Robert thank you for your explanation of the border and the Biden policy. I get tired of my Democrat friends buying the news we have open borders and Democrats want to flood the country with immigrants to vote for them. It is absolutely untrue and as you have pointed out Biden is doing more to keep immigrants out of the country than Trump. It is a problem for Congress to solve and the Republicans refuse to address it as it is a winner for them. Please speak out against this negative and untrue fact in your talks with independents and undecided voters and clear up this lie.
Sorry to point this out, but you may have friends who are Democrats, and Democratic friends, but you have no Democrat friends. Using “Democrat” for the name of the party or its members is a slur that Republicans have engaged in since the 1940s. It is a perhaps-subtle way of signaling that the other party does not deserve enough respect to use its name. We need to be disciplined in rejecting it and calling it out. Always.
Thank you, Jon. The issue is that "Republican" is both a noun and an adjective. As used politically, "Democrat" is a noun and "Democratic" is an adjective. Rush Limbaugh (may he rest in purgatory) turned using the noun as a pejorative and forgoing usage of the proper adjective of "democratic" and that has seeped into common usage.
I think it long-antedated the late, unlamented Rush. But perhaps not. I agree that there is some surface ambiguity there. Maybe we should start referring to the other party as the Republics. Or the Publicans. Or just the Gangsters. :-)
It goes back much further than Limbaugh. Thomas Dewey used it in his White House runs in the 1940s, and members of the John Birch Society briefly revived it in the mid-fifties. George W. Bush started using it again in the 1988 Presidential campaign and New Gingrich subsequently put it into his infamous Republican “language guide.” Republicans have used it ever since.
Hello, Robert. Of course I know that you are aware of the mis-use of Democrat. But I was replying to Richard Stenton. That's not an alias you use, is it?
This all needs to be explained to the public repeatedly and in very simple terms. It isn’t enough to tell people where to find the information. It must be given to them in as clear a language as is being used to put the blame on Democrats. And Democrats need to get ahead of the story of who is to blame rather than react. If people are afraid of an invasion then tell them who is causing it before we hear of caravans of terrorists.
We’ve seen this show before. We ought to know how to deal with it by now.
Robert's explanation is exactly what needs to be plastered on billboards, featured in TV commercials, and repeated in op eds across the nation! It is spot on! Start writing, everyone!
Agreed. We can't simply rely on WH papers and press releases, particularly when faced with the constant stream of lies from Republican presidential candidates, Republican members of Congress and the right wing media.
While I agree with all of that (Biden’s accomplishments, etc.), it seems to me that we nonetheless have a serious border problem and the only hope for a fix is to break congressional dysfunction getting back on track with finding our magic in the middle.
That written, personally I disagree with allowing people to enter the country any way other than via proper process — coming vetted and through the designated gates. I also think that we should call the bluff of “GOP extremists” by offering up building the wall in exchange for full funding of Bidenomic programs.
We put fences around pools for a reason; gated communities; fenced yards, etc. What’s so wrong with insisting that those entering do so through gates rather than climbing or bashing fences, or whatever?
“And we’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden…” (vintage Joni M)
I don't know this as a fact but I think right wingers are SENDING immigrants to the border. Currently there are more Cubans there than came during the Mariel boatlift. I always ask how an impoverished African, Ukrainian, Cuban guajiro can get the dinero to get to the Mexican border?
The Republicans talk incessantly about "open borders," especially around election time. Their words are repeated around the world, especially in Central and South America. The criminal people movers in operation in such places spread the false information. Desperate people will take desperate measures to give themselves a chance to live and possibly have a life. The Republicans have refused to address border problems since George W. Bush tried to address the issue. Immigration is a prime example of Republican putting themselves and their cult ahead of the greater good of the country. I would gladly sign on to deporting the obstructionist "Freedom Caucus" plus the cruel Republican lawmakers in Texas.
They have no money! These are not balseros. Many of them are on the lam -- fleeing arrest in their home countries. They have to fly to Mexico City or arrive by cruise ship,
What you say makes sense, but ignores reality. Climate change, economic reality and political dysfunction, combined with the American Dream, push far too many people to come here (at great risk and expense) for any barrier to keep them out, unless you are talking about erecting an Iron Curtain and machine-gunning people as they come over the border.
The door at my house encourages most people to ring the doorbell, so I rarely have to resort to means rejecting intruders.
I think that we should rely on our subject matter experts and develop whatever is the smartest most effective structures, technology, etc. to encourage proper and orderly entry.
Furthermore, those seeking safe harbor deserve assistance, but heartfelt empathy does not go so far as to dictate granting territory of choice — does it..?
@ Jon Margolis. I heard visa cases for 20 years. Not talking about central Americans. There are currently more Cubans at the border than came in the Mariel boatlift. Thousands of Somalis, other Africans. Ukrainians. Chinese. You get the idea.
Central Americans are another story. Directly proportional to the cost of coffee, bananas. If they are seeking political asylum, have rights. If not political, they don't.
In the past few days I saw a story about a man from Turkey who flew to Tijuana and hiked or hitched out into the desert to cross at an isolated spot. I understand that a lot of people from all over the world are going to Mexico to cross the southern border. It's an accident of geography that it will always be easier to enter the US without authorization from the south than on the East or West Coast.
Yes, they do. Should we refuse tourists and students? There is already concern that students are turning their backs on American universities, which is effectively a brain drain.
Moreover, our country is well beyond environmental sustainability with the current population. We're running out of groundwater, putting our agricultural productivity in jeopardy.
Propublica projects that within several decades, MILLIONS of Americans will become climate refugees.
Both of these findings suggest that we badly need to stabilize our population, which is projected to grow by the equivalent of nearly four New York States over the next 40 years.
AND... the productivity of our ecosystems is declining. Insects, and wild vertebrate animals have declined by over half since the '60s, decimating ecosystem services (clean water, clean air, CO2 balance, pollination, soil fertility, and much else) as we spread sprawl, pavement, and agriculture (which does not provide ecosystem services) all over the land.
It's less about our population, and more about our per capita use of resources. I do not have the answer on immigration, but I am very uncomfortable with the idea that we, who have been the biggest contributor to climate change, and who have essentially mined much of the world of resources, are now going to say, "running out of clean water, and soil? Can't grow crops in your changed climate? Your cities are uninhabitable due to flooding? Too bad. Stay where you are while we shore up our climate resilience."
Our country is not a pool, and simplistic metaphors like that misrepresent the issue. Also no to giving into to the current era proto-nazis ground on immigration by building a wall. They want to shut down immigration, and speak past the fact that the vast majority of people coming to this country try to enter it legally, and act is if everyone entered illegally.
Many of us, on the left hand of the Democratic Party, understand that the elites in this country are supporting the wrong governments in Latin America, and trying to destroy those who are working for the people. Specifically, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua have been harshly, attacked with sanctions, aimed at overthrowing their governments And making peoples lives miserable there so that they will have to come here.
If God willing we retain the White House, Biden must reject the trump era foreign policy that labels Cuba a terrorist state— depriving Cuban children of Cancer care thru the cruel embargo, that the world condemns.
that means the cruel blockade has worked in starving people out of a society that provides free health services and education to its population and rejects corporate control.
A border wall or fence is useless. We have seen myriad instances where migrants desperate to enter into the United States have come up with any number of ways to breach said wall, in too many cases at the expense of their own lives or limbs.
IMO, that’s just not so, as structures like walls, fences, etc. serve as rather obvious and substantial obstacles to those attempting to improperly cross our border. We have a structure around the WhiteHouse for a similar reason. Same goes for the front doors of most homes, etc. Certainly, a wall in and of itself is not a fix all, but it is undeniably a substantial obstacle — a part of a bigger plan. It seems to me that immigration should be both encouraged and controlled.
Isn’t it to the benefit of America to have a smartly devised efficient well controlled immigration process? Isn’t conceding that physical barriers could be part of such a smart plan a small price to pay as a bargaining chip that might lead to fixing present congressional dysfunction, funding Biden’s smart and progressive programs, etc.?
It does appear that Biden is doing what he can do, which is heartening. But Democrats on Capitol Hill are not. The easiest way to stanch the flood at the border would be to pass a national, mandatory E-Verify, an identification system to identify people in the US illegally when they apply for jobs, which a handful of states require, and which millions of US companies voluntarily use. If they can't get jobs, they won't come. E-Verify also has the advantage of catching visa overstayers.
But Democrats on Capitol Hill have largely voted against E-Verify, at least once during the Trump Admin (Trump did not push for it, probably because he saw the wall as a monument to him), and I think there was a vote on E-Verify during the Biden Admin, which the Democrats largely failed to support it.
There is absolutely no reason to vote against E-Verify unless you want illegal immigrants coming in, ostensibly so they can become Democratic voters when legalized, which is something former Mass Congressman Barney Frank, and a few others have admitted is the case.
Dave, I know you and I disagree on this topic, but I will try again: First, the opposition to E-Verify is bi-partisan, so please don't just blame Democrats.
Second, E-Verify is mandatory in some states. Data suggests that there is no difference in the immigrant population in those states.
Third, E-Verify has a high error rate because it checks papers not workers. And by "error rate," I mean that a very high percentage of people who are supposed to be screened out by the program nonetheless present documentation that satisfies the requirements of e-Verify.
In order to actually screen WORKERS, the US would need to implement biometric screening tied to passports, drivers licenses, and SSNs. Indeed, Democrats and Republicans have jointly proposed such a measure on several occasions.
So, here's the question: Are you ready to have your biometric data tied to driver's license? Do you think it is reasonable for others to have privacy concerns about mandatory government collection of biometric data? Do you have any concerns that an authoritarian government would misuse that data?
It would also be effective for the government to plant a microchip in our necks as a precondition to employment. But effectiveness isn't the sole determinant of good policy.
You are obviously not suggesting such extreme measures, but I am pointing out that the E-Verify solution is not as simple and effective as you suggest. There are difficult issues of implementation that cause people of good faith to oppose it--even when they want a solution to unregulated immigration.
The votes on E-Verify have been largely Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed, which is pretty much the case with votes on anything to do with immigration. I do remember that the GOP House came very close during the Trump Admin, to passing E-Verify despite strong Democratic opposition (along with a couple of other measures including reducing annual immigration numbers by roughly a quarter--not nearly enough for me, but no other legislation that I know of has come up that would have reduced immigration, despite Barbara Jordan's recommendation in '96 that it be reduced to slightly over a half a million, from around a million annually). The Senate voted similarly, but not as dramatically so as the House. So I don't think your claim that the votes are bipartisan is accurate. (I would not expect such votes to be totally partisan, but that a vast majority of GOPers would favor, and a vast majority of Dems would oppose.)
I have never heard anything suggesting that E-Verify has a high error rate. Quite the opposite is true to my knowledge.
Nor have I heard anything suggesting that immigrant populations are the same in states with E-Verify as in those in other states (I'm assuming you mean percentagewise). Only four states require all employers to use E-Verify--Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arizona.
PS: I sent your account of Biden's measures to stop the Houthi interference with shipping to a friend who doesn't think much of Biden. Much appreciate that!
Until recently, the bulk of migrants had been coming from Latin American nations. Much of their Congressional support has come from Latino and allied “progressive” Congresspersons.
People should acknowledge the likelihood and influence of ethnic identification – more so among Democrats than Republicans – in the debates over immigration.
Frankly, I think Biden should address the Nation. He should explain the complex issues in terms most Americans can understand, from the plight of people leaving desperate lands (e.g. Authoritarian regimes (w/clear throat sound)) to the issue of employers hiring illegal immigrants (even children!); what his administration is doing and has done; compare his effort to other administrations' efforts; and finally challenge Congress to pass the U.S. Citizenship Act that he sent to Congress in 2021.
Unfortunately, we'll probably have to wait until his March 7th State of the Union address where immigration will be just one of the many issues he'll raise.
There are times when the bully-pulpit can be effectively used (and not by a bully). This is perhaps one of them.
While I agree that most fleeing other countries to ours likely enter with good intent, it seems indisputable that we have serious border breach issues.
Being a “nation of immigrants,” we are IMO at our best when we are celebrating and capitalizing on our diversity — our wellspring of ideas, etc. from which we harvest our best thoughts, theories, philosophies, etc. distilling same to best practices, policies, legislation, etc. Smart immigration policies are in all of our better interests.
But, our border problem is real and it is presently seemingly of control. That lack of control will be a hot issue for the coming election and understandably so.
Personally, I have loads of empathy for anyone fleeing oppression, etc. That written, I am not so sure that the requisite well-founded fear of persecution continues once such a person has successfully escaped the specific source of persecution — does it?
When I am sailing and a storm arises, most empathetic owners of safe harbors recognize the exigency and allow my temporary stay. That written, it would be entirely unreasonable for me to work my way down a cut until I reach some particular property of my choice — wouldn’t it…?
"Nation of immigrants" is a bit of a shibboleth. People invoke it so frequently and lose sight of our country's rejects--black people in the projects, people growing up poor in places like Appalachia, etc. Because we fail to give every child good teachers and a good school, these people, many of whom probably have the brains to do far more than they'll ever do, by dint of our failure to support all of our children equally, are doomed to lives of mediocrity.
I loved in a Black neighborhood in DC that was turning. Next door to me: Mr. and Mrs. Washington, a transmission rebuilder and a checker at a department store--nice people. Their daughters had kids by different men who spent different amounts of time in their lives, and those kids did not have good schools to go to.
On the next street up, I had some white, solidly middle class friends, who sent their kids to private school. One day I was out front. A couple of the Washingtons' grandchildren were out when the white mother walked by with a couple of her kids. As the white mother and kids walked by the Washingtons' grandchildren, I could literally feel the difference between the futures the two sets of kids would have. It felt awful. These are the kids we throw away while we focus our attention on the scads of immigrant children who come here, dumbing down the schools--which often aren't very good to begin with--with their numbers and their lack of English.
Instead of "Nation of Immigrants," how about "nation of descendants of slavery"? Or "nation of descendants of poor folk, who by dint of the large amount of inequality in our country, due to a sink or swim mentality, passed down from the wealthiest, are stuck in poverty?
I cringe every time I see or hear "Freedom Caucus" because these far right extremist Republicans have twisted a core progressive, humanistic value of freedom into "I am the boss of you." So we all should follow Robert's lead by using quotation marks as he did, "GOP extremist 'Freedom' Caucus," or preface it with "so-called Freedom Caucus." Words matter.
100% agree, and I feel similarly about MAGA. I prefer past perfidious pulpit and soldiers of sedition, but it doesn’t work well as an acronym (PPP&SS). Well, the Schutzstaffel (“SS”) does seem to fit, but…
"Freedom Caucus" is not in any way associated with freedom. I utilize "Klown Kar Kawkus" for a variety of reasons, mostly because my junior high brain runs away with me frequently. I also acknowledge the RepubliKan party with a K, both of these utilizations pointing their true north to the KKK.
Thank you. The word Freedom is particularly important as identified by messaging experts such as Anat Shenker-Osorio. Research shows that messages about our freedoms are more effective than about our rights.
Regarding the border crisis, there is an important discussion on it in the most recent podcast “Winning 2024” with Claire McCaskill and Jennifer Palmieri. It’s a tough love kind of a talk that agrees largely with what you have written here but acknowledges that the Dems need to get out in front of this and address it because it is, in fact, a major voting issue and concern for people on both sides. The optics are not good for this administration in spite of all the facts you have presented. The conversation acknowledges that Biden largely has his hands tied, but there is a big need to come out and acknowledge the problem and talk about it. One of the guests, a congresswoman from Texas, has good ideas. They need to be talked about and the Republicans need to be consistently exposed as the fake actors that they are. This issue is a festering wound, that while impossible to solve without Congress, can at least be exposed and openly discussed. Again and again.
And Thank You for saying what I have wanted someone to say… TFG should have not been allowed even a second to spew more lies, when he had already been told, repeatedly, that he could not. Why he gets away with this time after time, I don’t understand. He should have been jailed for contempt, exactly as you said.
Thanks for calling our attention to the "Winning 2024" podcast, Pamsy. I will listen. And I agree "that the Dems need to get out in front of this and address it because it is, in fact, a major voting issue and concern for people on both sides." Robert addressed the immigration issue, with particular focus on asylum seekers in NY, last week in the comment section. For me, it was a perspective on reality that I was unaware of – how even Dems are turning to the false narrative promulgated by the Republican agenda, that it’s “Joe Biden’s fault.”
For me, it was a call to the seriousness of it, of awareness and truth-telling on the matter. And as I understood it, Robert also expressed, in your words, the need for it “to be talked about and the Republicans need to be consistently exposed as the fake actors that they are.”
Yet another occasion where the generative collective wisdom of Today’s Edition Newsletter is self-evident. Something I remain grateful to be the beneficiary of, ongoing.
Day-to-day, I search for ways (within myself) to articulate my part in stepping forward. With the truth, and longing for a better world as channels of hope, even when it seems to elude me. (And without sounding over the top, that love allows that to unfold, in me, and in the world – somehow.)
You’re so kind, Pamsy. I must admit to a bit of residual regret for sharing so openly, fearing judgment, I suppose. So your generous words are timely, and appreciated.
And seems a privilege we can find safety here, enough to express ourselves in the company of one another. Earlier in the week, another reader commented about this community as a ‘sacred place.’ How lovely. And true.
Hi, Jacquie. It was in the comments section of Today's Edition Newsletter dated January 5 – ‘Promises Kept.’ Robert was responding to a reader’s comments. It is something that has made its mark on me. I’ve attempted to articulate the matter in a letter to a Democrat, though as usual, doubt my ability to articulate clearly and powerfully, as Robert knows well how to do. (Since it was in the comments section, I was not comfortable quoting Robert so have made a humble attempt at calling out the GOP lie, that even Dems have absorbed, with the facts, as I understand them.)
I was pleased to see Robert succinctly address the immigration issue in (the body of) Today’s Newsletter, which I feel free to share. So I’m including link to it in my letter to the Democrat with the intention to get it out the door today. Perfection eludes me though such as it is.
Thank you, Jean! This is very helpful. I think I know why I missed those comments. The previous day, I fell on ice and fractured my left patella/kneecap!
O Jacquie, I am so sorry about the fall. I’ve had falls and fractures and know how challenging these can be. You’re rather amazing to be attentive and curious about detail here, even now. I’d be wallowing in self-pity, something I’m expert in, truth be told. Here’s to hoping your complete healing comes soon.
The thing we can be most sure of is Trump would NEVER have been able to put together a coalition of nations, standing together on this issue. No nation trusts Trump.
Big business loves immigration -- legal or otherwise. I've said this before. Refugees have a Constitutional right to asylum. They are entitled to a hearing but the problem is that the system is underfunded and the backlog is overwhelming. Eliminate the backlog and there would be few on parole.
Venezuelans. Cubans. Republicans tell them to fight their governments, and later they do and have to "vote" with their feet. When they come here, they are scapegoated for political purposes -- sometimes by their own "people".
When they stay beyond their contract date, they become illegal aliens. Many people from Venezuela and other countries, for that matter come here on a tourist or an educational visa and stay.
I heard debarment penalty cases under several statutes. I have war stories, when I debarred a company for one purpose but it affected all government contracts. Some of the same companies in the "labor pool" business also have contracts with other agencies, i. e. defense or state.
Hi, Dave, you raise very good points. As a policy question, should we expect employers to be enforcers of immigration policy when fraud in identification documents is rampant. E-Verify requires documents as proof of employability, which are easily forged. The only workable solution is collection of biometric data to be tied to a national ID. Many Americans of both parties are wary of such a system. Without taking a position on such a requirement, I believe that people of good faith can oppose it--even if they want to end unregulated mass migration into the US.
Why do Americans feel that the President is "soft on the border?" Because Republicans and their enablers control the narrative. Why? Because it is easier to do so if you lie and ignore the facts. MAGAs scream about $8 gasoline as they fill up their gigantic trucks that get 12 MPG, while Democrats motor by in a Prius that runs on air.
But Democrats are different, we don't lie. We tell the truth. The truth about the struggle and fight many of us are engaged in daily. The greatest Democrat President in our history said it the best, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Thank you FDR.
P.S. Laura Loomer, a self styled far-right and anti-Muslim conservative political activist, white nationalist, conspiracy theorist tweeted yesterday that the "Deep State" was using HARP (?) to manipulate the weather and prevent Trump from "dominating the Iowa Caucus." I can't make this stuff up.
It is important to remember that, in the current Red Sea situation, the Houthis are the original aggressors and what the Joint Task Force did was retaliation. War had already begun, and yesterday's action is the only way to bring an end to it. Stopping the flow of money and weapons to the Houthis, Hamasaki, Hezbollah, and other such groups will be another piece of a puzzle that is being assembled in fits and starts but is essential if there is to be any sort of peace in that part of the world.
Similarly, although the failed insurrectionist was totally out of control yesterday, Judge Engoron's subdued response was exactly correct. Any attempt to stop the tirade would feed the "I'm a victim" narrative and eliminating that means there are no effective grounds for appeal, even though there will be one.
Congress beggars comment, other than that Mr. Jeffries should be out there every day with a growing stack of legislation saying "These are the bills that are ready to be voted on if my colleagues across the aisle are interested in governance." There is no other way to drive home the point of who is at fault here and taking that load off of the President will be like Sam carrying Frodo to Mt. Doom.
Everybody stay warm, there is some miserable weather coming.
Out in the Northwet, we're looking a freezing rain before snow. Always a great combination for a segment of the country who cannot drive in sunshine and dry pavement and who lacks public works mitigation to the degree that our neighbors to the north and east have in abundance.
Frankly I’m fed up. I’m tired of the courts and everyone else trying to make sure that Defendant Trump is treated fairly and given opportunities that typical defendants were not given. Treat him the same as everyone else period. Robert today provided great information about the immigration efforts and results of the Biden administration that I was unaware of and probably millions of voters also. This information must be shouted from the roof tops and everyone must be made aware of it. The Biden Administration must start pushing back with harder hitting fact based information to drown out the Republicans campaign of lies. A columnist recently said that the 2024 campaign will be an information war and that is were the fight must be won. This is just an example.
Stephen --- absolutely. And - once again - the NYT. I want to scream at the irresponsible, lazy journalists --- 'have you no shame?' And also - thank you Robert --- I too have been ignorant about the border - and have paid too little attention to it.
Oh, to be a rich, privileged, white dude in our legal system and get away with this behavior...! And on top of that, have a sizable segment of our citizenry side with you and fund your defense!
My faith in our justice system has eroded over the decades, but the past 8 years has been a constant bombardment on the concept of lawful vs unlawful, right vs wrong. It flows down stream; we are paying for it now and it will wash over us in the future. A stronger voice has to be raised against bad faith/intent actors.
I was disappointed to hear that the judge started to agree to allow the Quadefendant to speak after rightly denying it. Then to have the POS launch into precisely the tirade that the judge was guarding against without repercussions added to my disappointment. I hope the judge did so to make the Quadefendant's appeal to the Supreme Court less appealing.
Mary Trump is pleased with how things went yesterday. "The damage has been done. Despite the fact he just destroyed any hope for leniency, Donald said exactly what was on his mind. Now, he will pay for it."
Here are some questions about the civil fraud trial that I haven't seen addressed:
It seems clear that harsh penalties are coming Trump's way, both restrictions on his ability to do business and a large fine. Can this decision be appealed? What will the next step be? If this is final, I fully expect Trump to simply refuse to pay up, present himself as unfairly targeted, and dare the court to jail him. What happens then?
If a person refuses to pay, bank accounts can be garnished, real estate sold.
As I understand, in NY, the cost of an appeal surety bond varies from case to case. Typically, the amount the appellant will be responsible for is 1-2% of the surety bond a mount that is needed. For example, if the appeal bond is in the amount of $1,000,000 then it would cost between $10,000 and $20,000 annually.
If he appeals, the appellate court can stay everything.
On the other hand he has a lot more exposure. 2 more NY cases in January. E Jean Carroll is seeking $10MM plus punitive damages. his pyramid fraud trial in connection with ACN, Inc. is still scheduled for January 29.
He has at least another 6 damage suits pending trial dates.
According to Andrew Weisseman, and my possibly inaccurate memory of what he has said, a court monitor may/will be appointed to liquidate assets to pay the judgement assessed. If he wants to appeal, he has to post a large sum of money as a bond. Either way, it sounds like there will be real monetary costs involved.
As I see it there are two problems at the border and perceptions of the problem by people (drugs crossing the border and human beings) I don't know the answer to either problem but I also know that republicans don't either and don't care. As Robert said, it's a campaign issue and it makes for great grievances for political gain. It was no different for the abortion issue until Roe v. Wade was overturned and it went far beyond the republican thoughts as a campaign issue and now it's biting them in the ass and an issue in reverse?
I digress, so back the the border and drugs and my thoughts, #1 we have an addiction problem and that requires attention, but that's too complicated and the solutions are progressive and republicans don't want anything to do with that. #2 and I think the bigger problem, is where the chemicals for the drugs are coming from, China. I don't know how you stop or curtail that, but it's a huge issue and no one is focusing on that.
Last but not least is human beings coming to the border and hoping to enter the US? Are they all coming here to destroy the country, I don't think so. It's how my ancestors got here, not southern but eastern seaboard from Ireland and how everyone's ancestors got here reading this, i.e. from some other country. Why? For opportunity and that tangible gift of opportunity is what drives, my guess, 85 to 90 % of people/families to come here. This is what has made the United States such a dynamic country and economic powerhouse. All you have to do is look at (moron Musk) he isn't from the US but he is a citizen and, again my guess, he's rich and republican and they don't give a shit because that fits their bill as an acceptable immigrant? If you have a shit ton of money come on in and could you vote republican too? Sorry, that's my rant for today and have a great day everyone.
Robert mentioned the Cato Institute. Here’s another article that addresses the fentanyl issue. I think it’s important to note the Cato Institute is a conservative, Libertarian think tank.
“ U.S. President Joe Biden highlighted "strong international coordination" by his administration to halt the flow of fentanyl and the ingredients used to produce the deadly drug following his diplomatic engagements with leaders of China and Mexico last week.”
I’m getting weary of statements about how our forebears came to the US unhindered (not quite true) and so we should not hinder immigration today.
We need an immigration *policy* based on our needs (including humanitarian concerns) – *not* the perceived or alleged needs of others. That policy need not be confined to immigration-as-future-citizenship, but could encompass various forms of work permits that are not connected go future citizenship.
This liberal believes US citizenship should have meaning.
Set aside the issue of HOW immigrants get into the US. About a dozen states have stagnant population (and a few are declining) except for the inflow of immigrants--legal and illegal.
While we can debate whether continued population growth is good for the earth, having a population collapse--like Japan--is a recipe for a failed state. If red states in central America want a future, they need to be welcoming to immigrants. Otherwise, their economies will collapse. There will be no one to fill their service jobs, take care of their ageing populations, or fill out their workforce.
My wife and I were in San Diego in the last year of Trump's term. About 50% of the Starbucks shops were shuttered. We asked why at one of the shops. The worker said, "Trump." His immigration policies worked--by drying up the labor force in San Diego. We see that same dynamic in Florida, where there are not enough workers to harvest the citrus crops.
See "Florida’s labor shortage spans wide range of industries."
"Hardest hit are industries such as construction, restaurants, hotels, roofing, landscaping and agriculture, which traditionally have relied on both citizens and migrant workers without permanent legal status.
Yesterday you addressed how Trump wanted to be compared to Hitler, —because that comparison normalizes the notion that Trump will regain power as an autocratic strongman. I think he wanted Judge Engeron to hold him in contempt as a martyr. His rantings, before, during and after the court appearance in essence argue for victimhood for selective political prosecution, martyrdom and assert that regardless of outcome, whether the court fines him, jails him, or symbolically emasculates him, history will absolve him.
IMHO it's obvious that Trump makes statements with the intent to inflame the ire of his his cult, if not call them to protest. They didn't seem to be out in force yesterday.
Had I been Engeron, I might have been tempted to ask him how he was feeling, as a predicate, to order a mental examination, and ask counsel whether civil commitment was justified, but that might really made Trump a martyr.
Great newsletter, again. It’s possible that people no longer trust the government website after all the lies that ere posted during Trump’s term. I have tracked climate change statistics for years and the .gov place was excellent for that. The day Trump got into office, the climate information was pulled off the site. Within months, scientists and other experts on many topics were relocated from DC. And don’t get me started about COVID. I guess the upside to all this is that we are benefitting now as authors, readers, are collaborators for saving our democracy and our world. One more thing, because of my background with the Myers-Briggs, the feeling-thinking (F-T) continuum shows up mightily among your readers, Robert. While we can all care deeply about fairness, for example, continuing to keep giving those who wrong us “just one more chance” rarely works! Hmmm, I hope I made sense here.
Why was the headline in the NYT, "Trump Rebukes Judge in Court?" He had no standing to "rebuke" anyone. The headline should have been, "Trump, Out of Control, Flouts Gag Order Again Spouting Nonsense."
Robert thank you for your explanation of the border and the Biden policy. I get tired of my Democrat friends buying the news we have open borders and Democrats want to flood the country with immigrants to vote for them. It is absolutely untrue and as you have pointed out Biden is doing more to keep immigrants out of the country than Trump. It is a problem for Congress to solve and the Republicans refuse to address it as it is a winner for them. Please speak out against this negative and untrue fact in your talks with independents and undecided voters and clear up this lie.
Ironically, Trump was the poster boy foe employer sanctions for using illegals on his job site.https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/nyregion/trump-tower-illegal-immigrant-workers-union-settlement.html
He also used temporary visas to hire foreigners to displace American workers on his properties.
Argh! I should have made those points. Thanks for doing so!
The MSM and the Fox and clones blast out the lies non-stop. No mystery
Sorry to point this out, but you may have friends who are Democrats, and Democratic friends, but you have no Democrat friends. Using “Democrat” for the name of the party or its members is a slur that Republicans have engaged in since the 1940s. It is a perhaps-subtle way of signaling that the other party does not deserve enough respect to use its name. We need to be disciplined in rejecting it and calling it out. Always.
Thank you, Jon. The issue is that "Republican" is both a noun and an adjective. As used politically, "Democrat" is a noun and "Democratic" is an adjective. Rush Limbaugh (may he rest in purgatory) turned using the noun as a pejorative and forgoing usage of the proper adjective of "democratic" and that has seeped into common usage.
It didn’t *seep* into common usage. Republicans intentionally used “Democrat” when they should have used “Democratic”
It has even “seeped” into PBS TV News reportage.
I think we're saying the same thing.
I think it long-antedated the late, unlamented Rush. But perhaps not. I agree that there is some surface ambiguity there. Maybe we should start referring to the other party as the Republics. Or the Publicans. Or just the Gangsters. :-)
I call them Repuglicans
I've also seen Rethuglicans, which I kind of like.
It goes back much further than Limbaugh. Thomas Dewey used it in his White House runs in the 1940s, and members of the John Birch Society briefly revived it in the mid-fifties. George W. Bush started using it again in the 1988 Presidential campaign and New Gingrich subsequently put it into his infamous Republican “language guide.” Republicans have used it ever since.
Thanks for the historical recap. I guess that it became common with Limbaugh when he got his radio platform.
I agree that tolerated usage does not make this correct.
So many words have been added to the English language not because they are correct, but because they have been commonly used.
Hello, Robert. Of course I know that you are aware of the mis-use of Democrat. But I was replying to Richard Stenton. That's not an alias you use, is it?
No. I have deleted my comment. I assumed it was directed to me. It was not. Apologies for the misunderstanding.
If that's the worst mistake you make today, it will be a good day. At least it would be for me. Have a good weekend.
This all needs to be explained to the public repeatedly and in very simple terms. It isn’t enough to tell people where to find the information. It must be given to them in as clear a language as is being used to put the blame on Democrats. And Democrats need to get ahead of the story of who is to blame rather than react. If people are afraid of an invasion then tell them who is causing it before we hear of caravans of terrorists.
We’ve seen this show before. We ought to know how to deal with it by now.
Robert's explanation is exactly what needs to be plastered on billboards, featured in TV commercials, and repeated in op eds across the nation! It is spot on! Start writing, everyone!
Agreed. We can't simply rely on WH papers and press releases, particularly when faced with the constant stream of lies from Republican presidential candidates, Republican members of Congress and the right wing media.
While I agree with all of that (Biden’s accomplishments, etc.), it seems to me that we nonetheless have a serious border problem and the only hope for a fix is to break congressional dysfunction getting back on track with finding our magic in the middle.
That written, personally I disagree with allowing people to enter the country any way other than via proper process — coming vetted and through the designated gates. I also think that we should call the bluff of “GOP extremists” by offering up building the wall in exchange for full funding of Bidenomic programs.
We put fences around pools for a reason; gated communities; fenced yards, etc. What’s so wrong with insisting that those entering do so through gates rather than climbing or bashing fences, or whatever?
“And we’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden…” (vintage Joni M)
I don't know this as a fact but I think right wingers are SENDING immigrants to the border. Currently there are more Cubans there than came during the Mariel boatlift. I always ask how an impoverished African, Ukrainian, Cuban guajiro can get the dinero to get to the Mexican border?
The Republicans talk incessantly about "open borders," especially around election time. Their words are repeated around the world, especially in Central and South America. The criminal people movers in operation in such places spread the false information. Desperate people will take desperate measures to give themselves a chance to live and possibly have a life. The Republicans have refused to address border problems since George W. Bush tried to address the issue. Immigration is a prime example of Republican putting themselves and their cult ahead of the greater good of the country. I would gladly sign on to deporting the obstructionist "Freedom Caucus" plus the cruel Republican lawmakers in Texas.
They don't need to. If you could increase your income 5-10-fold, by moving to another country, wouldn't you? It's a no-brainer!
They have no money! These are not balseros. Many of them are on the lam -- fleeing arrest in their home countries. They have to fly to Mexico City or arrive by cruise ship,
What you say makes sense, but ignores reality. Climate change, economic reality and political dysfunction, combined with the American Dream, push far too many people to come here (at great risk and expense) for any barrier to keep them out, unless you are talking about erecting an Iron Curtain and machine-gunning people as they come over the border.
The door at my house encourages most people to ring the doorbell, so I rarely have to resort to means rejecting intruders.
I think that we should rely on our subject matter experts and develop whatever is the smartest most effective structures, technology, etc. to encourage proper and orderly entry.
Furthermore, those seeking safe harbor deserve assistance, but heartfelt empathy does not go so far as to dictate granting territory of choice — does it..?
whatever is = whatever are
@ Jon Margolis. I heard visa cases for 20 years. Not talking about central Americans. There are currently more Cubans at the border than came in the Mariel boatlift. Thousands of Somalis, other Africans. Ukrainians. Chinese. You get the idea.
Central Americans are another story. Directly proportional to the cost of coffee, bananas. If they are seeking political asylum, have rights. If not political, they don't.
In the past few days I saw a story about a man from Turkey who flew to Tijuana and hiked or hitched out into the desert to cross at an isolated spot. I understand that a lot of people from all over the world are going to Mexico to cross the southern border. It's an accident of geography that it will always be easier to enter the US without authorization from the south than on the East or West Coast.
They come here on tourist visas, Student visas.
Yes, they do. Should we refuse tourists and students? There is already concern that students are turning their backs on American universities, which is effectively a brain drain.
What is it, exactly, that you would have us do?
The impetus is largely economic. If you could boost your income five to tenfold by moving to a different country, wouldn't you do that?
We exclude economic refugees. Deport them.
supposedly. A lot of them get in here.
Moreover, our country is well beyond environmental sustainability with the current population. We're running out of groundwater, putting our agricultural productivity in jeopardy.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/08/28/climate/groundwater-drying-climate-change.html
Propublica projects that within several decades, MILLIONS of Americans will become climate refugees.
Both of these findings suggest that we badly need to stabilize our population, which is projected to grow by the equivalent of nearly four New York States over the next 40 years.
AND... the productivity of our ecosystems is declining. Insects, and wild vertebrate animals have declined by over half since the '60s, decimating ecosystem services (clean water, clean air, CO2 balance, pollination, soil fertility, and much else) as we spread sprawl, pavement, and agriculture (which does not provide ecosystem services) all over the land.
It's less about our population, and more about our per capita use of resources. I do not have the answer on immigration, but I am very uncomfortable with the idea that we, who have been the biggest contributor to climate change, and who have essentially mined much of the world of resources, are now going to say, "running out of clean water, and soil? Can't grow crops in your changed climate? Your cities are uninhabitable due to flooding? Too bad. Stay where you are while we shore up our climate resilience."
No
Why?
Our country is not a pool, and simplistic metaphors like that misrepresent the issue. Also no to giving into to the current era proto-nazis ground on immigration by building a wall. They want to shut down immigration, and speak past the fact that the vast majority of people coming to this country try to enter it legally, and act is if everyone entered illegally.
Where is the pool metaphor to which you refer?
Why not insist that the rules are followed as to entering the country?
Many of us, on the left hand of the Democratic Party, understand that the elites in this country are supporting the wrong governments in Latin America, and trying to destroy those who are working for the people. Specifically, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua have been harshly, attacked with sanctions, aimed at overthrowing their governments And making peoples lives miserable there so that they will have to come here.
If God willing we retain the White House, Biden must reject the trump era foreign policy that labels Cuba a terrorist state— depriving Cuban children of Cancer care thru the cruel embargo, that the world condemns.
We've been working on negotiations. Just approved reinstitution of humanitarian immigrants from Cuba.
There are 11 million Cubans. IMHO 10 million want to emigrate to Miami.
that means the cruel blockade has worked in starving people out of a society that provides free health services and education to its population and rejects corporate control.
In effect we bribed Cubans to come to the US starting in 1966. SSI pays more in a month than say, a Cuban physician makes in a year. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility/green-card-for-a-cuban-native-or-citizen#:~:text=The%20Cuban%20Adjustment%20Act%20of,(get%20a%20Green%20Card).
The people who feel most discriminated are Haitians, Dominicans, etc who do not get favored treatment.
A border wall or fence is useless. We have seen myriad instances where migrants desperate to enter into the United States have come up with any number of ways to breach said wall, in too many cases at the expense of their own lives or limbs.
IMO, that’s just not so, as structures like walls, fences, etc. serve as rather obvious and substantial obstacles to those attempting to improperly cross our border. We have a structure around the WhiteHouse for a similar reason. Same goes for the front doors of most homes, etc. Certainly, a wall in and of itself is not a fix all, but it is undeniably a substantial obstacle — a part of a bigger plan. It seems to me that immigration should be both encouraged and controlled.
Isn’t it to the benefit of America to have a smartly devised efficient well controlled immigration process? Isn’t conceding that physical barriers could be part of such a smart plan a small price to pay as a bargaining chip that might lead to fixing present congressional dysfunction, funding Biden’s smart and progressive programs, etc.?
It does appear that Biden is doing what he can do, which is heartening. But Democrats on Capitol Hill are not. The easiest way to stanch the flood at the border would be to pass a national, mandatory E-Verify, an identification system to identify people in the US illegally when they apply for jobs, which a handful of states require, and which millions of US companies voluntarily use. If they can't get jobs, they won't come. E-Verify also has the advantage of catching visa overstayers.
But Democrats on Capitol Hill have largely voted against E-Verify, at least once during the Trump Admin (Trump did not push for it, probably because he saw the wall as a monument to him), and I think there was a vote on E-Verify during the Biden Admin, which the Democrats largely failed to support it.
There is absolutely no reason to vote against E-Verify unless you want illegal immigrants coming in, ostensibly so they can become Democratic voters when legalized, which is something former Mass Congressman Barney Frank, and a few others have admitted is the case.
Dave, I know you and I disagree on this topic, but I will try again: First, the opposition to E-Verify is bi-partisan, so please don't just blame Democrats.
Second, E-Verify is mandatory in some states. Data suggests that there is no difference in the immigrant population in those states.
Third, E-Verify has a high error rate because it checks papers not workers. And by "error rate," I mean that a very high percentage of people who are supposed to be screened out by the program nonetheless present documentation that satisfies the requirements of e-Verify.
In order to actually screen WORKERS, the US would need to implement biometric screening tied to passports, drivers licenses, and SSNs. Indeed, Democrats and Republicans have jointly proposed such a measure on several occasions.
So, here's the question: Are you ready to have your biometric data tied to driver's license? Do you think it is reasonable for others to have privacy concerns about mandatory government collection of biometric data? Do you have any concerns that an authoritarian government would misuse that data?
It would also be effective for the government to plant a microchip in our necks as a precondition to employment. But effectiveness isn't the sole determinant of good policy.
You are obviously not suggesting such extreme measures, but I am pointing out that the E-Verify solution is not as simple and effective as you suggest. There are difficult issues of implementation that cause people of good faith to oppose it--even when they want a solution to unregulated immigration.
Robert,
The votes on E-Verify have been largely Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed, which is pretty much the case with votes on anything to do with immigration. I do remember that the GOP House came very close during the Trump Admin, to passing E-Verify despite strong Democratic opposition (along with a couple of other measures including reducing annual immigration numbers by roughly a quarter--not nearly enough for me, but no other legislation that I know of has come up that would have reduced immigration, despite Barbara Jordan's recommendation in '96 that it be reduced to slightly over a half a million, from around a million annually). The Senate voted similarly, but not as dramatically so as the House. So I don't think your claim that the votes are bipartisan is accurate. (I would not expect such votes to be totally partisan, but that a vast majority of GOPers would favor, and a vast majority of Dems would oppose.)
I have never heard anything suggesting that E-Verify has a high error rate. Quite the opposite is true to my knowledge.
Nor have I heard anything suggesting that immigrant populations are the same in states with E-Verify as in those in other states (I'm assuming you mean percentagewise). Only four states require all employers to use E-Verify--Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arizona.
PS: I sent your account of Biden's measures to stop the Houthi interference with shipping to a friend who doesn't think much of Biden. Much appreciate that!
Until recently, the bulk of migrants had been coming from Latin American nations. Much of their Congressional support has come from Latino and allied “progressive” Congresspersons.
People should acknowledge the likelihood and influence of ethnic identification – more so among Democrats than Republicans – in the debates over immigration.
Frankly, I think Biden should address the Nation. He should explain the complex issues in terms most Americans can understand, from the plight of people leaving desperate lands (e.g. Authoritarian regimes (w/clear throat sound)) to the issue of employers hiring illegal immigrants (even children!); what his administration is doing and has done; compare his effort to other administrations' efforts; and finally challenge Congress to pass the U.S. Citizenship Act that he sent to Congress in 2021.
Unfortunately, we'll probably have to wait until his March 7th State of the Union address where immigration will be just one of the many issues he'll raise.
There are times when the bully-pulpit can be effectively used (and not by a bully). This is perhaps one of them.
While I agree that most fleeing other countries to ours likely enter with good intent, it seems indisputable that we have serious border breach issues.
Being a “nation of immigrants,” we are IMO at our best when we are celebrating and capitalizing on our diversity — our wellspring of ideas, etc. from which we harvest our best thoughts, theories, philosophies, etc. distilling same to best practices, policies, legislation, etc. Smart immigration policies are in all of our better interests.
But, our border problem is real and it is presently seemingly of control. That lack of control will be a hot issue for the coming election and understandably so.
Personally, I have loads of empathy for anyone fleeing oppression, etc. That written, I am not so sure that the requisite well-founded fear of persecution continues once such a person has successfully escaped the specific source of persecution — does it?
When I am sailing and a storm arises, most empathetic owners of safe harbors recognize the exigency and allow my temporary stay. That written, it would be entirely unreasonable for me to work my way down a cut until I reach some particular property of my choice — wouldn’t it…?
"Nation of immigrants" is a bit of a shibboleth. People invoke it so frequently and lose sight of our country's rejects--black people in the projects, people growing up poor in places like Appalachia, etc. Because we fail to give every child good teachers and a good school, these people, many of whom probably have the brains to do far more than they'll ever do, by dint of our failure to support all of our children equally, are doomed to lives of mediocrity.
I loved in a Black neighborhood in DC that was turning. Next door to me: Mr. and Mrs. Washington, a transmission rebuilder and a checker at a department store--nice people. Their daughters had kids by different men who spent different amounts of time in their lives, and those kids did not have good schools to go to.
On the next street up, I had some white, solidly middle class friends, who sent their kids to private school. One day I was out front. A couple of the Washingtons' grandchildren were out when the white mother walked by with a couple of her kids. As the white mother and kids walked by the Washingtons' grandchildren, I could literally feel the difference between the futures the two sets of kids would have. It felt awful. These are the kids we throw away while we focus our attention on the scads of immigrant children who come here, dumbing down the schools--which often aren't very good to begin with--with their numbers and their lack of English.
Instead of "Nation of Immigrants," how about "nation of descendants of slavery"? Or "nation of descendants of poor folk, who by dint of the large amount of inequality in our country, due to a sink or swim mentality, passed down from the wealthiest, are stuck in poverty?
I cringe every time I see or hear "Freedom Caucus" because these far right extremist Republicans have twisted a core progressive, humanistic value of freedom into "I am the boss of you." So we all should follow Robert's lead by using quotation marks as he did, "GOP extremist 'Freedom' Caucus," or preface it with "so-called Freedom Caucus." Words matter.
100% agree, and I feel similarly about MAGA. I prefer past perfidious pulpit and soldiers of sedition, but it doesn’t work well as an acronym (PPP&SS). Well, the Schutzstaffel (“SS”) does seem to fit, but…
"Freedom Caucus" is not in any way associated with freedom. I utilize "Klown Kar Kawkus" for a variety of reasons, mostly because my junior high brain runs away with me frequently. I also acknowledge the RepubliKan party with a K, both of these utilizations pointing their true north to the KKK.
“Freedom Caucus” and similar intentional misuses of the word should immediately prompt the rejoinder
“Freedom to WHAT”?
Words most certainly do matter. They are the deciders of sanity or craziness.
I always feel better when I see your posts, Ellie because you have posted so many helpful positive things.
Thank you. The word Freedom is particularly important as identified by messaging experts such as Anat Shenker-Osorio. Research shows that messages about our freedoms are more effective than about our rights.
Alas. Those messages about "freedoms" are often excuses.
She really does!
Regarding the border crisis, there is an important discussion on it in the most recent podcast “Winning 2024” with Claire McCaskill and Jennifer Palmieri. It’s a tough love kind of a talk that agrees largely with what you have written here but acknowledges that the Dems need to get out in front of this and address it because it is, in fact, a major voting issue and concern for people on both sides. The optics are not good for this administration in spite of all the facts you have presented. The conversation acknowledges that Biden largely has his hands tied, but there is a big need to come out and acknowledge the problem and talk about it. One of the guests, a congresswoman from Texas, has good ideas. They need to be talked about and the Republicans need to be consistently exposed as the fake actors that they are. This issue is a festering wound, that while impossible to solve without Congress, can at least be exposed and openly discussed. Again and again.
And Thank You for saying what I have wanted someone to say… TFG should have not been allowed even a second to spew more lies, when he had already been told, repeatedly, that he could not. Why he gets away with this time after time, I don’t understand. He should have been jailed for contempt, exactly as you said.
Thanks for calling our attention to the "Winning 2024" podcast, Pamsy. I will listen. And I agree "that the Dems need to get out in front of this and address it because it is, in fact, a major voting issue and concern for people on both sides." Robert addressed the immigration issue, with particular focus on asylum seekers in NY, last week in the comment section. For me, it was a perspective on reality that I was unaware of – how even Dems are turning to the false narrative promulgated by the Republican agenda, that it’s “Joe Biden’s fault.”
For me, it was a call to the seriousness of it, of awareness and truth-telling on the matter. And as I understood it, Robert also expressed, in your words, the need for it “to be talked about and the Republicans need to be consistently exposed as the fake actors that they are.”
Yet another occasion where the generative collective wisdom of Today’s Edition Newsletter is self-evident. Something I remain grateful to be the beneficiary of, ongoing.
Day-to-day, I search for ways (within myself) to articulate my part in stepping forward. With the truth, and longing for a better world as channels of hope, even when it seems to elude me. (And without sounding over the top, that love allows that to unfold, in me, and in the world – somehow.)
Thank you for stepping forward today, Pamsy.
I love your last paragraph!
You’re so kind, Pamsy. I must admit to a bit of residual regret for sharing so openly, fearing judgment, I suppose. So your generous words are timely, and appreciated.
And seems a privilege we can find safety here, enough to express ourselves in the company of one another. Earlier in the week, another reader commented about this community as a ‘sacred place.’ How lovely. And true.
Jean, on which day can I find Robert's explanation re: asylum seekers?
Hi, Jacquie. It was in the comments section of Today's Edition Newsletter dated January 5 – ‘Promises Kept.’ Robert was responding to a reader’s comments. It is something that has made its mark on me. I’ve attempted to articulate the matter in a letter to a Democrat, though as usual, doubt my ability to articulate clearly and powerfully, as Robert knows well how to do. (Since it was in the comments section, I was not comfortable quoting Robert so have made a humble attempt at calling out the GOP lie, that even Dems have absorbed, with the facts, as I understand them.)
I was pleased to see Robert succinctly address the immigration issue in (the body of) Today’s Newsletter, which I feel free to share. So I’m including link to it in my letter to the Democrat with the intention to get it out the door today. Perfection eludes me though such as it is.
Thank you, Jean! This is very helpful. I think I know why I missed those comments. The previous day, I fell on ice and fractured my left patella/kneecap!
O Jacquie, I am so sorry about the fall. I’ve had falls and fractures and know how challenging these can be. You’re rather amazing to be attentive and curious about detail here, even now. I’d be wallowing in self-pity, something I’m expert in, truth be told. Here’s to hoping your complete healing comes soon.
Hear hear!
The thing we can be most sure of is Trump would NEVER have been able to put together a coalition of nations, standing together on this issue. No nation trusts Trump.
no one in their right mind trusts pmurt
I would like to add Robert Reich to the mix:
https://robertreich.org/post/131585289045#amp_tf=Von%20%251%24s&aoh=17050514671286&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Frobertreich.org%2Fpost%2F131585289045
The facts that he explains, are applicable to the economies of Europe as well. Human potential, the most precious commodity. Greetings, Betty
Hi, Elisabeth. Thanks for the link to Robert Reich's column today about the "myths" about immigration. I will link to it in tonight's newsletter.
Big business loves immigration -- legal or otherwise. I've said this before. Refugees have a Constitutional right to asylum. They are entitled to a hearing but the problem is that the system is underfunded and the backlog is overwhelming. Eliminate the backlog and there would be few on parole.
Venezuelans. Cubans. Republicans tell them to fight their governments, and later they do and have to "vote" with their feet. When they come here, they are scapegoated for political purposes -- sometimes by their own "people".
We have had temporary work visa programs for many years. American employers bring in workers from other countries. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/topics/libraries/LIBINA
When they stay beyond their contract date, they become illegal aliens. Many people from Venezuela and other countries, for that matter come here on a tourist or an educational visa and stay.
IMHO the antidote for illegal immigration is employer sanctions. https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/legal-requirements-and-enforcement/penalties
There is concurrent jurisdiction and employers can be exposed to both criminal and civil sanctions. https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1908-unlawful-employment-aliens-criminal-penalties#:~:text=Subsection%201324a(f)%20provides%20that,for%20the%20entire%20pattern%20or
I heard debarment penalty cases under several statutes. I have war stories, when I debarred a company for one purpose but it affected all government contracts. Some of the same companies in the "labor pool" business also have contracts with other agencies, i. e. defense or state.
Hi, Dave, you raise very good points. As a policy question, should we expect employers to be enforcers of immigration policy when fraud in identification documents is rampant. E-Verify requires documents as proof of employability, which are easily forged. The only workable solution is collection of biometric data to be tied to a national ID. Many Americans of both parties are wary of such a system. Without taking a position on such a requirement, I believe that people of good faith can oppose it--even if they want to end unregulated mass migration into the US.
It's Dan.
Employers are supposed to ask for an 8I form. But many are illegally paying "under the table."
Why do Americans feel that the President is "soft on the border?" Because Republicans and their enablers control the narrative. Why? Because it is easier to do so if you lie and ignore the facts. MAGAs scream about $8 gasoline as they fill up their gigantic trucks that get 12 MPG, while Democrats motor by in a Prius that runs on air.
But Democrats are different, we don't lie. We tell the truth. The truth about the struggle and fight many of us are engaged in daily. The greatest Democrat President in our history said it the best, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Thank you FDR.
P.S. Laura Loomer, a self styled far-right and anti-Muslim conservative political activist, white nationalist, conspiracy theorist tweeted yesterday that the "Deep State" was using HARP (?) to manipulate the weather and prevent Trump from "dominating the Iowa Caucus." I can't make this stuff up.
Wow. Just, wow.
It is important to remember that, in the current Red Sea situation, the Houthis are the original aggressors and what the Joint Task Force did was retaliation. War had already begun, and yesterday's action is the only way to bring an end to it. Stopping the flow of money and weapons to the Houthis, Hamasaki, Hezbollah, and other such groups will be another piece of a puzzle that is being assembled in fits and starts but is essential if there is to be any sort of peace in that part of the world.
Similarly, although the failed insurrectionist was totally out of control yesterday, Judge Engoron's subdued response was exactly correct. Any attempt to stop the tirade would feed the "I'm a victim" narrative and eliminating that means there are no effective grounds for appeal, even though there will be one.
Congress beggars comment, other than that Mr. Jeffries should be out there every day with a growing stack of legislation saying "These are the bills that are ready to be voted on if my colleagues across the aisle are interested in governance." There is no other way to drive home the point of who is at fault here and taking that load off of the President will be like Sam carrying Frodo to Mt. Doom.
Everybody stay warm, there is some miserable weather coming.
Hmmmm...the visual of Leader Jeffries carrying around a growing stack of legislation 🤗 He'd probably need a radio flyer wagon with the tall sides.
That might be a great meme theme.
Stay safe and warm Dave. Polar vortex is already here in MN - but little snow for us. That storm looks wicked!
Thanks Sheila, the forecast keeps changing, but we're going to set some low temp records for sure.
Out in the Northwet, we're looking a freezing rain before snow. Always a great combination for a segment of the country who cannot drive in sunshine and dry pavement and who lacks public works mitigation to the degree that our neighbors to the north and east have in abundance.
“Cannot drive in sunshine and dry pavement…” 🤪🤣 I understand…
Be warm and stay safe!
Thank you. Heading out to double check faucet covers and batten down the hatches (high wind warning so all my whirlygigs have to come in.)
Frankly I’m fed up. I’m tired of the courts and everyone else trying to make sure that Defendant Trump is treated fairly and given opportunities that typical defendants were not given. Treat him the same as everyone else period. Robert today provided great information about the immigration efforts and results of the Biden administration that I was unaware of and probably millions of voters also. This information must be shouted from the roof tops and everyone must be made aware of it. The Biden Administration must start pushing back with harder hitting fact based information to drown out the Republicans campaign of lies. A columnist recently said that the 2024 campaign will be an information war and that is were the fight must be won. This is just an example.
Stephen --- absolutely. And - once again - the NYT. I want to scream at the irresponsible, lazy journalists --- 'have you no shame?' And also - thank you Robert --- I too have been ignorant about the border - and have paid too little attention to it.
Oh, to be a rich, privileged, white dude in our legal system and get away with this behavior...! And on top of that, have a sizable segment of our citizenry side with you and fund your defense!
My faith in our justice system has eroded over the decades, but the past 8 years has been a constant bombardment on the concept of lawful vs unlawful, right vs wrong. It flows down stream; we are paying for it now and it will wash over us in the future. A stronger voice has to be raised against bad faith/intent actors.
If no means no, then why was he not stopped.
I was disappointed to hear that the judge started to agree to allow the Quadefendant to speak after rightly denying it. Then to have the POS launch into precisely the tirade that the judge was guarding against without repercussions added to my disappointment. I hope the judge did so to make the Quadefendant's appeal to the Supreme Court less appealing.
I was mortified, somebody will die and it will be on him. But, of course, it was part of his official duty as a candidate. What bull schitt
Mary Trump is pleased with how things went yesterday. "The damage has been done. Despite the fact he just destroyed any hope for leniency, Donald said exactly what was on his mind. Now, he will pay for it."
https://marytrump.substack.com/p/breaking-engoron-destroys-donald
Here are some questions about the civil fraud trial that I haven't seen addressed:
It seems clear that harsh penalties are coming Trump's way, both restrictions on his ability to do business and a large fine. Can this decision be appealed? What will the next step be? If this is final, I fully expect Trump to simply refuse to pay up, present himself as unfairly targeted, and dare the court to jail him. What happens then?
Can be appealed but he will have to post a supersedeas bond at 120% of the judgment.
He has a lot of exposure. His properties will have liens imposed. https://askalawlibrarian.nycourts.gov/legalresearch/faq/274780
If a person refuses to pay, bank accounts can be garnished, real estate sold.
As I understand, in NY, the cost of an appeal surety bond varies from case to case. Typically, the amount the appellant will be responsible for is 1-2% of the surety bond a mount that is needed. For example, if the appeal bond is in the amount of $1,000,000 then it would cost between $10,000 and $20,000 annually.
If he appeals, the appellate court can stay everything.
On the other hand he has a lot more exposure. 2 more NY cases in January. E Jean Carroll is seeking $10MM plus punitive damages. his pyramid fraud trial in connection with ACN, Inc. is still scheduled for January 29.
He has at least another 6 damage suits pending trial dates.
Thank you, Daniel Solomon.
According to Andrew Weisseman, and my possibly inaccurate memory of what he has said, a court monitor may/will be appointed to liquidate assets to pay the judgement assessed. If he wants to appeal, he has to post a large sum of money as a bond. Either way, it sounds like there will be real monetary costs involved.
Thanks for that, Pamsy
As I see it there are two problems at the border and perceptions of the problem by people (drugs crossing the border and human beings) I don't know the answer to either problem but I also know that republicans don't either and don't care. As Robert said, it's a campaign issue and it makes for great grievances for political gain. It was no different for the abortion issue until Roe v. Wade was overturned and it went far beyond the republican thoughts as a campaign issue and now it's biting them in the ass and an issue in reverse?
I digress, so back the the border and drugs and my thoughts, #1 we have an addiction problem and that requires attention, but that's too complicated and the solutions are progressive and republicans don't want anything to do with that. #2 and I think the bigger problem, is where the chemicals for the drugs are coming from, China. I don't know how you stop or curtail that, but it's a huge issue and no one is focusing on that.
Last but not least is human beings coming to the border and hoping to enter the US? Are they all coming here to destroy the country, I don't think so. It's how my ancestors got here, not southern but eastern seaboard from Ireland and how everyone's ancestors got here reading this, i.e. from some other country. Why? For opportunity and that tangible gift of opportunity is what drives, my guess, 85 to 90 % of people/families to come here. This is what has made the United States such a dynamic country and economic powerhouse. All you have to do is look at (moron Musk) he isn't from the US but he is a citizen and, again my guess, he's rich and republican and they don't give a shit because that fits their bill as an acceptable immigrant? If you have a shit ton of money come on in and could you vote republican too? Sorry, that's my rant for today and have a great day everyone.
Robert mentioned the Cato Institute. Here’s another article that addresses the fentanyl issue. I think it’s important to note the Cato Institute is a conservative, Libertarian think tank.
https://www.cato.org/blog/fentanyl-smuggled-us-citizens-us-citizens-not-asylum-seekers
“ U.S. President Joe Biden highlighted "strong international coordination" by his administration to halt the flow of fentanyl and the ingredients used to produce the deadly drug following his diplomatic engagements with leaders of China and Mexico last week.”
https://www.voanews.com/a/biden-highlights-efforts-with-china-mexico-to-combat-fentanyl/7365221.html
Bill, I don’t know the answer either but agree the Republicans don’t care to address this huge albatross.
I’m getting weary of statements about how our forebears came to the US unhindered (not quite true) and so we should not hinder immigration today.
We need an immigration *policy* based on our needs (including humanitarian concerns) – *not* the perceived or alleged needs of others. That policy need not be confined to immigration-as-future-citizenship, but could encompass various forms of work permits that are not connected go future citizenship.
This liberal believes US citizenship should have meaning.
Set aside the issue of HOW immigrants get into the US. About a dozen states have stagnant population (and a few are declining) except for the inflow of immigrants--legal and illegal.
While we can debate whether continued population growth is good for the earth, having a population collapse--like Japan--is a recipe for a failed state. If red states in central America want a future, they need to be welcoming to immigrants. Otherwise, their economies will collapse. There will be no one to fill their service jobs, take care of their ageing populations, or fill out their workforce.
My wife and I were in San Diego in the last year of Trump's term. About 50% of the Starbucks shops were shuttered. We asked why at one of the shops. The worker said, "Trump." His immigration policies worked--by drying up the labor force in San Diego. We see that same dynamic in Florida, where there are not enough workers to harvest the citrus crops.
See "Florida’s labor shortage spans wide range of industries."
"Hardest hit are industries such as construction, restaurants, hotels, roofing, landscaping and agriculture, which traditionally have relied on both citizens and migrant workers without permanent legal status.
"A morality play in a NY courtroom" reminds me of Fidel Castro, who had no legal defense after he attacked the Moncada barracks, and wrote "History will absolve me" when in prison. His motto was "Death or martyrs." His entire defense was a public relations stunt. Five were killed in the attack and 56 were executed later by Batista. But the speech saved Castro's life and made him a national hero. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_Will_Absolve_Me#:~:text=Castro's%20speech%20and%20sentence,-Prison%20Presidio%20Modelo&text=Castro%20was%20brought%20before%20a,outlining%20his%20plans%20for%20Cuba.
Yesterday you addressed how Trump wanted to be compared to Hitler, —because that comparison normalizes the notion that Trump will regain power as an autocratic strongman. I think he wanted Judge Engeron to hold him in contempt as a martyr. His rantings, before, during and after the court appearance in essence argue for victimhood for selective political prosecution, martyrdom and assert that regardless of outcome, whether the court fines him, jails him, or symbolically emasculates him, history will absolve him.
IMHO it's obvious that Trump makes statements with the intent to inflame the ire of his his cult, if not call them to protest. They didn't seem to be out in force yesterday.
Had I been Engeron, I might have been tempted to ask him how he was feeling, as a predicate, to order a mental examination, and ask counsel whether civil commitment was justified, but that might really made Trump a martyr.
Again, no stops on chump. Is there a brick wall anywhere in our future
It’s past time for people to characterize Trump as a crybaby.
(Being a bully and being a crybaby are not mutually exclusive.)
We walk a tight rope.here. Defendant Trump will use whatever to claim he is being persecuted unfairly regardless
Great newsletter, again. It’s possible that people no longer trust the government website after all the lies that ere posted during Trump’s term. I have tracked climate change statistics for years and the .gov place was excellent for that. The day Trump got into office, the climate information was pulled off the site. Within months, scientists and other experts on many topics were relocated from DC. And don’t get me started about COVID. I guess the upside to all this is that we are benefitting now as authors, readers, are collaborators for saving our democracy and our world. One more thing, because of my background with the Myers-Briggs, the feeling-thinking (F-T) continuum shows up mightily among your readers, Robert. While we can all care deeply about fairness, for example, continuing to keep giving those who wrong us “just one more chance” rarely works! Hmmm, I hope I made sense here.
In that connection, Deborah Ruf, a wise saying (from the Mishnah, I understand):
“Those who are kind to the wicked end up being wicked to the kind.”
I like it. Thanks for sharing.
If only this had been the judge’s response. Let it be America’s response.
https://tenor.com/bkhvY.gif
(;<{)
Why was the headline in the NYT, "Trump Rebukes Judge in Court?" He had no standing to "rebuke" anyone. The headline should have been, "Trump, Out of Control, Flouts Gag Order Again Spouting Nonsense."