U.S. Border Patrol arrests 4,500 migrants in a day, a major increase amid fears of surge

[DrDave]

2 hours ago, Credo said:

A lot to unpack there, but I'll give it a try.   I'll start with the big picture of refugees in general.  

 

There are a lot of refugees in the world, and a significant number are real, genuine political refugees.  The US under almost every President has set a number of refugees that will be admitted to the US.   We don't take them all, we don't have to and we don't try.  We do, historically, make an effort to get things in their country functioning in a manner that allows them to stay or return.   And yes, we create more refugees with our military interventions than we allow to enter the US.      

So on this thread we are ONLY dealing with the ones who are arriving at our borders or our ports of entry.   That alone moves the numbers from the millions to the thousands.   Now with the border effectively closed, it's primarily unaccompanied minors that are being admitted.  Although it's a rather big mess right now, it will be sorted out.  

 

Like all major influxes of people, problems exist and problems develop.  Whether it's a rock concert like Woodstock or the Fyre Island festival, when a lot of people have the same destination, expect a degree of chaos. (Check on the Spring Break situation in Miami).  This is complicated by a pandemic and a good number of young people being held in detention who are Covid positive.   

 

They will be working there way through the detention system, they will get placed in proper child care facilities, foster homes or with the relatives they have in the US (please note, some of the younger ones are coming with phone numbers/addresses sewn into their clothes.  

 

The conservatives are upset that they are coming in.   The liberals are upset that they are held in detention.  Life sucks, but they will get them through the system and get them into safe and proper care.   Then they will start screening them.  If they aren't refugees they have a good chance of being returned to their family.   Some of the younger ones who have relatives may be allowed to stay as an immigrant, but that requires some legal gyrations, but the family does have to show they can financially support the child.

 

Schools were overcrowded before they came.   They'll be overcrowded after they come.   That's a different problem and its solution has zero to do with whether refugees are admitted.   US citizens were going hungry before they came and they'll likely be hungry after they come.  The solution to that problem has zero to do with refugee children.   

 

So, the decent and humane thing to do for any child is to provide them with safe care until their life situation is sorted out.  It's what we do for kids found wandering in the streets or lost in a shopping mall.  It's what we need to do for those at our border.

 

There are a lot of refugees in the world, and a significant number are real, genuine political refugees. 

And a very significant number are not genuine, political refugees. How many of these poor, unskilled uneducated "refugees" are fleeing their country due to fear of retribution due to a difference in political ideology? I submit that the overwhelming majority are fleeing to the U.S. because a perceived better life, economically speaking, and the willingness of the U.S. government to provide them a higher standard of living then they can have in their home country. If this wasn't the case, wouldn't they simply emigrate to Mexico, where they also would be free of political fears and have an easier time from a language/cultural perspective?  

 

The US under almost every President has set a number of refugees that will be admitted to the US.

What is that number for 2021, and given the daily trend when will that number be reached?

 

Like all major influxes of people, problems exist and problems develop.  Whether it's a rock concert like Woodstock or the Fyre Island festival, when a lot of people have the same destination, expect a degree of chaos.

Comparing a rock concert or festival to illegal immigration and a flood of "refugees" is like comparing apples to oranges. The rush of citizens attending an event is temporary, as these people will return to their homes and jobs after a few days. The rush of illegals and refugees has permanent ramifications.

 

Life sucks, but they will get them through the system and get them into safe and proper care.   Then they will start screening them.  If they aren't refugees they have a good chance of being returned to their family.

I have to admit, I'm a little confused by this statement. I assume that screening occurs during detention, not after (as in "let's pass this bill and see what's in it later").  Are you referencing adults or children when you say there's a good chance they'll be returned to their family?  The U.S. has traditionally been very lax on deportations of illegal aliens. I personally know a family that was in the country illegally, and when discovered USCIS merely asked them to leave with no follow-up.

 

They will be working there way through the detention system, they will get placed in proper child care facilities, foster homes or with the relatives they have in the US

Foster care is typically subsidized by taxpayers, as are these child care facilities.

 

Schools were overcrowded before they came.   They'll be overcrowded after they come.   That's a different problem and its solution has zero to do with whether refugees are admitted. 

Unless refugee children will not be attending public schools, it has very much to do with the number of refugee children admitted. More students without an increase of school funding further exacerbates the overcrowding and underfunded situation. The only ways that funding would be increased would be through a voter-approved hike in school taxes, or additional dwellings being built that would add to the tax roll. 

 

US citizens were going hungry before they came and they'll likely be hungry after they come.  The solution to that problem has zero to do with refugee children.

For all of the news coverage that the hunger problem gets, the word "Americans" is never used when referring to those affected - it's always "people/children in the United States", which would naturally lead one to believe that a significant number are not citizens. It's not much of a stretch to assume that a major influx of poor, unskilled, unemployed families would add to the number of people needing nutritional assistance from the taxpayers or other sources.

 

So, the decent and humane thing to do for any child is to provide them with safe care until their life situation is sorted out.  It's what we do for kids found wandering in the streets or lost in a shopping mall.  It's what we need to do for those at our border.

Why isn't Mexico providing this safe care to those that they have allowed into their country on their journey to the U.S.?  If the U.S. border is overwhelmed and has reached the limit on how many refugees can be housed, fed and processed, the border should be closed until such time as more can be accommodated. This would require a significant amount of coordination with the Mexican government, but responsibility for these people (adults and children) does not lie solely with the U.S. government.

 

Remember that this influx of "refugees" is not due to something like a natural disaster. It's a relatively new phenomenon (at these levels) that has gained in popularity due to the increasing ability to take advantage of inconsistent U.S. border control and immigration policies. The remarks you made above essentially saying "U.S. schools will always be overcrowded" and "some U.S. citizens will always be hungry" can also be applied to the home countries of these refugees. Nicaragua,  Honduras and El Salvador will always have poor people,  just as the United States will always have poor people. That doesn't make American citizens responsible for raising the economic standard of living for these people any more that it makes countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the EU responsible for the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Credo]

1 hour ago, DrDave said:

There are a lot of refugees in the world, and a significant number are real, genuine political refugees. 

And a very significant number are not genuine, political refugees. How many of these poor, unskilled uneducated "refugees" are fleeing their country due to fear of retribution due to a difference in political ideology? I submit that the overwhelming majority are fleeing to the U.S. because a perceived better life, economically speaking, and the willingness of the U.S. government to provide them a higher standard of living then they can have in their home country. If this wasn't the case, wouldn't they simply emigrate to Mexico, where they also would be free of political fears and have an easier time from a language/cultural perspective?  

 

The US under almost every President has set a number of refugees that will be admitted to the US.

What is that number for 2021, and given the daily trend when will that number be reached?

 

Like all major influxes of people, problems exist and problems develop.  Whether it's a rock concert like Woodstock or the Fyre Island festival, when a lot of people have the same destination, expect a degree of chaos.

Comparing a rock concert or festival to illegal immigration and a flood of "refugees" is like comparing apples to oranges. The rush of citizens attending an event is temporary, as these people will return to their homes and jobs after a few days. The rush of illegals and refugees has permanent ramifications.

 

Life sucks, but they will get them through the system and get them into safe and proper care.   Then they will start screening them.  If they aren't refugees they have a good chance of being returned to their family.

I have to admit, I'm a little confused by this statement. I assume that screening occurs during detention, not after (as in "let's pass this bill and see what's in it later").  Are you referencing adults or children when you say there's a good chance they'll be returned to their family?  The U.S. has traditionally been very lax on deportations of illegal aliens. I personally know a family that was in the country illegally, and when discovered USCIS merely asked them to leave with no follow-up.

 

They will be working there way through the detention system, they will get placed in proper child care facilities, foster homes or with the relatives they have in the US

Foster care is typically subsidized by taxpayers, as are these child care facilities.

 

Schools were overcrowded before they came.   They'll be overcrowded after they come.   That's a different problem and its solution has zero to do with whether refugees are admitted. 

Unless refugee children will not be attending public schools, it has very much to do with the number of refugee children admitted. More students without an increase of school funding further exacerbates the overcrowding and underfunded situation. The only ways that funding would be increased would be through a voter-approved hike in school taxes, or additional dwellings being built that would add to the tax roll. 

 

US citizens were going hungry before they came and they'll likely be hungry after they come.  The solution to that problem has zero to do with refugee children.

For all of the news coverage that the hunger problem gets, the word "Americans" is never used when referring to those affected - it's always "people/children in the United States", which would naturally lead one to believe that a significant number are not citizens. It's not much of a stretch to assume that a major influx of poor, unskilled, unemployed families would add to the number of people needing nutritional assistance from the taxpayers or other sources.

 

So, the decent and humane thing to do for any child is to provide them with safe care until their life situation is sorted out.  It's what we do for kids found wandering in the streets or lost in a shopping mall.  It's what we need to do for those at our border.

Why isn't Mexico providing this safe care to those that they have allowed into their country on their journey to the U.S.?  If the U.S. border is overwhelmed and has reached the limit on how many refugees can be housed, fed and processed, the border should be closed until such time as more can be accommodated. This would require a significant amount of coordination with the Mexican government, but responsibility for these people (adults and children) does not lie solely with the U.S. government.

 

Remember that this influx of "refugees" is not due to something like a natural disaster. It's a relatively new phenomenon (at these levels) that has gained in popularity due to the increasing ability to take advantage of inconsistent U.S. border control and immigration policies. The remarks you made above essentially saying "U.S. schools will always be overcrowded" and "some U.S. citizens will always be hungry" can also be applied to the home countries of these refugees. Nicaragua,  Honduras and El Salvador will always have poor people,  just as the United States will always have poor people. That doesn't make American citizens responsible for raising the economic standard of living for these people any more that it makes countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the EU responsible for the same.

Your dislike of refugees is clear, but your understanding of what it means is limited.   Those fleeing for political reasons are most certainly genuine refugees.  That's the very definition of a refugee.   It's the definition used by the US gov't and countries that are signatories to the UN Protocols.   

You apparently don't like the level of education or skills.   If you want particular skills, there are numerous visa categories that allow you to get everything from your grapes picked, to your software designed.   

 

The number of refugees set last year by Trump was 18,000.  Only 11,814 were admitted to the US in that year.   

 

As far as your assertion that it's not like they are fleeing natural disasters, you might want to read this:

 

Migrants are heading north because Central America never recovered from last year’s hurricanes

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/3/22/22335816/border-crisis-migrant-hurricane-eta-iota

 

[EVENKEEL]

6 minutes ago, Credo said:

Your dislike of refugees is clear, but your understanding of what it means is limited.   Those fleeing for political reasons are most certainly genuine refugees.  That's the very definition of a refugee.   It's the definition used by the US gov't and countries that are signatories to the UN Protocols.   

You apparently don't like the level of education or skills.   If you want particular skills, there are numerous visa categories that allow you to get everything from your grapes picked, to your software designed.   

 

The number of refugees set last year by Trump was 18,000.  Only 11,814 were admitted to the US in that year.   

 

As far as your assertion that it's not like they are fleeing natural disasters, you might want to read this:

 

Migrants are heading north because Central America never recovered from last year’s hurricanes

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/3/22/22335816/border-crisis-migrant-hurricane-eta-iota

 

Genuine refugees would be ecstatic to claim asylum  in Mexico, why don't they? Why make the journey to the US? 

[Credo]

21 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Genuine refugees would be ecstatic to claim asylum  in Mexico, why don't they? Why make the journey to the US? 

They can't.  Mexico is not a signatory to the Protocols on asylum.   It is not a country of first asylum.

 

 

[Enzian]

I submit that all this talk is beside the point because we know what is going on. The new administration can claim that they didn't know that the border developments would occur, they weren't sure what to say, they want to be different from the previous but they are not sure how, some of their trial and error efforts have unintended consequences, they're doing their best but no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, and so on. All smoke. This is going according to plan, and I'm not a conspiracy guy. Political hegemony is the goal. CA where I'm from is a one party state, and is the model; the USA can be a one party state, and will be.

[EVENKEEL]

6 hours ago, Credo said:

They can't.  Mexico is not a signatory to the Protocols on asylum.   It is not a country of first asylum.

 

 

They can claim asylum in Mexico, they choose not to. They come to the US who can't tell to claim in Mexico. But, upon entering Mexico from the south they certainly could claim asylum.

[SunnyinBangrak]

16 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

They can claim asylum in Mexico, they choose not to. They come to the US who can't tell to claim in Mexico. But, upon entering Mexico from the south they certainly could claim asylum.

Any genuine REFUGEE fleeing persecution and fearing for his/her life would think arriving in Mexico is like arriving at the Promised Land. There would be no need to walk another footstep. They are finally safe.

[DrDave]

9 hours ago, Credo said:

Your dislike of refugees is clear, but your understanding of what it means is limited.   Those fleeing for political reasons are most certainly genuine refugees.  That's the very definition of a refugee.   It's the definition used by the US gov't and countries that are signatories to the UN Protocols.   

You apparently don't like the level of education or skills.   If you want particular skills, there are numerous visa categories that allow you to get everything from your grapes picked, to your software designed.   

 

The number of refugees set last year by Trump was 18,000.  Only 11,814 were admitted to the US in that year.   

 

As far as your assertion that it's not like they are fleeing natural disasters, you might want to read this:

 

Migrants are heading north because Central America never recovered from last year’s hurricanes

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/3/22/22335816/border-crisis-migrant-hurricane-eta-iota

 

Your dislike of refugees is clear, but your understanding of what it means is limited.   Those fleeing for political reasons are most certainly genuine refugees.  That's the very definition of a refugee.   It's the definition used by the US gov't and countries that are signatories to the UN Protocols. 

No, I have tremendous respect for genuine political refugees. But you're correct that I have have a general dislike of people who are gaming the U.S. immigration system by claiming refugee status when really they're just ordinary people trying to quickly upgrade their lives by "jumping the line" and not following the same immigration protocols that others around the world must follow.

 

You apparently don't like the level of education or skills.   If you want particular skills, there are numerous visa categories that allow you to get everything from your grapes picked, to your software designed. 

Correct. So why don't these people follow the rules and apply for these visas at the U.S. embassy in their home country? That's how the process works for citizens of all other countries.

 

The number of refugees set last year by Trump was 18,000.  Only 11,814 were admitted to the US in that year.   

So if only 11.814 refugees were admitted to the U.S. last year, under what status were the other non-visa holders permitted entry? The 11,814 admitted is a tiny percentage of the total number of people showing up at the Mexican border without a visa and subsequently admitted. They certainly weren't refugees according to that figure.

 

It's very apparent that what's happening at the U.S. border is nothing more than a "fast track" immigration procedure that allows people from this region to bypass visa procedures and protocols that apply to people from other regions, in order to gain admittance relatively quickly. I have a Thai stepdaughter and two little grandkids in Thailand that are most certainly in the same economic position as those being fast tracked at the Mexican border. Can they somehow take advantage of this process? Otherwise, following the rules it'll most likely be 8-10 years before the 3 of them would be granted visas and be admitted. 

 

 

 

 

[DrDave]

8 hours ago, Enzian said:

I submit that all this talk is beside the point because we know what is going on. The new administration can claim that they didn't know that the border developments would occur, they weren't sure what to say, they want to be different from the previous but they are not sure how, some of their trial and error efforts have unintended consequences, they're doing their best but no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes, and so on. All smoke. This is going according to plan, and I'm not a conspiracy guy. Political hegemony is the goal. CA where I'm from is a one party state, and is the model; the USA can be a one party state, and will be.

And this is exactly why the U.S. will never have a merit based immigration system as long as the the current administration and their ilk is in power. They know that those admitted under a merit system may not have the "loyalty" to their party that the current system encourages.

[WaveHunter]

On 3/23/2021 at 5:21 PM, placeholder said:

Please.  Let's look at exactly what Trump said:

 

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. […] They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people”

 

You'll notice that Trump states as a categorical fact that they're bringing drugs and crime and that they're rapists. But he only assumes that some are good people. He won't even concede that's a fact. There's nothing in that statement that would rule out that none of them are good people.

 What's more, undocumented aliens actually commit less felonies on average than do native born Americans. So, if anything, they're lowering the crime level in the usa.

 

Oh please!  Do you really believe that a candidate running for the Office of President of the United States would openly hold such a position?  Again, if you listen to the speech in its' entirety, his message was that SOME of the illegal aliens, not ALL of the illegal aliens were CONVICTED murderers and rapists (I emphasize the word "convicted).  To deny such an obvious truth is intentionally disingenuous.   

 

You are just as guilty of selective misinformation as the media sources that promote such erroneous and misleading sound-bites.  Furthermore, anyone who is actually gullible enough to accept such sound-bites as the whole truth and nothing but the truth needs to have their IQ checked.

 

As for your comment "undocumented aliens actually commit less felonies on average than do native born Americans", the fact of the matter is that they have committed a criminal act simply by illegally entering the United States.  Who the hell cares whether more felonies are committed by illegal aliens or US citizens?  See what reaction you get to that statistic by a family who has been victimized or lost a loved one at the hands of  illegal alien who never should have been here in the first place.

 

This whole debate about illegal aliens is absolutely ABSURD!  No other country in the world permits a foreigner to violate a sovereign border.  The United States is unprecedented in welcoming immigrants who attempt immigration LEGALLY.  Those who choose to do it illegally not not only jeopardize US citizens' safety and ability to earn a decent living, but it is a slap in the face to immigrants who attempt to immigrate legally.

Edited March 26, 2021 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

16 hours ago, DrDave said:

...It's very apparent that what's happening at the U.S. border is nothing more than a "fast track" immigration procedure that allows people from this region to bypass visa procedures and protocols that apply to people from other regions, in order to gain admittance relatively quickly. I have a Thai stepdaughter and two little grandkids in Thailand that are most certainly in the same economic position as those being fast tracked at the Mexican border. Can they somehow take advantage of this process? Otherwise, following the rules it'll most likely be 8-10 years before the 3 of them would be granted visas and be admitted. ...

You are spot on, and yes it would be very easy for anyone from anywhere in the world to circumvent US immigration law right now and illegally "fast track" it.  All you have to do is pay money to a Mexican Cartel.  They have becomes masters at gaming US Immigration law and anyone from anywhere in the world can AND INDEED IS taking advantage.  Just pay the Cartels the money, and you are in!

 

The influx at the Southern Border is not just "refugees" from Central America, but people from all around the world, and that includes some of the countries that are the leading exporters of terrorism such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan, who are presently paying exorbitant amounts of money to the Mexican Cartels to get them in.  It is one of the biggest security breaches that the US now faces IMO.

 

Getting illegals into the US has now become the most profitable business for the Cartels.  And to make it worse, by overwhelming US Immigration officials with the influx, it makes it a cake walk now for them to get their drugs into the US!

 

If anyone thinks we, as US citizens, are in a better position now with respect to the Southern Border than in the previous Administration, I think they need to have their heads examined.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by WaveHunter

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Oh please!  Do you really believe that a candidate running for the Office of President of the United States would openly hold such a position?  Again, if you listen to the speech in its' entirety, his message was that SOME of the illegal aliens, not ALL of the illegal aliens were CONVICTED murderers and rapists (I emphasize the word "convicted).  To deny such an obvious truth is intentionally disingenuous.   

 

You are just as guilty of selective misinformation as the media sources that promote such erroneous and misleading sound-bites.  Furthermore, anyone who is actually gullible enough to accept such sound-bites as the whole truth and nothing but the truth needs to have their IQ checked.

 

As for your comment "undocumented aliens actually commit less felonies on average than do native born Americans", the fact of the matter is that they have committed a criminal act simply by illegally entering the United States.  Who the hell cares whether more felonies are committed by illegal aliens or US citizens?  See what reaction you get to that statistic by a family who has been victimized or lost a loved one at the hands of  illegal alien who never should have been here in the first place.

 

This whole debate about illegal aliens is absolutely ABSURD!  No other country in the world permits a foreigner to violate a sovereign border.  The United States is unprecedented in welcoming immigrants who attempt immigration LEGALLY.  Those who choose to do it illegally not not only jeopardize US citizens' safety and ability to earn a decent living, but it is a slap in the face to immigrants who attempt to immigrate legally.

I don't have to believe it. I know it. He did openly hold such a position. And he didn't say some are rapists.You're making that up.  He said he assumes some are 'good people". He couldn't even state is as a fact that some are good people. He qualified it as an assumption. He did no such qualifying for his assertions about rapists and worst people. And of course in a population of millions there will be some bad people. But why stress it?

 

I got some news for you. Crossing into the USA without documentation is not a felony. It's a misdemeanor. Like jaywalking. And one of the cheapest most transparently invalid shots is the "ask a relative about what they think of members of a particular group". Do you think policy should be based on the judgement of emotionally distraught people? What about if a legal immigrant is the one who kills a loved one?? What do you the relatives of the victim might say about that? Ya think we should change that  policy in order to accommodate their rage and grief? 

 

And if Donald Trump and others were truly concerned about the issue of illegal immigration, why didn't they propose harsh penalties including imprisonment for employers who hire them? Because the fact is, Trump and other vested interests actually depend on them. Had such a law passed, Trump might well have ended up in prison himself assuming his businesses didn't disgorge all the undocumented aliens it had as employees.

 

[Yahooka]

On 3/22/2021 at 3:42 AM, Jeffr2 said:

You'll have to show a credible link where Biden invites migrants to cross the border.  I've not seen that.  Another member tried, but the statement was taken out of context.  I'll wait....

Well if someone has lived under a stone for the past 2 years ................................................

[EVENKEEL]

Hey problem solved, during bidens press conference he said this migrant surge is seasonal, happens every year and has nothing to do with his or his handlers policies.

[Phoenix Rising]

On 3/25/2021 at 8:32 AM, EVENKEEL said:

Genuine refugees would be ecstatic to claim asylum  in Mexico, why don't they? Why make the journey to the US? 

Because they would just love to see that big beautiful wall.

[Phoenix Rising]

51 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Hey problem solved, during bidens press conference he said this migrant surge is seasonal, happens every year and has nothing to do with his or his handlers policies.

President Biden is correct so what's your point?

[Jeffr2]

14 hours ago, Yahooka said:

Well if someone has lived under a stone for the past 2 years ................................................

Biden hasn't been president for the past 2 years.  Talk about living under a stone! LOL

[Jeffr2]

12 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Hey problem solved, during bidens press conference he said this migrant surge is seasonal, happens every year and has nothing to do with his or his handlers policies.

At last we have a president how doesn't tell lies.  Ya gotta love that.  Sad if you don't.

[Eric Loh]

12 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Hey problem solved, during bidens press conference he said this migrant surge is seasonal, happens every year and has nothing to do with his or his handlers policies.

 

Biden is right that the colder months typically bring a surge of border crossings. There was a 28% surge in apprehension at the southern border from Jan to Feb of this year. Last year the Trump administration saw a 31% surge in migrant apprehension from Jan to Feb. 

 

[EVENKEEL]

26 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

At last we have a president how doesn't tell lies.  Ya gotta love that.  Sad if you don't.

 

14 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

 

Biden is right that the colder months typically bring a surge of border crossings. There was a 28% surge in apprehension at the southern border from Jan to Feb of this year. Last year the Trump administration saw a 31% surge in migrant apprehension from Jan to Feb. 

 

It's disingenuous to claim it's seasonal, while there is truth to it many other factors are at play. Please take the time to read and become informed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/20/us/politics/fact-check-immigration-border.html

[EVENKEEL]

29 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Biden hasn't been president for the past 2 years.  Talk about living under a stone! LOL

You think perhaps biden's words during the debates and on the campaign trail are factored in, come on man.

[Eric Loh]

6 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

 

It's disingenuous to claim it's seasonal, while there is truth to it many other factors are at play. Please take the time to read and become informed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/20/us/politics/fact-check-immigration-border.html

So you agree that seasonal surge was a factor. My work done. 

[Jeffr2]

9 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

 

It's disingenuous to claim it's seasonal, while there is truth to it many other factors are at play. Please take the time to read and become informed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/20/us/politics/fact-check-immigration-border.html

All in all...a big nothing burger.  You're grasping at straws trying to bash Biden.

[EVENKEEL]

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So you agree that seasonal surge was a factor. My work done. 

So you don't want the whole truth, I understand. Come on man

 

[EVENKEEL]

3 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

All in all...a big nothing burger.  You're grasping at straws trying to bash Biden.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Come on man

[WaveHunter]

43 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Biden hasn't been president for the past 2 years.  Talk about living under a stone! LOL

...but according to him in his one and only press conference, he's been a senator for 120 years LOL!

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said:

So you don't want the whole truth, I understand. Come on man

 

The truth is that it’s a regular seasonal surge and all other factors are peripheral. 

[Jeffr2]

10 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

You think perhaps biden's words during the debates and on the campaign trail are factored in, come on man.

Show me a link where Biden invites migrants to cross the border.  Here's what I found:

 

https://www.voanews.com/usa/immigration/biden-migrants-heading-us-mexico-border-stay-home

Biden to Migrants Heading for US-Mexico Border: Stay Home

[EVENKEEL]

5 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Show me a link where Biden invites migrants to cross the border.  Here's what I found:

 

https://www.voanews.com/usa/immigration/biden-migrants-heading-us-mexico-border-stay-home

Biden to Migrants Heading for US-Mexico Border: Stay Home

Now stick your head back in the sand. Come on man.

[Jeffr2]

4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

You can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Come on man

There were some misstatements.  Like holding children.  It was canceled, by court order, in November.  He took credit.  Again, a big nothing burger compared to all the other problems we're facing. 

 

You're nit picking.  Just to bash Biden.  I know it's tough.  Not nearly as easy with Trump and all his lies. LOL