Trump: Dems 'forced' family separation law on the nation

I've heard enough! Give Trump the Nobel Peace Prize NOW!!!
 
ChainFlow said:
people who come to the US and apply for asylum are not illegal immigrants. If you say otherwise, you are lying.
Click to expand...

That's actually not true.

Those who apply for asylum at a port of entry are not illegal immigrants.

Those who cross the border illegally and apply for asylum upon apprehension by CBP are both asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. This is extremely common.
 
ChainFlow said:
The US is taking families that are asking for asylum in the common and accepted method of doing so and are, without reason other than cruelty, taking babies and children away from their parents who had the temerity to ask one of the historically most kind nations in the world for kindness.
Click to expand...
No. Those who are using the "common and accepted method" of applying at a port of entry are not having their children taken away from them.
 
waiguoren said:
There are two kinds of asylum seekers: those who apply at a port of entry and those who apply after being apprehended for improper entry (misdemeanor) or illegal re-entry (felony).

So, many asylum seekers are lawbreakers.
Click to expand...

And many are not, my point stands.
 
Gandhi said:
Sure about that?
https://www.aclu.org/cases/ms-l-v-ice
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm sure. The woman from your link crossed the border illegally and was apprehended by CBP. She did not apply for asylum at a port of entry. She then tried to claim asylum but the government did not find her claim credible.

Edit: I'm not sure. DHS hasn't commented on the case. The ACLU says she applied at a port of entry, but the report below says it was "without papers". We won't know for sure until we've heard the government's side.

A source who has been helping the mother confirmed that she arrived in California without papers — she’s Catholic and was rushed out of Congo, formerly Zaire, with the help of a Catholic church there — but is willing to take a blood test to prove she’s the child’s mother.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...y-separation-congo-huppke-20180304-story.html
 
Last edited:
waiguoren said:
Yes, I'm sure. The woman from your link crossed the border illegally and was apprehended by CBP. She did not apply for asylum at a port of entry. She then tried to claim asylum but the government did not find her claim credible.
Click to expand...
The basis for asylum is not "did they go through a port of entry." Lack of credibility can be a basis for denying asylum, but that also does not hinge on method of entry.
 
Quipling said:
The basis for asylum is not "did they go through a port of entry."
Click to expand...
Could you re-word this? Did you mean "the basis for denying asylum"?

Edit: I think I know what you meant. My response is: yes. Nothing you wrote appears to contradict anything I wrote.

Quipling said:
Lack of credibility can be a basis for denying asylum, but that also does not hinge on method of entry.
Click to expand...

Yes. Nothing you wrote appears to contradict anything I wrote.
 
Last edited:
waiguoren said:
Yes, I'm sure. The woman from your link crossed the border illegally and was apprehended by CBP. She did not apply for asylum at a port of entry. She then tried to claim asylum but the government did not find her claim credible.
Click to expand...

Not according to the prev. link or this one.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrant...and-detention/fact-checking-family-separation

Is the administration separating asylum-seeking families who enter at ports of entry?
Yes, despite claims to the contrary. On June 17, DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen took to Twitter to defend family separation, saying, “For those seeking asylum at ports of entry, we have continued the policy from previous administrations and will only separate if the child is in danger, there is no custodial relationship between 'family' members, or if the adult has broken a law.”

In case Secretary Nielsen forgot, she’s currently a defendant in our class action lawsuit, where we represent families who entered at ports of entry to seek asylum and had their children taken away.

Ms. L, a Congolese mother who sought asylum at a port of entry, had her seven-year-old daughter taken away from her for four months. Immigration authorities made no meaningful attempt to verify their relationship during that time, only doing so after we filed our lawsuit.

Mirian G, a mother from Honduras, came to the U.S. with her young son on Feb. 20, 2018. She presented herself to immigration authorities and sought asylum, committing no crime. During her interview, Mirian provided immigration officers with several identification documents for her child which listed her as his mother. The next morning, Border Patrol agents took away her 18-month-old son with no explanation. She did not see him again for two months.
Click to expand...

ACLU could be not telling the truth/misleading if so please support.
 
Seano said:
What would you have the US do for illegals who show up at the border with kids?

Is anyone going to answer this question or just run about with tears in their eyes? I mean, by all means, be outraged but your outrage should imply that there are viable options for dealing with children being brought to the border by adults. You should be able to tell me some of those options.

@anyone
Click to expand...

If you're going to keep those people in camps, then keep them together. Otherwise send them back to the country they entered from. Like I said earlier, U.S. had concentration camps for Japanese folks back in the day, even for those who were U.S. citizens. You're doing the same thing now except children are being separated from their parents. Trump is willing to add more resources, so why not do that. And then you can process each family and see if they qualify. Also, work with Mexico. Trump needs Mexico as an ally not as enemy. Be firm, but work in unity. His loud mouth has only distanced Mexico.
 
Trump just said he'll sign an executive order to stop the kids from being separated from their parents.

What do you right wingers who supported the child camps now think?
 
Falsedawn said:
Uh you do know the ACA took a little over a year to come to fruition, right? As in, it was signed in march and the election was in November? The Democrats were dedicated to bipartisanship, there's no freaking way the Democrats were going to get immigration reform out of the GOP in 8 months. Come on now.

You can't say the GOP had no input on the ACA and then ding the Democrats for not steamrolling the GOP into immigration reform. Doesn't make any sense at all.
Click to expand...

By that point the Dem's knew that the GOP weren't going to vote for anything - many dems even called on the party to simply pass legislation while left leaning sites were asking why there was no action on the issue:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...rom-health-care-but-what-are-they-running-on/

Not a single Republican who opposes immigration reform needs to vote for it. Not a one. And we will still have a majority of the House voting to do what a majority of Americans want them to do, address immigration. - Dem. Luis Gutierrez

​
For the last time, I never said the GOP didn't have input on the ACA - I said none of them voted for it.
 
They key word is "parents". Many of these kids are not with their parents.

Damien Karras said:
Trump just said he'll sign an executive order to stop the kids from being separated from their parents.

What do you right wingers who supported the child camps now think?
Click to expand...
 
Damien Karras said:
Trump just said he'll sign an executive order to stop the kids from being separated from their parents.

What do you right wingers who supported the child camps now think?
Click to expand...
No one supported child camps
It was enforcing the law that the 9th circuit ruled on and since the Democrats won’t work the GOP and do what they suppose to do and give the executive branch more power even though Trump is literally Hitler lol. I think it’s the right move, Trump’s pen shouldn’t be though what are all these worthless elected officials doing ? But hey you want Trump to look like a king and use hide power so be it. People don’t say nothing when he uses the pen for other laws and cry foul.
 
ShadowRun said:
No one supported child camps
It was enforcing the law that the 9th circuit ruled on and since the Democrats won’t work the GOP and do what they suppose to do and give the executive branch more power even though Trump is literally Hitler lol. I think it’s the right move, Trump’s pen shouldn’t be though what are all these worthless elected officials doing ? But hey you want Trump to look like a king and use hide power so be it. People don’t say nothing when he uses the pen for other laws and cry foul.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but "the end justifies the means" justification equates to support of child camps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,662
Messages
55,432,799
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top