“Hostage-taking” has been going on for the past two years: Recalling how POTUS declared his own orders

To date: DACA is still in limbo; not only are dreams on hold, but lives are drastically affected



As President Trump has been dealing with certain legislations that have indicated their implementations, one that stands out conspicuously was his order: To end Dreamers’ protections under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was one which was met with sadness, untold grief, suspension stemming from a great many of the younger generation who likewise had dreams of their own.

A very recent proposal by President Trump “to trade border wall funding for temporary protections for Dreamers,” was rejected by the Democrats on the ground they would not “negotiate” until the end

of the “shutdown” crisis.  As issues continue to proceed, another shutdown could be in the making despite the conclusion of the longest government shutdown in the history of the United States.

The initial offer from Trump in reference to DACA when the first shutdown was going on was: “to exchange temporary immigrant protections for $5.7 billion to adding ‘steel barriers’ in high-priority

locations” to 654 miles of existing border fencing. Those so-called “protections included a three-year extension on DACA, covering some “700,000 immigrants illegally brought to America as children,” likewise

called the “Dreamers,” as they were identified legally during the presidency of Barack Obama.

Most editorials sounded off prominently in siding with the Democrats vis-à-vis the Trump offer of what was branded as “temporary relief.” The Los Angeles Times strongly stated how “Democrats are

right to reject Trump’s statement on DACA.”

Indeed, POTUS’ offer of relief was noted as one that could not be counted upon, as it “wouldn’t make the Dreamers much better off than they are now.”  Too, what seemed as distant from reality is

the very recent word from the Supreme Court that it wouldn’t “likely consider the Dreamers case until Year 2020.”

Therefore, the stand strongly taken by the Democrats in regard to government shutdowns was welcomed by DACA recipients who thanked the Democrats for their efforts.  DACA spokespersons claimed

how “Democrats are right to refuse to negotiate until the shutdown is over.”

Legal practitioners were of the opinion that negotiations cannot be relied upon until after shutdowns will no longer prevail because any effort aimed at DACA while shutdowns persist, would be tantamount to “encouraging Trump to take the government hostage again  the next time he wants something Congress won’t give him.”

Another vigorous voice was heard from a law professor who said: “Trump so-called compromise is a total sham.  First of all, the DACA kids already had legal protection until Trump yanked it way in 2017  by executive order.  Likewise, the Senate bill that incorporated his temporary DACA protection was loaded up with poison pills impossible for Democrats to swallow.”

Reportedly, in the fine print, there were provisions that kept “desperate Central American children from applying for asylum at the border.”

Additionally, there was another provision that required Central American children to apply in their home countries.  It would limit asylum admissions to a very tiny number: “15,000 a year, and, therefore

would “raise the bar for judging asylum claims.”

Another requirement surfaced: “requiring that any approval be in the national interest.”  Wouldn’t such a term be considered as vague?  Wouldn’t it be equated to a justification to turn down or minimize

“mass rejections?”

Evidently, despite marked differences in opinions where negotiations appear to be frail, some “Independents” were prone to ask.  “Why won’t Democrats go through negotiations?”

A Nancy Pelosi supporter forwarded a response: “The Speaker knows how President Trump has been hurt more politically than the Democrats by the government shutdown, and her base has remained

unconvinced about that same Trump Wall.”

Ronald Brownstein, known as another strong political analyst was heard to state: “The power struggle is not really about a literal wall anymore, but the ‘powerful symbol’ it has become.” How true!

Progressives have not at all been deterred to lend their opinion about the “wall.”  They have seen the wall as “a symbol of racism.”

Deplorably, the chief occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, does not cease to defend his initial policies which commenced long before the presidency became his, thanks to the electoral college.

One lingering question that requires an accurate reply: “Is Trump really ‘tough’ on Russia?”