A post by Maynard

Here’s an excerpt from the transcript. I could editorialize, but it pretty much speaks for itself.

BLITZER: All right. Let’s talk a little bit about Mexico’s laws. I read an article in “The Washington Times” the other day. I’m going to read a paragraph to you and you tell me if this is true or not true. This is from “The Washington Times”: “Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to reenter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.”

Is that true?

CALDERON: It was true, but it is not anymore. We derogate or we erased that part of the law. Actually, the legal immigration is not a — is not a crime in Mexico. Not anymore, since one year ago. And that is the reason why we are trying to establish our own comprehensive public policy talking about, for instance, immigrants coming from Central America…



BLITZER: So if people want to come from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua, they want to just come into Mexico, they can just walk in?

CALDERON: No. They need to fulfill a form. They need to establish their right name. We analyze if they have not a criminal precedent. And they coming into Mexico. Actually…

BLITZER: Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants?

CALDERON: Of course. Of course, in the border, we are asking the people, who are you?

And if they explain…

BLITZER: At the border, I understand, when they come in.


BLITZER: But once they’re in…

CALDERON: But not — but not in — if — once they are inside the — inside the country, what the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law. But by any means, immigration is a crime anymore in Mexico.

BLITZER: Immigration is not a crime, you’re saying?

CALDERON: It’s not a crime.

BLITZER: So in other words, if somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America, through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job…


BLITZER: They can work.

CALDERON: If — if somebody do that without permission, we send back — we send back them.

BLITZER: You find them and you send them back?

CALDERON: Yes. However, especially with the people of Guatemala, we are providing a new system in which any single citizen from Guatemala could be able to visit any single border (INAUDIBLE) in the south. And even with all the requirements, he can or she can visit any parts of Mexico.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
13 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. morecowbell says:

    LOL perfect…. thanks Maynard

  2. brandonj says:

    This is too funny. Immigration isn’t illegal any more, but illegals can’t work, can be apprehended and deported, etc? I can’t decide if it’s poor english, stupidity, or both. Here’s a question though-why is Calderon here? What does Mexico have to offer us (besides drug dealers, gangs and unskilled scofflaws who want to leech off our social systems, while expecting us to speak their language to them)? It’s an absolute outrage that with a disaster off of the coast of Lousiana, terrorsim threats, two wars going on and staggering unemployment that this administration is spending the time and money entertaining and kissing the butt of this third world moron! Barry really is a texbook example of an educated idiot.

  3. Chuck says:

    Was the interview in English or in Spanish? Maybe somewhat got lost in the translation …

    Just kidding.

  4. LJZumpano says:

    LOL when I first heard it I thought it was a parody — guess truth is stranger than fiction

  5. […] like, chopped, sliced, and diced: Don Surber and Tammy Bruce post the transcript of Blitzer interviewing Felipe Calderón: BLITZER: After president […]

  6. Laura says:

    OMG; “We send back….we send back them” lol

    Yea ah kinda like what we are doing, only we send them back

  7. franknitti says:

    Could it be that Wolf Blitzed is regaining his manhood as a journalist?

  8. makeshifty says:

    Well I guess the conclusion that can be drawn is that at least Mexico doesn’t detain illegal immigrants for years anymore. They “send back them”. I guess with his brain under stress, because he wasn’t as well prepared as he thought to deliver the PR message he wanted, he went back to what would be normal syntax in Spanish. I liked Blitzer’s questioning. He just used our own experience with immigrants as a guide. This only confirms what some of us heard years ago, which is that Mexico’s immigration laws are stricter than ours. Now, with their more “lax” attitude, their laws sound like what we want! They make sense!

    • makeshifty says:

      I feel the need to “walk back” on my comment some. I based my comments on what I saw here, not a full reading of Mexico’s immigration law. I watched Hannity’s analysis of Mexico’s rules for immigration tonight. He said they do racial profiling, and I don’t mean to say that I would like that idea, or perhaps some other provisions I missed.

  9. BeforeGoreKneel says:

    After all is said and done, everyone agrees that American livers are the best when they are transplanted in American emergency hospitals. For free, of course.

  10. tamcat says:

    This conversation (interview) was so hard to follow. Kinda like a Democrat doing double talk. He sounds ignorant.

  11. eMVeeH says:

    Mua, ha, ha, ha, haaa…
    Wanna bet the godling told the pathetic, meddling, shrimp Calderon that an interview with CNN would be a breeze?

    Calderon’s meddling and rudeness in Congress today will bring the opposite of what he wants. And those clapping politcos will feel the heat, soon.

  12. naga5 says:

    hey TAMs,
    slightly off topic, but did any of you catch megyn kelly’s read on sb1070 vs the federal law on oreilly?
    she made some interesting points on how the federal law is much more severe than arizona’s law. i know that the feds make it a felony and the arizona law makes it a misdemeanor. apparently there’s pretty slam dunk precedent for upholding sb1070.
    i continue to be amazed at how urkel and his regime continues to spout talking points unrelated to the bill, i.e. chance for abuse meme.
    thanks for preemptively indicting all police officers.
    urkel acts stupidly.

You must be logged in to post a comment.