Donald Trump rips 'luxury hotels' for migrants while US citizens are 'living from hand to mouth'
Trump was traveling back to the United States after a four-day trip to Scotland when he was asked about mass migration to the United Kingdom.
A reporter pointed out that many in the U.K. have taken issue with housing migrants in hotels at the expense of taxpayers while their asylum claims are being processed and asked whether Britain needs its own "Alligator Alcatraz."
It was a reference to Florida's illegal immigrant detention center on a 30-square-mile property in the Everglades' swamplands.
"They're putting people in luxury hotels and other people that are working their a---- off are living from hand to mouth. They're not living the same way," Trump said aboard Air Force One. "I've looked at some of the hotels they're using."
Trump noted that illegal immigrants in some parts of the U.S. have also been housed in hotels.
"They put them in like the best hotels anywhere in the world," he said. "Thousands of dollars a night, and other people are living out in the streets, including our veterans. They can't get a room.
"There are pictures of our veterans staying right by the door where they're walking in to live, and the veterans are sitting out in the sidewalk in front of a fancy hotel. And the illegals are coming into that hotel and staying for a week," he added. "That's no good."
In 2023, Fox News reported that claims that homeless veterans were displaced at hotels in upstate New York were false.
However, that same year in Massachusetts, military families who booked rooms in Foxboro, Massachusetts, the site of the 124th Army-Navy football Game at Gillette Stadium, received cancellation notices from hotels that were being used by the state to house migrants.
In June, the Roosevelt Hotel in Manhattan, which served as one of the main migrant shelters in the city, closed its doors.
The converted site, which has around 1,000 rooms, processed more than 173,000 migrants since its opening in May 2023, the city said.
The hotel was linked to gang activity, and the Justice Department in May launched a probe into the Roosevelt, which is owned by the government of Pakistan, and the Stewart Hotel, which was also transformed into a migrant shelter.
New York City taxpayers have forked out billions of dollars to pay for housing for more than 232,000 migrants who have arrived in the city since the spring of 2022.
Originally published as Donald Trump rips 'luxury hotels' for migrants while US citizens are 'living from hand to mouth'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
43 minutes ago
- The Age
In dark times, hope is the sunshine
Unseen, uncaring? Many correspondents have emphasised we must act to stop the killing and hunger in Gaza because we are seeing this unravel before our eyes through pictures and video. This poses a question: If we don't see vision of other catastrophic wars in the world, should we care? I am distressed at what is happening in Gaza, but I am also disturbed by the starvation and killing of hundreds of thousands people in countries such as Sudan. The BBC has reported that 13 children have died of starvation in a displacement camp in East Darfur. And, last year UNICEF reported harrowing accounts of armed men in Sudan raping and sexually assaulting children. But Australia's media rarely reports and shows pictures of what is happening in other war-torn countries. We don't even get stories about the effect of what is happening in Sudan on our Sudanese community in Victoria. If we did read and see pictures about killing and hunger in other parts of the world, would we call for this to stop? Would the weekly CBD protests call for an end to all catastrophic wars? Erica Cervini, Prahran The Trump remedy Donald Trump firing the statistician who reports poor jobs data reminds me of his proposed remedy when faced with steeply increasing COVID cases: stop testing. Soon on the agenda: stop voting. Ralph Böhmer, St Kilda West A Tigers fan softens Thanks for the apology Bob Murphy (″ I owe the Tigers an apology ″, 1/8). As a lifetime Tiger supporter, I was one of many Tiger fans extremely disappointed in his pre-season prediction of a winless Tigers 2025 season. Today I'm still that little boy from the 1960s who wore Bill Brown's No. 40 on my Richmond jumper and that little boy was shattered by his statement. While always believing in his ability on the playing field, my assessment of his performance as a 774 radio host was tempered by his ill-advised prediction. I, too, witnessed the great deeds of Matthew Knights in the 1995 final comeback victory against the Bombers and was also at his fourth game when all hell broke loose between the Doggies and Tigers. Fortunately I have become the grandfather of two young passionate Doggie supporters and while they tell me they hate the Tigers, I now have a very big soft spot for their Doggies and I have been able to let go of my feelings from that day. My assessment of his performance on the airwaves is now unencumbered by his poor Tigers 2025 prediction So Bob, I forgive you. Paul Gooley, Ringwood East Do the maths Your correspondent (Letters, 31/7) took me back to my 1980s sixth grade at Brunswick North West Primary School. Before curriculum and assessment design became a political plaything, teachers were provided with the freedom to adopt models from a range of expert mathematics educators. For eight months, my students treated numbers and their patterns like fun manipulative toys. Along the way they became experts at automatic response. Today's content driven/test proven/NAPLAN-backed regime would have straightjacketed my teaching. My students loved mathematics, declaring it the easiest subject. Would they say this today? Sadly, I doubt it. Ian Whitehead, Traralgon Profit v care Why on earth, 40 years after Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan tried to persuade us that all public services should be privatised, are we still surprised at the shocking revelations coming out of the ″childcare industry″? The two underlying motivations are completely divergent and at odds: private childcare to maximise private profit (largely supported by government subsidies), and public services to care for children. Keep it simple. Tony Adami, Caulfield South When new is the norm Reading Scott Farquhar's comments about AI reminds me of Alexis de Tocqueville's observations about capitalists in 19th-century America (″ Tech boss calls for boost to AI as 150 jobs cut ″, 31/7). He observed, ″The idea of newness is closely linked with that of improvement. Nowhere in his mind does he see any limit placed by nature to human endeavour.″ On the question of AI, we are encouraged to exalt what is new, to exploit it, remaining indifferent to the destruction of the old ways. There will, of course, be radical social change, high unemployment and entire industries erased, but those entranced by newness will have moved on by then. Anders Ross, Heidelberg Reward the teachers It's a significant achievement that Victorian primary schoolchildren have scored highly in NAPLAN tests (″ Victorian kids are the brightest sparks ″, 30/7). It's also heartening that Education Minister Ben Carroll acknowledges the reasons for these improvements and recognises teachers play a pivotal role in this progress. As a parent of one I hope this will translate into tangible outcomes for our hard-working and undervalued teachers.
Perth Now
43 minutes ago
- Perth Now
US appeals court keeps ban on LA immigration arrests
A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement.
West Australian
43 minutes ago
- West Australian
US appeals court keeps ban on LA immigration arrests
A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court's decision temporarily barring US government agents from making immigration-related arrests in Los Angeles without probable cause. Rejecting the Trump administration's request to pause the lower court's order, the three-judge appeals panel ruled the plaintiffs would likely be able to prove that federal agents had carried out arrests based on people's appearance, language and where they lived or worked. President Donald Trump called National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles in June in response to protests against the immigration raids, marking an extraordinary use of military force to support civilian police operations within the United States. The city of Los Angeles and other Southern California municipalities joined a lawsuit filed in June by the American Civil Liberties Union, accusing federal agents of using unlawful police tactics such as racial profiling to meet immigration arrest quotas set by the administration. A California judge in July blocked the Trump administration from racially profiling immigrants as it seeks deportation targets and from denying immigrants' right to access to lawyers during their detention. In Friday's unsigned decision, the judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit largely rejected the administration's appeal of the temporary restraining order. The judges agreed with the lower court in blocking federal officials from detaining people based solely on "apparent race or ethnicity", speaking Spanish or accented English, or being at locations such as a "bus stop, car wash, tow yard, day labourer pick up site, agricultural site, etc". The Department of Homeland Security and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside business hours. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the order a victory for the city. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now," she said in a statement. Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff lawyer at the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, also welcomed the ruling. "This decision is further confirmation that the administration's paramilitary invasion of Los Angeles violated the Constitution and caused irreparable injury across the region," he said in a statement.
