Must Read Trump backs down, orders end to family separations at U.S. border

[stevenl]

44 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

 

Nobody is saying it is easy, and he does a good job of explaining. Since quite a few proponants of this policy are blaming the MSM, l hope you also saw that CNN is giving every opportunity to him to speak out and explain.

 

But the facts are what they are, or were what they were, because at present nobody knows what is happening. Trump instigated the policy, and had to retract it because the USA did not accept it.

[bushdoctor]

Are you referring to trumps “policy” of enforcing the law? 

[bushdoctor]

 

[spidermike007]

9 hours ago, jackh said:

Oh my...another my parents were immigrants story. So what's your point?  Best you get a grip on reality. BIG difference between an immigrant and an ILLEGAL immigrant. The former (including their offspring) are not welcome here. They are criminals. 

 

You want to immigrate to the USA? Do it legally, and you are all welcomed. Be a criminal and face whats coming to you. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Total BS by someone who refused to do some research on the subject, and has not read up on the immigration issue on any level. The talking points coming out of the very white house are nonsense, as usual, and contains no factual information. Only a daily fake narrative. The only people who are currently allowed to immigrate to the US (since 9/11) are people of wealth, and substance. Someone from Thailand cannot even get a tourist visa to the US, unless they are married to an American, are lucky enough to be among a tiny allotment of student visas, or have over 20 million baht cash, in the bank here. Otherwise, not happening. I know this for a fact. If you are from Europe, or the first world, no problem. If you are unlucky enough to be from the third world, you are totally unwanted in the US. 

 

As far as the rest of the debate goes, if you have $1,000,000 US, to invest in a business, or real estate, you can get a visa. In terms of the people coming over illegally, there is presently no means with which they could apply legally, as you suggest. 

 

Even a top talent, is limited to a minuscule quote system, that has not been revised for decades. The frustrating part of this discussion is that most vocal participants are human parrots, and few are willing to educate themselves about legal immigration, and the total unwillingness of the very white house, congress and the senate, to even debate this issue. Not illegal immigration. Everyone loves to talk about that simple minded issue. The real issue at stake here is legal immigration, and the need to fix a broken and dysfunctional system.

 

Be a criminal. What nonsense. What quaker based, puritanical, fake BS.

[wayned]

Actually you don't have to apply for asylum at a port of entry you can apply if you are already in the USA, legally or illegally!  So the people that entered  by climbing over the wall or crossing the Rio Grande and go to an immigration officer should not be arrested as they are applying for asylum and are in the USA per the regulations.

 

" To apply for asylum in the United States, you may ask for asylum at a port-of-entry (airport, seaport, or border crossing), or, if you are already in the United States, you may file Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, at the appropriate Service Center."

[bushdoctor]

7 minutes ago, wayned said:

Actually you don't have to apply for asylum at a port of entry you can apply if you are already in the USA, legally or illegally!  So the people that entered  by climbing over the wall or crossing the Rio Grande and go to an immigration officer should not be arrested as they are applying for asylum and are in the USA per the regulations.

 

" To apply for asylum in the United States, you may ask for asylum at a port-of-entry (airport, seaport, or border crossing), or, if you are already in the United States, you may file Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, at the appropriate Service Center."

They are being allowed to apply for asylum. That doesn’t let them off the hook for illegal entry.....that’s a crime. It’s a law that was passed by Congress. 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, bushdoctor said:

They are being allowed to apply for asylum. That doesn’t let them off the hook for illegal entry.....that’s a crime. It’s a law that was passed by Congress. 

Straight question to you.

 

Do believe forcibly removing children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps is acceptable?

 

Let’s see if you can give a straight answer.

[bushdoctor]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Straight question to you.

 

Do believe forcibly removing children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps is acceptable?

 

Let’s see if you can give a straight answer.

I know your upset but they are not being caged. The chain link enclosures you see are holding areas, they get transferred from there.

 

To compare the facilities to concentration camps is insincere and unfair. They are not being killed or shoved in ovens, they are being well taken care of. 

 

To answer your question, I think enforcing the law is totally fair. If I as a citizen break the law I am also separated from my children. That’s on me. There are consequences to breaking the law. It’s just a sad fact of life, but without laws we would not be civilized. 

 

What is is your solution? Don’t prosecute and go to open borders? Then persuade congress to pass new laws. 

[xylophone]

An evil of biblical contortion

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

I know your upset but they are not being caged. The chain link enclosures you see are holding areas, they get transferred from there.

 

To compare the facilities to concentration camps is insincere and unfair. They are not being killed or shoved in ovens, they are being well taken care of. 

 

To answer your question, I think enforcing the law is totally fair. If I as a citizen break the law I am also separated from my children. That’s on me. There are consequences to breaking the law. It’s just a sad fact of life, but without laws we would not be civilized. 

 

What is is your solution? Don’t prosecute and go to open borders? Then persuade congress to pass new laws. 

Yep, as I thought, simple answer to a simple question is beyond you.

 

Your verbose answer reveals you share a mindset wit those who ‘were only following orders’.

 

You clearly see nothing wrong with anything the law permits.

 

 

[bushdoctor]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yep, as I thought, simple answer to a simple question is beyond you.

 

Your verbose answer reveals you share a mindset wit those who ‘were only following orders’.

 

You clearly see nothing wrong with anything the law permits.

 

 

And I asked you a question as well. What would you like to see done? 

[Chomper Higgot]

34 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

And I asked you a question as well. What would you like to see done? 

Let’s start with returning the 2000+ children to their parents, then we’ll discuss what else to do.

 

[bushdoctor]

You asked me for a straight answer. 

You must know most of those parents are in detention awaiting their hearings for breaking immigration law. Do you really want the children in there with the adults? 

[mtls2005]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

Are you referring to trumps “policy” of enforcing the law? 

 

If you read Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III original memo you will clearly see the impetus behind this hare-brained scheme. It wasn't about enforcing the law, and he admitted that in public, although he walked it back on Thursday, a tad. 

 

Entering the U.S. illegally is a misdemeanor, for the first offense. While seeking asylum is (still) legal.

 

Jared Kushner, just as a matter of comparison, has effectively lied upwards of 40 times on his financial disclosure forms. Each of these is a felony. I'm waiting to hear the law and odor types rail on about separating Jared from his convicted felon father and putting Jared into a Tender Age Facility. Obviously, there are a couple dozen more in the Trump administration who've similarly lied.

[chubby]

13 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Trump backed down because he knows he is losing support because his decision was crap. A decision that was emboldened by listening to white supremacist trash like Stephen Miller.

 

Attacking the First Lady? You mean the illegal immigrant first lady? You don't like illegal Mexican potato pickers but any East European that gets her tits out for the lads should be given a free pass for her and her chain immigrant family members?

damn straight,   dittoheads reap the whirlwind, finally got their  Koch Bros  world,    now they just need  a  war with Iran   to  seal the deal

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

You asked me for a straight answer. 

You must know most of those parents are in detention awaiting their hearings for breaking immigration law. Do you really want the children in there with the adults? 

No I do not.

 

I don’t support detention for ‘misdemeanour’.

 

But since Trump’s executive order now includes the incarceration of children with their parents I’ll ask you your own question:

 

Do you really want children incarcerated with adults?

 

[bushdoctor]

27 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

If you read Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III original memo you will clearly see the impetus behind this hare-brained scheme. It wasn't about enforcing the law, and he admitted that in public, although he walked it back on Thursday, a tad. 

 

Entering the U.S. illegally is a misdemeanor, for the first offense. While seeking asylum is (still) legal.

 

Jared Kushner, just as a matter of comparison, has effectively lied upwards of 40 times on his financial disclosure forms. Each of these is a felony. I'm waiting to hear the law and odor types rail on about separating Jared from his convicted felon father and putting Jared into a Tender Age Facility. Obviously, there are a couple dozen more in the Trump administration who've similarly lied.

To be clear, Trump’s immigration policy is to follow the law and prosecute people who enter illegally. This is in line with his campaign promises which got him elected. 

The separation is a result of the current bad immigration laws. Trump signed an executive order to keep families together, just like Chuck Schumer suggested he should do. Now it’s time for congress to fix the bad laws.

 

The only other alternative is to let the offenders go, and hope they show up for their hearings. That was known as catch and release in the Obama years and the result was disastrous. As you might expect, most of those people are at large in the US and didn’t show up. That would hardly be in line with campaign promises. 

 

Is it your belief that the law should be ignored and people should be allowed to enter at will provided they have a child with them? Are you aware that it’s commonplace for human traffickers wanting easy entry to bring a child that doesn’t belong to them and claim they are family? I hope you don’t condone this type of illegal activity, it puts children in real danger. What happens to them after the adult gets in and doesn’t have anymore use for them? 

 

Edited June 22, 2018 by bushdoctor
Spelling

[bushdoctor]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No I do not.

 

I don’t support detention for ‘misdemeanour’.

 

But since Trump’s executive order now includes the incarceration of children with their parents I’ll ask you your own question:

 

Do you really want children incarcerated with adults?

 

No. I don’t think anyone really does, although until Trump issued the executive order it sure seemed like that’s what the Democrats wanted.

This should wind down to a trickle once people get the feedback that if you immigrate illegally you will be prosecuted, and bringing a child with you will no longer get you a free pass. 

I understand your concerns, but what’s your solution? 

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

To be clear, Trump’s immigration policy is to follow the law and prosecute people who enter illegally. This is in line with his campaign promises which got him elected. 

The separation is a result of the current bad immigration laws. Trump signed an executive order to keep families together, just like Chuck Schumer suggested he should do. Now it’s time for congress to fix the bad laws.

 

The only other alternative is to let the offenders go, and hope they show up for their hearings. That was known as catch and release in the Obama years and the result was disastrous. As you might expect, most of those people are at large in the US and didn’t show up. That would hardly be in line with campaign promises. 

 

Is it your belief that the law should be ignored and people should be allowed to enter at will provided they have a child with them? Are you aware that it’s commonplace for human traffickers wanting easy entry to bring a child that doesn’t belong to them and claim they are family? I hope you don’t confine this type of illegal activity, it put those children in danger. What happens to them after the adult gets in and doesn’t have anymore use for them? 

 

." That was known as catch and release in the Obama years and the result was disastrous."

What exactly was the disaster or what were the disasters?

[mtls2005]

5 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

That was known as catch and release in the Obama years and the result was disastrous.

Feel free to define "disastrous", especially in context of children being held in camps.

 

8 minutes ago, bushdoctor said:

Is it your belief that the law should be ignored

 

Who's suggesting that anyone "ignore" laws? Falling back on that old tripe is infantile, but I do understand how it can appeal to the "base". 

 

 

The Trump administration muddled along for what ~ 15 months, then implemented an idiotic policy with little forethought and planning.

 

And these are the same folks whining about how "unfair" the system was to Arpaio, DeSouza and Manafort. Sheesh.

[bushdoctor]

7 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

." That was known as catch and release in the Obama years and the result was disastrous."

What exactly was the disaster or what were the disasters?

As I already stated, it resulted in most of them not showing up for the hearing and disappearing into the US. In the context of Trumps pledge to secure the border, it was a disaster. 

[bushdoctor]

7 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

Feel free to define "disastrous", especially in context of children being held in camps.

 

 

Who's suggesting that anyone "ignore" laws? Falling back on that old tripe is infantile, but I do understand how it can appeal to the "base". 

 

 

The Trump administration muddled along for what ~ 15 months, then implemented an idiotic policy with little forethought and planning.

 

And these are the same folks whining about how "unfair" the system was to Arpaio, DeSouza and Manafort. Sheesh.

What idiotic policy are you referring to? 

[bushdoctor]

By idiotic policy you mean his policy of enforcing the laws passed by congress that he is sworn to uphold as president? 

[jcsmith]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

This should wind down to a trickle once people get the feedback that if you immigrate illegally you will be prosecuted, and bringing a child with you will no longer get you a free pass. 

The big problem is that they have been intentionally slowing down access at the border to the point that they are not allowing asylum seekers in. People who have traveled long distances and then get turned away at the border without even hearing their case. Then they cross illegally and become criminals. They are in a desperate situation and the U.S. is legally obligated to listen to their case.

This would be the equivalent of making a law informing people they can only eat food from Tops Supermarket. And when they showed up to Tops Supermarket to buy food telling them that tops is full and they can not come in. Then prosecuting starving people who stole a piece of bread or shopped elsewhere.

Edited June 22, 2018 by jcsmith

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

As I already stated, it resulted in most of them not showing up for the hearing and disappearing into the US. In the context of Trumps pledge to secure the border, it was a disaster. 

It's a failure not a disaster. Hyperbole much?

The highest estimate I have seen of the number of undocumented immigrants living in the USA is about 15,000,000. That's out of a population of roughly 350,000,000. Most of them are gainfully enployed Lots of them actually help support social security since they are working with a false ID and without hope of ever being repaid. And they pay sales taxes and such, too. And spend money here. They overwhelmingly contribute to the economy. So where's the disaster?

[mtls2005]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

By idiotic policy you mean his policy of enforcing the laws passed by congress that he is sworn to uphold as president? 

 

No.

 

An idiotic policy is our government moving unaccompanied minor children around the United States under cover of darkness. That sounds like human trafficking to me.

 

An idiotic policy is incarcerating children, in "detention centers" run by private contractors who probably made the lowest bid. Or paid off someone to win the contract.

 

An idiotic policy is using military lawyers (JAGs) to prosecute foreigners seeking asylum in the United States.

 

An idiotic policy is one where you enforce certain crimes with a "Zero Tolerance", but others, meh.

 

In other news...

 

Western District to drop charges against immigrants separated from children, email says

 

“Be advised that the US Attorney's Office will move (or have already moved) to dismiss all 1325 and 1326 cases where children were separated from their parent,” Franco wrote. “Going forward, they will no longer bring criminal charges against a parent or parents entering the United States if they have their child with them.”

 

Title 8 of U.S. Code 1325 and 1326 assigns misdemeanor charges for illegal entry and felony charges for illegal re-entry into the country.

 

Franco also says that Bash told her “until or unless he is countermanded this will be the policy of the Western District of Texas.”

 

https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/immigration/2018/06/21/charges-dropped-against-immigrants-separated-children-email-says/723253002/

 

[pedro01]

This whole thing is hilarious.

 

Some posters - taking themselves waaaay to seriously saying things like "do you agree kids should be kept in concentration camps>" - and then only allowing an answer of "yes" or "no".

 

Reminds me of a lawyer in court who did a similar thing with a question he asked me. I looked at the judge and said "is this a multiple choice exam?" The lawyer gave up shortly after.

 

What is REALLY hilarious is that Trump can't be right....

- enforces the law - He's Hitler

- listens to public opinion and writes an executive order - He's Hitler

 

Look - the bottom line is the BEST thing you could have in a president is someone flexible that listens to the people. Yet he's attacked for that.

 

Fact remains that 80% of girls travelling alone to the US to try to sneak over the border are raped on the way. 85% of the kids are sent on their own - their parents willingly separating from them. Nobody seems to be complaining about those separations.

 

If you encourage them to come, more will be sent, more will be murdered and raped. 

 

If you say "bring a kid - and we'll let the whole family in" - then more will risk it - and who knows if it'll even be their own kids they are bringing in.

 

You have to see past the images on TV and consider how much suffering is caused by having it known that taking that dangerous trip ends up with a better life in the US, when it often ends in death and sexual abuse.

 

I mean - do any of you people KNOW just how dangerous Mexico is right now?

 

If Trump walked on water, the media would be ranting how he couldn't swim. 

 

Blinding yourselves to all the other factors in this issue is idiotic. It's politics, nothing more - irrational liberal ranting.

 

 

Edited June 22, 2018 by pedro01

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, bushdoctor said:

By idiotic policy you mean his policy of enforcing the laws passed by congress that he is sworn to uphold as president? 

The idiotic policy of forcibly removing children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

An idiotic policy that he said he was powerless to stop, that he must follow the law, that his hands are tied.

 

Then faced with wide public outrage he suddenly can stop his own idiotic policy.

 

So quit this ‘only enforcing the law garbage’.

 

Trump enacted a vicious policy forcibly separating children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

He has been forced to make a U-turn.

 

He’s now relying on people like you to present this a not Trump’s fault.

 

 

This started like every other concentration camp policy throughout history - with the demonstration of a group of people.

 

Trump demonised immigrants from South America, then enacting a policy to forcibly separate children from their parents and cage the children.

 

Plan by Trump

Propaganda campaign by Trump

Policy ordered by Trump

Policy enacted at Trump’s order.

Edited June 22, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[pedro01]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

The idiotic policy of forcibly removing children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

An idiotic policy that he said he was powerless to stop, that he must follow the law, that his hands are tied.

 

Then faced with wide public outrage he suddenly can stop his own idiotic policy.

 

So quit this ‘only enforcing the law garbage’.

 

Trump enacted a vicious policy forcibly separating children from their parents and caging them in concentration camps.

 

He has been forced to make a U-turn.

 

He’s now relying on people like you to present this a not Trump’s fault.

 

 

This started like every other concentration camp policy throughout history - with the demonstration of a group of people.

 

Trump demonised immigrants from South America, then enacting a policy to forcibly separate children from their parents and cage the children.

 

Plan by Trump

Prooaganda campaign by Trump

Policy ordered by Trump

Policy enacted at Trump’s order.

 

There are no concentration camps.

 

Trump listened to public opinion.

 

Pretty much what we want politicians to do.

[mtls2005]

6 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

If Trump walked on water, the media would be ranting how he couldn't swim. 

 

Yes, "ranting".