Donald Trump offers 3-year protection for immigrants in exchange for border wall

Agencies
January 20, 2019

Washington, Jan 20: President Donald Trump on Saturday offered Democrats three years of deportation protections for some immigrants in exchange for $5.7 billion in border wall funding, a proposal immediately rejected by Democrats and derided by conservatives as amnesty.

Aiming to end the 29-day partial government shutdown, Trump outlined his plan in a White House address in which he sought to revive negotiations with Democrats, who responded that they would not engage in immigration talks until he reopened the government.

Trump proposed offering a reprieve on his attempts to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and temporary protected status (TPS) for immigrants from some Latin American and African nations, in exchange for building hundreds of miles of barriers on the southern U.S. border and hiring thousands of new law enforcement agents to be deployed there.

"This is a common-sense compromise both parties should embrace," Trump said. He added: "The radical left can never control our borders. I will never let it happen."

But the initial reaction to the offer from Democrats and conservative border hawks was hostile, raising doubts that it would be enough to break an impasse that has resulted in 800,000 federal workers being furloughed or forced to work without pay and numerous government agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, operating at minimal staffing levels.

The shutdown has become the longest in U.S. government history.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., dismissed the proposal as a "non-starter" and vowed that Democrats would pass legislation next week to reopen the government, putting the onus on the Republican-led Senate to follow suit.

"The president must sign these bills to reopen government immediately and stop holding the American people hostage with this senseless shutdown," Pelosi said. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., also said he opposed the plan.

Moving ahead on Trump's plan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced that he would put the legislation on the Senate floor for a vote next week. And Trump heralded the package as a bipartisan, "compassionate response" that would offer humanitarian relief on the border and curb illegal immigration - while allowing the government to reopen.

McConnell laid out his plan in a private call with GOP senators late Saturday afternoon, where there was little dissent, according to an official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.

In addition to its immigration provisions, the package - which McConnell could move to advance as early as Tuesday, although a Thursday vote appears more likely - would reopen all parts of the government that are closed. It also would provide emergency funding for U.S. areas hit by hurricanes, floods and other natural disasters.

The package would include an extension of the Violence against Women Act.

Senior White House aides cast the proposal as a good-faith effort from the president to incorporate ideas from Democrats during weeks of talks with a negotiating team led by Vice President Mike Pence and senior adviser Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law.

In a briefing for reporters after Trump's remarks, the aides acknowledged that the bill faces a difficult path in the Senate, where it would require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. But they predicted that ordinary Americans would view the plan as a compromise and pressure lawmakers to make the deal.

"I hope once people get past their initial statements, initial reaction, they will really look at the legislation that comes to the floor and see what it is - a sincere effort by the president of the United States to take ideas from both political parties," Pence said of lawmakers.

The shutting down of some 25 percent of the federal government was triggered by Trump's demand for $5.7 billion to build more than 200 miles of new wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Pelosi has called the wall "immoral," and Democrats are refusing to offer more than $1.3 billion, maintaining existing funding levels for border barriers and fences. Democrats also frequently point out that Trump long claimed that Mexico would pay for the wall.

Trump's offer would not provide the path to permanent legal status - or citizenship - for DACA beneficiaries that many Democrats have sought in any immigration deal that dramatically ramps up border security. The DACA program, which began in 2012 under President Barack Obama, has provided renewable work permits to more than 700,000 undocumented young immigrants, known as "dreamers," who were brought into the country when they were children.

Trump appealed to "rank-and-file" Democratic lawmakers, hoping to peel them away from leadership, but many issued statements of opposition moments after his 13-minute speech.

Trump's proposal also was pilloried by some of the most influential border hawks, including conservative author and commentator Ann Coulter, who said in a tweet that the proposal was "amnesty."

"We voted for Trump and got Jeb!" she wrote, referring to former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who had a more moderate immigration position when campaigning for the presidency.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, a longtime anti-immigration voice in the House, blasted Trump's offer, and the conservative news website Breitbart noted that most of the border would remain without a wall under the plan.

Pence vehemently disputed the suggestion that the plan was a betrayal of Trump's hard-line border agenda. "This is not an amnesty bill," he said, noting the deportation protections are temporary under the plan.

Some congressional Republicans tried to bolster the president.

"This bill takes a bipartisan approach to reopening the closed portions of the federal government," McConnell said in a statement.

Yet McConnell's decision to advance the bill to the Senate floor in the coming days marks a reversal of his promise not to hold votes on legislation that did not already have explicit support from the White House and Democratic leaders.

The calculus for the majority leader changed as the shutdown has dragged on, people familiar with his thinking said, pointing to Pelosi's letter to Trump on Wednesday suggesting he postpone his Jan. 29 State of the Union address until the government reopens. That moment, the sources said, convinced McConnell that Pelosi would not negotiate without further incentives.

McConnell spoke to Trump that afternoon, asking the president to add legislative sweeteners for Democrats, and Trump agreed, the official said.

Saturday's offer also marks a reversal for Trump, who had indicated for weeks that he would not include DACA in the talks.

Trump had said he was hoping the Supreme Court would hear an appeal to a lower court's injunction on his attempt to end the program; a high court ruling in his favor would give him more leverage.

But the Supreme Court signaled Friday that it might not take the case, meaning Trump cannot end the program for the time being.

On TPS, Trump has declared an end to a program that has offered hundreds of thousands of immigrants from El Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti and Sudan the right to remain in the United States after they were uprooted from their home countries during natural disasters and other emergencies. But that move also has been enjoined by federal courts.

White House aides said the president's proposal was an echo of a bipartisan bill called the "Bridge Act," previously offered by Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would have provided a three-year renewal of DACA-style protections from deportation - a period in which it was hoped lawmakers would pass a comprehensive immigration bill that included a permanent solution.

But Trump's proposal was far smaller in scope, covering fewer immigrants, and Democrats said his plan was akin to trading "permanent" border wall for "temporary" protections for immigrants that Trump could reverse in a second term.

Asked about that criticism, Pence replied: "I read that turn of phrase." He then paused and changed the subject.

Durbin issued a statement saying he opposed the offer.

After his speech, Trump joined a call with House Republicans, stressing his desire to finalize a deal with Democrats, according to an official on that call. Kevin McAleenan, the commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, also detailed to Republican lawmakers the administration's case for a wall, as well as for additional border security resources to "stop the flow of crime, drugs and trafficking coming over the southern border," the official said.

Other Trump aides said they think the president has the legal authority to declare a national emergency at the border, which could allow him to redirect Pentagon funding to a build a border wall, but they said Trump prefers a negotiated solution.

At the White House on Saturday morning, Trump continued to point to a new "caravan" of Central American migrants crossing into Mexico from Guatemala, which was featured on "Fox & Friends," a show the president watches regularly.

"If we had a wall, we wouldn't have a problem," Trump told reporters.

Ahead of his afternoon remarks from the White House, Trump oversaw a naturalization ceremony in the Oval Office for five new Americans, who recited the Oath of Allegiance, led by Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. They had come to the United States from Iraq, Bolivia, Britain, South Korea and Jamaica.

The image of the new citizens raising their hands in the Oval Office was meant to underscore Trump's support of foreigners who enter the country through legal immigration programs, even as his administration has supported policies to slash overall immigration.

"Each of you worked hard for this moment," Trump told them. "You followed the rules, upheld our laws, and contributed to the strength and success and vitality of our nation."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 22,2024

modihate.jpg

New Delhi: Even though Prime Minister Narendra Modi's nasty election speech in Rajasthan's Banswara has triggered a nationwide controversy, the Election Commission has so far not taken any action. Meanwhile the Opposition bloc INDIA called the speech an attempt to divert attention from "real issues".

Addressing the people Banswara, on April 21, (Sunday) Modi openly attacked India’s Muslims, suggesting they were “infiltrators” and went on to claim that the opposition if elected would give away “mangalsutras” and “land” of those listening to his speech to them (Muslims). 

He referred to his immediate predecessor, Dr Manmohan Singh who was in office for 10 years as prime minister till 2014, and said, “Earlier, when his government was in power, he had said that Muslims have the first right on the country’s property, which means who will they collect this property and distribute it to – those who have more children, will distribute it to the infiltrators. Will the money of your hard work be given to the infiltrators? Do you approve of this?” 

Modi went on to say, “This Congress manifesto is saying that they will calculate the gold of the mothers and sisters, get information about it and then distribute it. Manmohan Singh’s government had said that Muslims have the first right on property. Brothers and sisters, these urban Naxal thoughts will not let even your mangalsutra escape, they will go this far.”

Narendra Modi and the BJP so far in their campaign trail have invoked religious faith, the Ram temple and Lord Ram multiple times, directly using it to call for people to vote for them. The Election Commission has been completely silent on the messaging via videos, tweets and other exhortations. 

Did Manmohan Singh really say that?

Modi’s claim that Dr Singh said that is not new and was refuted in 2006 itself by Singh’s PMO, when Modi had first made the false claim. The PMO had termed such remarks, “a deliberate and mischievous misinterpretation of what the Prime Minister said here yesterday at the meeting of the National Development Council, on fiscal priorities of the government.” It was termed “an avoidable controversy has been generated. The Prime Minister’s observations have also been quoted out of context in some sections of the electronic media, fuelling a baseless controversy.”

The full text of the paragraph in which the Prime Minister referred to the issue of minority empowerment to clarify the matter is as follows:

“I believe our collective priorities are clear: agriculture, irrigation and water resources, health, education, critical investment in rural infrastructure, and the essential public investment needs of general infrastructure, along with programmes for the upliftment of SC/STs, other backward classes, minorities and women and children. The component plans for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes will need to be revitalized. We will have to devise innovative plans to ensure that minorities, particularly the Muslim minority, are empowered to share equitably in the fruits of development. They must have the first claim on resources. The Centre has a myriad other responsibilities whose demands will have to be fitted within the over-all resource availability.”

The PMO’s clarification said. “it will be seen from the above that the Prime Minister’s reference to “first claim on resources” refers to all the “priority” areas listed above, including programmes for the upliftment of SCs, STs, OBCs, women and children and minorities.

Opposition reacts

Chairman, Media and Publicity department of the Congress, Pawan Khera said in a video message in a post, “We challenge the Prime Minister to show us if the word Hindu or Muslim is written anywhere in our manifesto. This kind of lightness is there in your mentality, in your political values. We have talked about justice for the youth, women, farmers, tribals, middle class and workers. Do you object to this as well?”

Khera was referring to earlier mistruths uttered by Modi about the “Muslim League” having influenced the Congress manifesto.

In Jharkhand’s Ranchi at an opposition rally, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge is reported to have said by BBC Hindi, “If democracy and the Constitution end in the country, then the people will have nothing left. Babasaheb Ambedkar ji and Jawaharlal Nehru ji gave equal voting rights to everyone, due to which all classes got respect. But Narendra Modi wants to snatch their rights from the poor.”

B.V. Srinivas termed it as unfortunate that “this person is the Prime Minister of this country, and an even bigger tragedy is that the Election Commission of India is no longer alive.” He said that “due to the frustration of impending defeat, the Prime Minister of India is openly sowing the seeds of hatred, he is polarising by misquoting Manmohan Singh’s 18-year-old incomplete statement, But the Election Commission (Modi ka parivar) is bowing down.”

Modi’s past hate-speech

Modi, in his 12-year tenure as chief minister of Gujarat was known to have made speeches targeting the state’s minority Muslim community brazenly, terming camps where Muslims were forced to stay in after communal violence gripped the state in 2002. Frontline covered him on his Gujarat Gaurav Yatra started shortly after the violence, at a rally at Becharaji in Mehsana district in northern Gujarat, when he said, “What should we do? Run relief camps for them? Do we want to open baby-producing centres? But for certain people that means hum paanch, hamare pachees.” 

In 2017 it was time again for direct speech targeting Muslims when in February he spoke of ‘shamshaan versus kabristan’ campaigning for UP and then for Gujarat elections when the BJP had its worst performance this millennium, in a speech at Palanpur on December 10, 2017 Modi invoked a “secret meeting” to get Pakistan to fix Gujarat’s assembly polls. He said that a meeting was held at Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar’s residence, attended by former PM Manmohan Singh, former Vice-President Hamid Ansari, former Army Chief Deepak Kapoor and distinguished diplomats to execute the plot. Modi’s PMO faced embarrassment when in response to an RTI filed by the Congress, his office was forced to say that Modi’s campaign speech could have been based on an “informal input”.

In the only question he has answered as part of a press conference with Joe Biden on June 22, 2023, Modi was asked, “India has long prided itself as the world’s largest democracy, but there are many human rights groups who say that your government has discriminated against religious minorities and sought to silence its critics.  As you stand here in the East Room of the White House, where so many world leaders have made commitments to protecting democracy, what steps are you and your government willing to take to improve the rights of Muslims and other minorities in your country and to uphold free speech?”

In response Modi appeared visibly frazzled and denied all charges. “I’m actually really surprised that people say so.  And so, people don’t say it.  Indeed, India is a democracy.” 

The journalist was trolled online by BJP leaders and supporters to such an extent that the White House had to come out and defend her and strongly denounce the trolling and abuse.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 20,2024

AK.jpg

New Delhi: The Aam Aadmi Party on Saturday alleged that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal is being pushed towards a “slow death” inside Tihar jail by denying him insulin and consultations with his doctor.

Kejriwal, who has Type-2 diabetes, has been asking for insulin and a video conferencing with his family doctor but his requests are being denied by the jail administration, party spokesperson Saurabh Bharadwaj said in a press conference.

"I want to say with full responsibility that a conspiracy is underway for the slow death of Kejriwal," Bharadwaj claimed citing blood sugar readings of the Chief Minister in jail.

He also slammed the Tihar administration, BJP, Centre and Delhi LG for allegedly denying insulin to Kejriwal and said the Delhi Chief Minister had been suffering from diabetes for the last 20-22 years.

On Friday, the chief minister council Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi said Kejriwal has not been administered insulin to control his sugar levels since his arrest, terming it “shocking” and “alarming”.

The ED had on Thursday claimed before the court that Kejriwal was eating food high in sugar like mangoes and sweets every day, despite having Type-2 diabetes, to create grounds for medical bail.

Kejriwal, however, refuted the ED’s claims by asserting before a court that the food he consumed was in conformity with the diet chart prepared by his doctor.

“Out of 48 meals sent from home, only three times mangoes were there…,” Singhvi told the court.

Bharadwaj said Kejriwal was allowed by the court to use a machine in the jail to monitor his daily blood sugar levels.

"Overall, it was a conspiracy to finish Kejriwal so his multiple organ damage and when he comes out of jail after 2-4 months he goes for treatment of kidney, heart and other organs," said Bharadwaj, who holds the portfolio of health in Delhi government.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 16,2024

raoshankar.jpg

New Delhi:  Twenty-nine Maoists, including a senior rebel leader - Shankar Rao, who had a bounty of ₹ 25 lakh on his head - were killed by security forces during an encounter in Chhattisgarh's Kanker district on Tuesday afternoon. A huge quantity of weapons, including Ak-47 and INSAS rifles, were recovered. 

Three security personnel were injured in the gunfight, which took place in forests near the village of Binagunda after a joint team of District Reserve Guard and Border Security Force were attacked.

Two of the three injured are from the BSF. Their condition is stable but the third - from the DRG - is in critical care. All three received treatment at a local hospital and are to be shifted to a larger facility.

Sources said the fighting began at around 2 PM, when a joint DRG-BSF team was conducting an anti-Maoist operation. The DRG was set up in in 2008 to combat Maoist activities in the state, and the Border Security Force has been deployed extensively in the area to for counter-insurgency ops.

There was another encounter in the district last month, in which two people - a Maoist and a cop - were killed, and security forces recovered a gun, some explosives, and other incriminating materials.

Personnel from the DRG and Bastar Fighters, both units of the state police force, with the Border Security Force, were involved in that operation, officials told news agency PTI. The patrolling team was cordoning off a forested area when fired on indiscriminately, leading to the gun battle.

In November last year, while the state was voting in the first phase of an Assembly election, a gunfight broke out between security forces and Maoist rebels in the same district.

An Ak-47 rifle was recovered from the encounter site.

On the same day, while polling was taking place, Maoists fired at DRG personnel deployed near a polling station in Banda in Dantewada district.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.