That's your interpretation. Trump said he will deport Haitians, he didn't elaborate if there will be any consideration about asylum, and knowing him it wouldn't make sense to assume he'd be humane about it.
What Trump does or does not do will be subject to laws. It's not a matter of humanism, it's a matter of if you claim you have a right to asylum it doesn't automatically make you entitled to asylum.
We're discussing policies proposed by the candidates and this is one of them. I can easily say that e.g. Kamala's price gouging proposal is bullshit and disgraceful populism. Can you say the same thing about Trump's immigration bullshit, or do you still (selectively) like it?
Kamala's proposals are bullshit, as she has been vice president for 4 years and wants to present herself as the change the country needs. Check this out:
Kamala Harris pushes tougher asylum restrictions during visit to US-Mexico borderThere are things Trump says that are bullshit, like he is going to deport 20 million but wanting to control the border well and deport a good portion of illegals that Kamala has let in is not.
To put it another way, if Trump says (completely hypothetically) that he would jail journalists or let police do whatever they want, would you still be sanewashing it as if that could never happen, even given the near-absolute immunity granted by the Supreme Court?
Not to mention just the basic fitness for office implications. How much can someone talk nonsense, including unlawful and unconstitutional nonsense, before we should say that no fucking way this person is fit to be president. Rhetorical question of course. There is longer any guardrails on at least one side of the political spectrum.
Are you just saying that because Biden is too fit to be president or something?
I don't even know what you are talking about. And if Kamala Harris starts jailing people when they comment on a Facebook post that there has been an increase in rapes in their area due to mass illegal immigration are you going to white wash it? That already happens in the UK.
Being immigration such an issue - or has been made an issue but it is not really that much of an issue in a country with raising wages and pretty much only frictional unemployment and little public healthcare or other expensive state expenses of the like, my question is why did Trump trumped the the trumping of illegal border crossings?
I understand you because when I was a leftist I also believed that the world was like Alice in Wonderland.
Surely all those who cross illegally are engineers who are going to contribute their talent and effort to the country, and they are not going to drive wages down or push real estate prices up, nor are there any drug dealers, pimps, women prostituted against their will or any kind of criminals among them. Ironies aside, you only have to go to the previous page to see that Alice was a story:
In contrast, though I must mention it is unfortunate
Tren de Aragua has managed to get some of their people there in the States.
Tren de Aragua (English: Aragua Train) is a transnational criminal organization from Venezuela