RETURN TO SENDER/ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

[Duchess]

If Republicans are wretched, stupid, evil, bad, people for not agreeing with Democrats so be it. This is the message Dems put out. Otherwise it's open borders, which is what is really wanted. Trump stopped the separations but right away the moonbats and crazy people went right back at him. Like I said Trump will never do right with the hypocritical Democrat society that lives their days glued to CNN and MSNBC. I'm glad most Americans can see through their smokescreen. Oh well, as things get better more people will see. I'm not worried about it.

I don't think Republicans are wretched, stupid, evil and bad people because they don't agree with Democrats. Don't be silly, I am a grownup, I understand and appreciate differences of opinion.

I'm not someone who is for open borders and I don't know anyone who is, as a matter of fact I don't recall ever hearing/seeing/reading about any Democrat, or person in general, who is for open borders. That would be dangerous and irresponsible.

Moonbats & crazy people? Seriously?

[Maggot]

Then why all the hatred towards them? These illegals are getting tents, beds, food quite a few perks for coming over the border illegally yet within our borders there are quite a few homeless that are citizens that do not get even that chance. It just blows my mind how giving all the crazies are towards illegals yet turn a blind eye to citizens within our own borders. and you have to admit that Republicans, Trump and his supporters get the bums rush most of the time. Targets for any aggression that comes out daily from the left. There is nothing absolutely nothing Trump could do that is good in the eyes of anyone that voted for Clinton. It gets old and cold.

[HairOfTheDog]

Moonbats & crazy people? Seriously?

Extremists have no objectivity or critical thinking inclinations. They lie, swallow and spew any propaganda that appeals to them, disregard facts, and attempt to speak definitively to the thoughts and motives of everyone else - based on their very narrow and absolutist mindsets.

When it comes to immigration, even if you've openly and repeatedly supported enhanced border security, opposed open borders, and pushed for bipartisan immigration law reform (positions shared by many rational Dems, Republicans, and Independents)..............far right extremists will claim the opposite about you, especially if they worship someone who knowingly lies to feed the gullible extremists by telling them what they want to hear. It's idiocy and sometimes worse. Meh.

Anyway, clearly, just because you don't pray for violence against migrants at the border or support a new policy that separates migrant children from their parents (with no reunification plan)..........doesn't mean you're pro open-borders, nor does it mean you see all Republicans as evil. Nobody with a lick of sense or attentiveness would believe that about you, Duchess.

Plenty of independent thinking and feeling Republicans and Independents and Democrats alike are in opposition to the ill-advised and sloppily executed Trump/Sessions child separation practice. That's a fact and a matter of public record.

[Maggot]

You have every right to your opinion HOTD. As does anyone else. The far left has a great cheerleader in you, and it is what it is.

[HairOfTheDog]

You have every right to your opinion HOTD. As does anyone else. The far left has a great cheerleader in you, and it is what it is.

^ Proving the point, yet again, Mags.

You can falsely characterize me as cheerleading for the 'far left' all you want, even though I'm more conservative than you on some issues and have often and consistently vocalized my opposition to far left views and tactics.

And, of course we're all entitled to our own opinions. That goes without saying.

YOU frequently like to claim your opinions and bullshit are facts, but again, it's expected now -- that's just Maggot being Maggot.

[Duchess]

Fake news.

Fake news? I don't get it. I saw the photographer interviewed, he's an award winning photojournalist. Was that picture not taken at the border? Is she not someone who is seeking asylum?

[HairOfTheDog]

Note: This discussion was moved from the RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE thread for proper context.

Guess what I found on the Department of Homeland Securities website?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth...nce-policy

You know what's really weird? It says exactly what I've been saying all along. We've been separating kids at the border for a very long time for some very good reasons. Imagine that...

Your link explains what we've been trying to get you to comprehend in the "RETURN TO SENDER (Immigration)" thread. I'm not not sure why you're posting this in the RUSSIA INTERFERENCE thread.

Anyway, I posted a synopsis of what's covered in your link in caps, bolding, and coloring - just for you and Maggot in that thread, after you falsely insisted that family separation was an Obama policy.

Yes, children were separated from parents at the border in the Bush II and Obama administrations, when there was JUST CAUSE (parents were criminals, child's safety at risk...). It was the exception, not a rule or policy applied to all family's crossing outside of official entry points. It was not a policy or by-default practice in the United States until Trump and Session's introduced their Zero Tolerance policy. It did not happen at anywhere near the scale that it was happening after the Trump/Sessions policy was enacted and before Trump was forced to rescind their new policy last week.

That's simply a fact -- there's no link or spin that will change that fact. It's recorded history.

Prove it. Show me the verified numbers.

Gunnar, it's on YOU to prove your contentions when debating with someone, especially when that someone has already provided facts to disprove your point numerous times and very clearly.

But, I'll do your homework for you, again, one last time. Hopefully, this time, you'll get it. I won't be doing it again. If you can't accept reality because you don't like it, or because you're more worried about winning an argument on the internet than the topic at hand, or because you're just that drawn to me, or whatever else compels you to spin in circles........you're on your own.

(continued)

[HairOfTheDog]

So, one more time, just for you Gunnar......

The very person in the Trump administration who leads the agency responsible for the detention of migrants at the border (Kristjen Nilesen) has publicly acknowledged that previous administrations did not separate children from their parents at the scale that the Trump administration did, before Trump was pressured into rescinding the child separation policy.

Her counterpart under the Obama administration (Jeh Johnson) has always acknowledged that child separation was an exception not a rule; he acknowledged it during his tenure and he's acknowledged it again recently in interviews. The goal at that time was to keep families together.

Johnson has confirmed what those of us who've followed immigration policy for years already knew; child separation at the border happened under the Obama administration when there was just cause; it was an exception when the child's safety was a concern and/or the parent was a criminal or a suspected child trafficker. It was not a policy or rule applied to all families crossing the border at unauthorized entry points.

Snip:
“Bush and Obama did not have policies that resulted in the mass separation of parents and children like we’re seeing under the current administration,” Sarah Pierce, a policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute, told us.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said at a June 18 press briefing: “The Obama administration, the Bush administration all separated families. … They did — their (Obama administration) rate was less than ours, but they absolutely did do this. This is not new.”

Nielsen went on to explain that there is indeed something new, as we wrote in another article on this topic. Under a “zero tolerance policy” on illegal immigration announced by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in early April, the administration is now referring all illegal border crossings for criminal prosecution. By doing that, parents have been separated from their children, because children can’t be held in detention facilities for adults.

DHS told us that 2,342 children were separated from their parents between May 5 and June 9. But DHS couldn’t provide any statistics on how many children may have been separated from their parents under the Obama administration.

Instead, when we asked, it pointed to numbers that show 21 percent of apprehended adults were referred for prosecution under President Barack Obama from fiscal year 2010 to fiscal 2016. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-th...-families/
--------------------------------
Under the initial Trump/Session's policy, the goal was clearly 100% prosecution for illegal adult border-crossers, including adults with children, or as close as possible thereto. Thus the name "Zero Tolerance".

100% separation of children from adults is obviously a higher scale than 21%. Also, during Obama's administration, there were big spikes in illegal border crossings by unaccompanied minors (mostly male teens). The spikes during Trump's administration have been highest in illegal crossings by adults with children (https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration).

[HairOfTheDog]

Copied from the RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE thread.

Here is an interesting interactive map of the U.S. with different statistics for the statistically minded statisticians.

statistics


migrationpolicy.org site

[Maggot]

Copied from the RUSSIA INTERFERENCE thread.

Here is an interesting interactive map of the U.S. with different statistics for the statistically minded statisticians.

statistics


migrationpolicy.org site

I did not "copy" it from here I found it searching for info on immigration..........................Now I see .............carry on, carry on.

[HairOfTheDog]

It's been nearly impossible to follow what's happening with the Republican immigration bills. The Republican Congress reportedly can't keep up itself because President Trump is all over the map.

Late last week, he publicly advised them not to bother with immigration legislation attempts until after the midterms. Earlier in the week, before he signed an EO halting family separation, Trump had said that only Congress could end family separation and that he'd support either of the two competing Republican bills - neither of which had enough support within the party to pass.

Today, Sarah Sanders reversed course again on behalf of the president and said that Congress needs to be working on immigration legislation now, including solutions to family separation and processes for family reunification.

Some Republican congressmen said today that they are diligently working on the Republican 'compromise' bill, which is believed to have more Republican support than the competing hard-liner bill which is at least 40 Republicans short. Others said they are working on stand-alone legislation to address family separation and reunification because it's unlikely the Republican compromise bill will get enough party support now.

What a mess.

[Blindgreed1]

Note: This discussion was moved from the RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE thread for proper context.

Guess what I found on the Department of Homeland Securities website?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth...nce-policy

You know what's really weird? It says exactly what I've been saying all along. We've been separating kids at the border for a very long time for some very good reasons. Imagine that...

Your link explains what we've been trying to get you to comprehend in the "RETURN TO SENDER (Immigration)" thread. I'm not not sure why you're posting this in the RUSSIA INTERFERENCE thread.

Anyway, I posted a synopsis of what's covered in your link in caps, bolding, and coloring - just for you and Maggot in that thread, after you falsely insisted that family separation was an Obama policy.

Yes, children were separated from parents at the border in the Bush II and Obama administrations, when there was JUST CAUSE (parents were criminals, child's safety at risk...). It was the exception, not a rule or policy applied to all family's crossing outside of official entry points. It was not a policy or by-default practice in the United States until Trump and Session's introduced their Zero Tolerance policy. It did not happen at anywhere near the scale that it was happening after the Trump/Sessions policy was enacted and before Trump was forced to rescind their new policy last week.

That's simply a fact -- there's no link or spin that will change that fact. It's recorded history.

Prove it. Show me the verified numbers.

Gunnar, it's on YOU to prove your contentions when debating with someone, especially when that someone has already provided facts to disprove your point numerous times and very clearly.

But, I'll do your homework for you, again, one last time. Hopefully, this time, you'll get it. I won't be doing it again. If you can't accept reality because you don't like it, or because you're more worried about winning an argument on the internet than the topic at hand, or because you're just that drawn to me, or whatever else compels you to spin in circles........you're on your own.

(continued)

I already did my due diligence and posted the link to the department of homeland security's website so that you could educate yourself instead of talking out of your ass in an attempt to appear to be some sort of expert. You made a claim which I believe is complete bullshit and clearly you have no numbers to support your claim. Talk shit all you want to HoTD, just don't expect anyone to believe it until you can back your shit up

[HairOfTheDog]

I already did my due diligence and posted the link to the department of homeland security's website so that you could educate yourself instead of talking out of your ass in an attempt to appear to be some sort of expert. You made a claim which I believe is complete bullshit and clearly you have no numbers to support your claim. Talk shit all you want to HoTD, just don't expect anyone to believe it until you can back your shit up

I'm not an expert and never claimed to be one.

However, I can discern fact from utter bullshit. It's not difficult in this case, all it requires is:

(1) knowledge regarding the history of immigration border enforcement practices over the last 9.5 years (which I've followed real time and is recorded history for reference by those who haven't),
(2) a willingness and ability to objectively consider/weigh verified facts and recorded history against unsubstantiated propaganda and lies,
(3) a desire to deal in reality (even if it's inconvenient to one's agenda or ignorant claims) rather than fiction.

You lack all three Gunnar and it's clearly you who's talking out his ass, AGAIN.

I've backed my points multiple times in multiple ways, which is also a matter of recorded history in this very thread. Any rational person who's been reading along already knows the difference between unaccompanied minors and accompanied minors. They already know that the Bush II and Obama administration child separations at unauthorized border points were cause-based exceptions to those administrations' policies of keeping families together, whereas the Trump administration's Zero Tolerance policy made child separations at unauthorized border points the rule (and thus separated children from parents on a larger scale than previous administrations).

So, I'm not wasting any more time with your fiction-based spin cycle or demands for what you would consider 'proof' of what's already been addressed and established as reality. You're on your own.

And, you're free to continue spewing butthurt bullshit about verified history -- whether that's in regards to illegal migrant family separation or in regards to me personally or the content of my posts. I'm just gonna pass it by from here on out.

[HairOfTheDog]

Back to reality...........


Immigration Updates

1. Travel Ban

Yesterday, the Supreme Court upheld the third iteration of Trump's 'Travel Ban' with ⁵⁄₄ decision. That's a decision which limits legal immigration potential to the U.S. from the banned countries.

The Justices acknowledged Trump's campaign promise to ban "all Muslims from entering the U.S." and Giuliani's FOX News admission that he helped the Trump's administration rework Trump's original Executive Order to make it a travel ban vs. a Muslim ban.

However, the conservative judges on the court elected to disregard motivation in its ruling and instead focused on the constitutionality of the version 3.0 Executive Order as it relates to Presidential powers.

This is a win for Trump, Bannon, Miller, and company and I think will probably bolster Trump's belief that stoking immigration divisions is a winning strategy for him for 2020 and possibly helps some Republicans in the midterm elections.

One of many sources: https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-cou...1530022794

[HairOfTheDog]

2. Court Orders Trump Administration to Reunify Migrant Children & Parents

Also yesterday, a federal judge ordered the federal government to reunite migrant parents with children taken from them under the Trump administration’s family separation policy.

U.S. District Court Judge Dana Sabraw, based in San Diego, issued a preliminary injunction on Tuesday night requiring that nearly all children younger than 5 be returned to their parents within 14 days and that older children be returned within 30 days.

Blasting the Trump administration for what he called “a chaotic circumstance of the Government’s own making,” Sabraw said it was a “startling reality” that no adequate planning had been done before officials embarked on a policy to separate children from parents kept in immigration custody or referred for criminal prosecution. The practice has led to more than 2,300 children being separated from their parents or other family members.

“The government readily keeps track of personal property of detainees in criminal and immigration proceedings,” Sabraw wrote in his 24-page order. “Money, important documents, and automobiles, to name a few, are routinely catalogued, stored, tracked and produced upon a detainee’s release, at all levels — state and federal, citizen and alien. Yet, the government has no system in place to keep track of, provide effective communication with, and promptly produce alien children. The unfortunate reality is that under the present system migrant children are not accounted for with the same efficiency and accuracy as property. Certainly, that cannot satisfy the requirements of due process."
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/2...ies-678809

[HairOfTheDog]

3. Republican Immigration Bill

Today, the Republicans in the House of Representatives are scheduled to vote on the 'compromise bill' which attempts to resolve major conflicts among Republican lawmakers.

The current iteration of the bill reportedly undoes Trump's and Session's separation of children from their parents and addresses family reunification processes.

I'm not sure whether the bill includes a recommended attempt to get the Flores ruling reversed in order to keep migrant families together in detention.

During the Obama Administration, families were detained together (unless the parents were suspected criminals or smugglers/traffickers). Like now, there was a large queue of illegal border-crossers awaiting asylum/immigration hearings. As a result, the families were sometimes detained for months and months.

A court applied the Flores settlement to the situation and deemed that indefinite detention of accompanied migrant children was unconstitutional and inhumane and limited it to 20 days.

Ref: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/20/17484546/e...mmigration

[Duchess]

the conservative judges on the court

Ah yes, the stolen seat.

[HairOfTheDog]

the conservative judges on the court

Ah yes, the stolen seat.

Yeah, yesterday's Supreme Court decision was a win that Trump quite possibly owes to Mitch McConnell.

Maybe Obama's nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland, would have sided with the conservative judges and Kennedy (swinger) in upholding the Travel Ban. But, Garland might just as well have opposed it. If he'd opposed it, the ban would have been ruled unconstitutional by ⁵⁄₄ vote.

I don't agree with most of McConnell's views, nor his tactics. It was wrong of McConnell not to give Garland a senate confirmation hearing and leave the seat vacant for over a year, in my opinion.

McConnell's also truly a partisan obstructionist, famously swearing after the 2008 election that he'd lead the Republican senate in opposing every piece of legislation that Obama wanted passed (a promise which he largely kept for 8 years).

But, McConnell is very politically and strategically savvy.

[HairOfTheDog]

Flippin', Floppin', Fabricatin', and Deflecting the Blame

5 Days Ago:



This Morning:



The Republican bill failed miserably today, despite Trump's last-minute encouragement for his party to pass it and Ryan hailing it as a good deal. It was 112 votes short.

If Republicans could agree among themselves, the bill would go to the Senate where it would take only 9 Democrats to get it passed, if every Republican Senator supported it.

[HairOfTheDog]

The Republican 'compromise bill' isn't all that different from the last couple of decent bi-partisan bills. Trump would get his $25 billion Wall funding, immigration would be limited, DACA recipients would get a path to citizenship, the Trump/Sessions child separation policy would be ended...

It's not a certainty that 9 Senate Dems couldn't be persuaded to vote for it. There are Dems in red states who sometimes vote with the GOP. The ludicrous spending bill couldn't have passed without 5 Dems, for example.

However, Trump continues to falsely insist that it's the Dems who are holding up immigration reform; that the Dems are for open borders and crime and all kinds of other unsubstantiated claims and lies. He says that's good for Republicans in elections. I hope he's wrong.

Bi-partisan immigration reform is very doable and the Dems have come to the table and made concessions when asked. It's much more doable and appropriate for the country than trying to please all the Republican congresspeople. The ones on the far right aren't budging in their opposition to a path to citizenship for those covered by DACA. To them, it's 'amnesty', which is the 'a word'. Assholes.