"A serial amnesty machine." That's certainly what would have happened if Rubio & Graham's Gang of 8 bill had passed … https://t.co/fjIk6TL4h5
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 10, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Monthly Archives: June 2019
0
One of those facade-piercing leaks that makes Trump look better, not worse. Skepticism (eg about whether Mexico will really follow through) is appropriate … https://t.co/m4hcyT7lsv
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 9, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
WACKY NYT: That was a bizarre bit of See-We're-Standing-Up-To-Trump rhetoric policing. When press/pols/normal people use the word "invasion," how often is it literally an invasion, with troops and tanks? 10%? 20? https://t.co/IP1gjBOF7u
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 9, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
NY Times types & @JamesFallows
& Shannon O'Neil of CFR seem eager to deny there's any possibility Trump made progress with his tariff threat. Truth is we don't know yet. Trump doesn't know. Even if Mexico just said "This time we mean it"–that could be progress (if they do). https://t.co/vcC4jB0BrB— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 9, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
"US & Allies Told Russians They'd Open Western Front Months Ago." All they did on D-Day was put more resources behind it and move more aggressively (ie actually do it). https://t.co/hpT84zlMET
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 9, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Don't understand. Everyone knows Remain in Mexico was launched earlier. But it's very small. If MX decides to move "faster and more aggressively" with more resources to expand it, that's big progress. Skepticism is in order but rush of NYT (&others) to pooh-pooh seems silly. https://t.co/sWuz7J5CRJ
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 9, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
I dunno. We're a country with long, hard-to-seal borders that maybe a billion or two people would move to if given the chance. The principle of Don't F— With Us on Migration is pretty important in the long term also. Worth a little unpredictability. https://t.co/2QxCroP5ph
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Seems wrong to automatically dismiss the latest tariff-induced agreement with Mexico as unproductive. Don't think we know enough yet–eg about the scope of the Remain in Mexico program. Proof will be what happens with the numbers, no? https://t.co/Q2Aoru7rtX
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Skeptical … https://t.co/Ta2PvAs5yi
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Says here the existing Remain in Mexico program was expanded to "those apprehended in areas between official ports of entry in the Border Patrol's San Diego sector." So not just ports of entry in that sector. https://t.co/6dCDG7D9hs https://t.co/mMXXAb2T7O
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Are you sure it just affects ports of entry–that'd be gaping defect, but language refers to "across its entire Southern Border" & "those crossing the U.S. Southern Border to seek asylum." Does not mention POE. I guess all ambiguity should be read in the direction of weakness… https://t.co/mMXXAb2T7O
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Note also that the "existing" Remain in Mexico policy, which is all this agreement pledges to expand, does NOT apply to "unaccompanied minors." https://t.co/lk7TEbdUPN https://t.co/lut9HnadHL
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
If Mexico really does that, great. (Many will stop coming north in the first place, because whole idea is to get into US. But MX may have to confront whether it really wants to be as generous in allowing asylum in MX as its laws suggest. See https://t.co/Bg1qEop9Ak) https://t.co/ZxB4JyPhln
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Cynical reading: US has pledged to expand Remain in Mexico "across its entire Southern Border." But has it pledged – and has Mexico agreed to — applying it to EVERY asylum-seeker, or only a small percentage (spread across entire border)? https://t.co/tO6TbCLNox
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
So the part doing the lifting here is Remain in Mexico (ie they apply here but stay in MX pending decision) and NOT Safe Third Country (which would say they couldn't apply in US at all if have passed through MX) … Remain in Mexico still a huge deal if they fully implement it https://t.co/EpgsI3CZHo
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Good backgrounder for today's Mexico deal, whatever it is … https://t.co/Bg1qEop9Ak
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Transparently obvious common sense alternative: Many "asylum seekers" don't want to go to Mexico. They want to get into U.S.. If they can only get as far as Mexico many (who aren't actually in asylum-level danger) won't come at all, they'll stay home-vastly diminishing any crisis https://t.co/IgRzidfcTN
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
WHAT NPR WANTS YOU TO BELIEVE: A 'Safe Third Country" deal with Mexico "would just really move the migration crisis that we're currently seeing from the US border … down further south, just relocating the crisis."–@SarahPierceEsq https://t.co/AwAGtsEtfP Seems v-wrong 1/
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 8, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
"McConnell for Senate" fundraising off the "security crisis at the border" and the need for "a border wall."
Takes some gall, given @senatemajldr McConnell's inaction when GOPs had a majority in both house. Suggested contribution: $0
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
But you lost @DLind! https://t.co/Jl6HMHUFIy
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
1182(f)-mentum building! I still don't understand why @RoyBeck_NUSA & the NumbersUSA/CIS people seem leery of it. Maybe they have a good reason! Would it upset coalitions? Would its use be overridden by a veto-proof majority (seems unlikely)? Interested in what the problem is. https://t.co/TuQKj07N7X
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
#1 issue among ALL REGISTERED VOTERS. Are Dems on the winning side of it? I don't think so. (It's only a 7% issue among Dems, suggesting that the high score — 20% among independents — does not reflect anti-ICE, loose-border fervor.) https://t.co/okw1lP9rG9
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
PS Goldberg's implicit argument — that 10,000 word cover stories are the pinnacle of magazine journalism & the system should be geared to training people to produce them — seems completely wrongheaded. The soul of a magazine is in the short bits. https://t.co/Uk5P8Eqoff
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
What about those of us who have to *read* 10,000 word cover stories? That's not so damn easy either. https://t.co/02f3UH2P3D
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
1 FOR 4: What if Trump said he'd seek to reduce legal immigration by 25,000 for every 100,000 putative "asylum" surgers who get in? Some reductions (eg guestworkers) exec. can do by itself. Others can be legis. effort backed by veto. THAT might get Koch/donor/hackGOP attention…
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) June 7, 2019
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey