you meant to continue on with "eligible for some type of legal status"? I was not trying to be demeaning in anyway. If I do see statements that are incorrect, I do interject with my opinion, as that is the whole purpose of discussion/debate. I see a lot of incorrect and misunderstood info posted in here and I kind of have a working knowledge of immigration issues and law so I throw my 2 cents in from time to time.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close