Why is the White House Hiding the Immigration Status of Melania's Parents?

[Kalis]

Its important for the crowd on here too know so they can keep up the endless trump whine.

Attacking Trump on his political views and policies is part and parcel of politics, but I’ve seen childish stories about him feeding fish and utterly vile attacks like this, and even on his young son - that isn’t right, that’s sick.

[ohwell]

As an authoritarian, Trump takes on their normal shtick..."Do as I say, not as I do."

So that is the answer, the "laws" are for other people that can't get around them, like he (and his family) did.

More like most Americans don't seem to understand how immigration law works. You're an imbecile if you even think for one second that they're not legal or at the very least here on a visa/dual citizenship. Do you really think the president, or even Trump as not the president couldn't have pushed their paperwork through?

I mean hell tons of idiots were like "amg he hates immigrants, but his wife is" when he never once said that. Illegal immigrants and false flag refugees who just say fuck the system are not the same as people who come here through the system in place.

If anything the left is the "do as I say not as I do" these days. Piers Morgan and Omarosa rings a bell since by the left's standards if the genders were reversed Piers would have a #metoo moment of monumental proportion yet very few news outlets are covering it.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump's father-in-law, Melania'dad was a member of the Communist party Trumpkins.
You people were outraged at through conspiracy theories that Obama was a Communist, Muslim, Muslim Brotherhood and whatever else.

Obama's picture with Farakhan has more credence than this considering he's just like Rev Wright if not worse in advocation of white genocide and violence against white people.

[melodramocracy]

He's probably an hypocrite about it.
Still, involving the parents of an non-elected family member with no governmental position is pretty low.

Too bad. Thats the level of scrutiny you sign up for when becoming POTUS. And “exceptions for me but not for thee” is not indicative if strong leadership. The end.

[Shaderas]

Attacking Trump on his political views and policies is part and parcel of politics, but I’ve seen childish stories about him feeding fish and utterly vile attacks like this, and even on his young son - that isn’t right, that’s sick.

Eh, it's part of the landscape these days. People were attacking Obama's daughters.

It's my general opinion, that people are stupid.

[Kalis]

People were attacking Obama's daughters.

And that was vile as well.

It's my general opinion, that people are stupid.

I think it goes beyond stupidity and into extremism.

[Rennadrel]

Because they are commie Russian spies

[Kaleredar]

Attacking Trump on his political views and policies is part and parcel of politics, but I’ve seen childish stories about him feeding fish and utterly vile attacks like this, and even on his young son - that isn’t right, that’s sick.

This isn't about attacking Trump's relatives, it's about asking Trump "hey, Trump, you know how you're against sponsoring Visas for the parents of immigrants who became US citizens? Then why are you okay with your immigrant wife who became a US citizen sponsoring a visa for her immigrant parents?"


It's simply hypocrisy. Nobody would be commenting on them if what he was tacitly overlooking for family members didn't run antithetical to his entire political platform.

[Kalis]

This isn't about attacking Trump's relatives, it's about asking Trump "hey, Trump, you know how you're against sponsoring Visas for the parents of immigrants who became US citizens? Then why are you okay with your immigrant wife who became a US citizen sponsoring a visa for her immigrant parents?"


It's simply hypocrisy. Nobody would be commenting on them if what he was tacitly overlooking for family members didn't run antithetical to his entire political platform.

You don’t get to take a moral stance on immigrants when you are using immigrants in order to attack Trump.

[Kaleredar]

You don’t get to take a moral stance on immigrants when you are using immigrants in order to attack Trump.

First, I'm not "attacking immigrants."

You're acting as if merely mentioning their situation is "attacking" them. It's not. It's pointing out their situtation.

Second, you're acting as if pointing out Trump's positions on immigrants in their situation is attacking them. It's not. It's pointing out Trump's position on immigrants in their situation.

Third, you're construing the actual question of "why is it okay for Trump's family members to fly under what he prescribes should be the law" with your imagined scenario of "look at Trump's family members, aren't the awful people" for some reason. Which isn't what's being said. Even remotely. You don't really seem to understand what's going on here, because, in essence, all you seem to be saying "you can't point out hypocrisy because bringing up the subject makes you a hypocrite!"

Which is stupid.

[Kalis]

First, I'm not "attacking immigrants."

You are using their status for a political attack on Trump, that is also an attack on them as bystanders and they haven’t done anything to deserve that.

You aren’t interested in immigrants other than to use as a political tool, so you are in no position to criticise Trump for using immigrants as a political tool.

The rest of your post is pathetic attempts at trying to justify your actions, but you’ve sunk to Trump’s level and to any outsider you stink just as much as he does. So well done, you’ve managed to take the moral low ground in a fight against Trump...that’s impressive.

[Kaleredar]

You are using their status for a political attack on Trump, that is also an attack on them as bystanders and they haven’t done anything to deserve that.

No, I'm using Trump's political position for a political attack on Trump.

It'd be the exact same thing if he was being criticized for wanting to gut medicare but preserve it for his parents in law, or peel back regulations on where refineries could be built but maintain restrictions around properties he owned, or heighten import trade tariffs but not on materials he wanted to use to construct the wall, etc, etc, etc.

It's hypocrisy, plain and simple. That's whats being dealt with here.

You aren’t interested in immigrants other than to use as a political tool, so you are in no position to criticise Trump for using immigrants as a political tool.

Pointing out why an elected leader, who is ostensibly "hard but justified" in his actions against ALL immigrants, is full of horseshit because of his selective biases, is decidedly pro-immigrant, because it hopefully allows people to see that Trump is not approaching the immigrant situation in any way beyond a knee-jerk pandering level. He doesn't care about some imagined moral high ground as his supporters purport because he's willing to make exceptions based on no merit other than, effectively, nepotism.

Pointing out that a political figure is failing to uphold their own political discourse is very important, especially when that political figure is putting his entire weight behind the "but the immigrants" soapbox. You're effectively saying "look elsewhere, not important, Trump's words speak louder than his actions."

I disagree with that.

The rest of your post is pathetic attempts at trying to justify your actions, but you’ve sunk to Trump’s level and to any outsider you stink just as much as he does. So well done, you’ve managed to take the moral low ground in a fight against Trump...that’s impressive.

Your assertion really doesn't make much sense. You're basically saying "ignore this, it's not important, don't criticize his immigration policy because by doing so you're ignoring the immigrants." It's whataboutism fused with a false parallel.

[Macaquerie]

Funny thing is, if you were to deport Melania now she'd probably gladly go, anywhere to get away from the Donald.

Also, how exactly did "chain migration" become some kind of a snarl term? You WANT people to bring their families over, that encourages them to lay down roots and actually have a stake in the community. There are plenty of places where the work force just consists of temporary migrants who work for a few years before leaving to rejoin their families, and those are pretty much all universally dysfunctional societies. When none of the workers ever get to actually enjoy the fruits of their labor, they will have zero incentive to do a good job or contribute to society in any meaningful way, they're just there to make a quick buck before going home.

[Twix]

Trump is against ILLEGAL immigration.. that author needs to do some fact checking.. afaik his wife came here legally so no hypocrisy on his part. And, what does the first lady's parents have to do with the president?

[Doctor Amadeus]

You don’t get to take a moral stance on immigrants when you are using immigrants in order to attack Trump.

You don't have a moral authority of any kind anyways, pointing out Trump's stupidity is in no way attacking immigrants. Give this tolerance of the intolerant BS a rest.

[Manabomb]

Ahhhh... So wonderful, so beautiful.

This administration is such a train full of dogshit crashing into an exploding oil refinery. Everything about it is so hilariously epic at every turn.

[satimy]

/thread
_______

Melania is more brown than most South Americans, you people are projecting this false flag of white supremacy worse tha Jim jones

[Kalis]

No, I'm using Trump's political position for a political attack on Trump.

You are using the lives of two actual people for political point scoring. You are as bad as Trump, you just haven’t cottoned on to that yet.

When you lose the moral high ground to Trump, you’ve fucked up.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't have a moral authority of any kind anyways, pointing out Trump's stupidity is in no way attacking immigrants. Give this tolerance of the intolerant BS a rest.

These are two named individuals, their personal status is being used as a political football for partisan reasons. That is not acceptable politics, that is throwing innocent people under the bus for an ideology, it’s shameful behaviour.

[zolfare]

First of all, I hate defending Trump because he is an absolute man-child. With that being said, he has never had an anti-immigration rhetoric. He has always been pro-immigration, against illegal immigration. Based on our immigration laws, I would say it is far more likely that her parents are legal though, and there probably isn't too much in this story (ex. family members over the age of 55 do not need to speak a single word of English to gain citizenship).

Honestly, I wouldn't read too much into this one. There is plenty to get upset about with the Trump administration, and I would focus more on that (like Trumps Twitter potty mouth).

[Kathandira]

You are using the lives of two actual people for political point scoring. You are as bad as Trump, you just haven’t cottoned on to that yet.

When you lose the moral high ground to Trump, you’ve fucked up.

- - - Updated - - -



These are two named individuals, their personal status is being used as a political football for partisan reasons. That is not acceptable politics, that is throwing innocent people under the bus for an ideology, it’s shameful behaviour.

On one hand, your right. Stooping to his level is not a good thing to do. On the other hand, we shouldn't excuse the very person who is tightening the grip on immigration and allow him to have a pass on the very thing he is doing to other families.

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

[Machismo]

You don’t get to take a moral stance on immigrants when you are using immigrants in order to attack Trump.

I think the overall narrative is not their status, but rather Trump's hypocrisy on his main platform when running for office. It's about the same as a religious conservative who campaigns against gay marriage being found in bed with his boyfriend.

It's not meant to be an attack on the boyfriend, but on the utter hypocrisy of the politician.