Author Topic: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...  (Read 312321 times)

partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2215
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2100 on: June 20, 2018, 11:23:59 AM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

Can you at least agree, that the only reason children were being separated from their parents, did not have anything to do with their safety and well-being, but to traumatize the parents and serve as a general deterrent for people considering immigrating? While it may serve as a deterrent, the very act is considered abuse, and also opens the door to additional abuse, victimization and even possibly human trafficking. Though you don't believe it, even people who are not US citizens still have have rights in the US. You can't just throw people in cages. This is what the UN is warning our administration this is considered a human rights abuse.

There "are no solutions" How about not criminalizing immigrants? When you seek asylum, you have not broken any laws as yet. There is no reason to treat these people as hardened crimminals and separate families and jail them. Only Trump decided this.

For those who say, who cares, they are immigrants, etc. The fact that Trump is doing this, and willing to play fast and loose with laws and protections of human rights, AND do it on US soil, means he has very little respect for human rights in general. Are you OK with less human rights in the US?  In addition to his outspoken admiration of dictatorships as well as his desire to increase the scope and powers of the presidency, that should give us serious pause.

ematicic

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Virginia
  • Money Enthusiast
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2101 on: June 20, 2018, 11:24:21 AM »
We need immigrants in this country, as our birthrate overall is declining.  An overall solution would be great, but will probably need to be one that actually accepts more immigrants, not fewer.

If you're afraid that the US is going to look browner and sound spanishier 25 years from now, your fears will probably be realized, no matter what policies are adopted.  I suggest we open our eyes to the reality of things, and take ownership of how we integrate our new Americans, vs. trying to keep them out.  But that's just me, a "far left" capitalist who wants to make sure we have a healthy, hardworking population not just now but for perpetuity.

I'm not sure what DACA has to do with the current ZT policy, as it only applied to folks who came to the United States without documents before June 15, 2012.

I think there may also be some confusion about what benefits immigrants are entitled to, documented vs. undocumented.  The fear machine on the Right pushes the idea of "Schrodinger's immigrant": A scary (but lazy) brown-skinned guy who simultaneously takes your job and lives off welfare.  Problem is, immigrants aren't eligible for those benefits: https://www.thenation.com/article/the-truth-about-immigrants-and-public-benefits/

Agreed completely. Immigration reform is way over due! I just argue that any attempt to accept immigrants should be done with a path to citizenship. Not required citizenship, but at least a path. Some want to come here just to work abroad, some want a better life for their families. Wanting border security does not mean I don't want immigrants.

Right, you agree we need immigrants?  But earlier you mentioned that Trump had a solution for DACA but obstructionists blocked it.  You do realize a big part of the reason it was blocked  was because it slashed legal immigration to rates not seen since the 1920s? (Not mention the ridiculous, expensive and ineffective wall).

I think with the current backlog in the Immigration Department, it is reasonable to throttle back until the system catches up. There are people that sought asylum and got here 5 years ago that are tangled up in paperwork and have not even got their work permits. While the initial immigration process is ongoing, they cannot travel or have their families travel here. Many have a hard time getting work permits and the backlog is unfair to them. I think the rate of immigration should be ethically tied to the rate at which we can process candidates. I would like to see the process sped up if we are to try and accommodate the higher numbers, again all part of much needed reform. I do think that the open borders, and lack of border security yield increased crimes like drug and human trafficking and that is certainly worth action.

ematicic

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Virginia
  • Money Enthusiast
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2102 on: June 20, 2018, 11:28:01 AM »
There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family.

You should've started with this rather than bringing up "Liberals" and your conspiracy theories and mocking the situation and blaming it on Obama.

Quote
I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

Yeah, that's not how it read. To anyone.

Further, no one has suggested immigration is an easy fix. It is indeed a very difficult problem.

There's that straw man again.

Says the person mocking me for mocking them. Charming :)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11601
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2103 on: June 20, 2018, 11:30:01 AM »
We need immigrants in this country, as our birthrate overall is declining.  An overall solution would be great, but will probably need to be one that actually accepts more immigrants, not fewer.

If you're afraid that the US is going to look browner and sound spanishier 25 years from now, your fears will probably be realized, no matter what policies are adopted.  I suggest we open our eyes to the reality of things, and take ownership of how we integrate our new Americans, vs. trying to keep them out.  But that's just me, a "far left" capitalist who wants to make sure we have a healthy, hardworking population not just now but for perpetuity.

I'm not sure what DACA has to do with the current ZT policy, as it only applied to folks who came to the United States without documents before June 15, 2012.

I think there may also be some confusion about what benefits immigrants are entitled to, documented vs. undocumented.  The fear machine on the Right pushes the idea of "Schrodinger's immigrant": A scary (but lazy) brown-skinned guy who simultaneously takes your job and lives off welfare.  Problem is, immigrants aren't eligible for those benefits: https://www.thenation.com/article/the-truth-about-immigrants-and-public-benefits/

Agreed completely. Immigration reform is way over due! I just argue that any attempt to accept immigrants should be done with a path to citizenship. Not required citizenship, but at least a path. Some want to come here just to work abroad, some want a better life for their families. Wanting border security does not mean I don't want immigrants.

Right, you agree we need immigrants?  But earlier you mentioned that Trump had a solution for DACA but obstructionists blocked it.  You do realize a big part of the reason it was blocked  was because it slashed legal immigration to rates not seen since the 1920s? (Not mention the ridiculous, expensive and ineffective wall).

I think with the current backlog in the Immigration Department, it is reasonable to throttle back until the system catches up. There are people that sought asylum and got here 5 years ago that are tangled up in paperwork and have not even got their work permits. While the initial immigration process is ongoing, they cannot travel or have their families travel here. Many have a hard time getting work permits and the backlog is unfair to them. I think the rate of immigration should be ethically tied to the rate at which we can process candidates. I would like to see the process sped up if we are to try and accommodate the higher numbers, again all part of much needed reform. I do think that the open borders, and lack of border security yield increased crimes like drug and human trafficking and that is certainly worth action.

That's not how asylum seeking works though.  It's not something that can be 'throttled back'.  They are fleeing because they'll die if they stay where they are.  Telling them that immigration isn't a priority so they have to turn back because you haven't bothered to hire enough people is not a reasonable position to take.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3200
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2104 on: June 20, 2018, 11:33:28 AM »
There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family.

You should've started with this rather than bringing up "Liberals" and your conspiracy theories and mocking the situation and blaming it on Obama.

Quote
I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

Yeah, that's not how it read. To anyone.

Further, no one has suggested immigration is an easy fix. It is indeed a very difficult problem.

There's that straw man again.

Says the person mocking me for mocking them. Charming :)

Huh. So, please find where I said "immigration is an easy fix." Please find where I even suggested it.

I'll wait.

ematicic

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Virginia
  • Money Enthusiast
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2105 on: June 20, 2018, 11:37:47 AM »
We need immigrants in this country, as our birthrate overall is declining.  An overall solution would be great, but will probably need to be one that actually accepts more immigrants, not fewer.

If you're afraid that the US is going to look browner and sound spanishier 25 years from now, your fears will probably be realized, no matter what policies are adopted.  I suggest we open our eyes to the reality of things, and take ownership of how we integrate our new Americans, vs. trying to keep them out.  But that's just me, a "far left" capitalist who wants to make sure we have a healthy, hardworking population not just now but for perpetuity.

I'm not sure what DACA has to do with the current ZT policy, as it only applied to folks who came to the United States without documents before June 15, 2012.

I think there may also be some confusion about what benefits immigrants are entitled to, documented vs. undocumented.  The fear machine on the Right pushes the idea of "Schrodinger's immigrant": A scary (but lazy) brown-skinned guy who simultaneously takes your job and lives off welfare.  Problem is, immigrants aren't eligible for those benefits: https://www.thenation.com/article/the-truth-about-immigrants-and-public-benefits/

Agreed completely. Immigration reform is way over due! I just argue that any attempt to accept immigrants should be done with a path to citizenship. Not required citizenship, but at least a path. Some want to come here just to work abroad, some want a better life for their families. Wanting border security does not mean I don't want immigrants.

Right, you agree we need immigrants?  But earlier you mentioned that Trump had a solution for DACA but obstructionists blocked it.  You do realize a big part of the reason it was blocked  was because it slashed legal immigration to rates not seen since the 1920s? (Not mention the ridiculous, expensive and ineffective wall).

I think with the current backlog in the Immigration Department, it is reasonable to throttle back until the system catches up. There are people that sought asylum and got here 5 years ago that are tangled up in paperwork and have not even got their work permits. While the initial immigration process is ongoing, they cannot travel or have their families travel here. Many have a hard time getting work permits and the backlog is unfair to them. I think the rate of immigration should be ethically tied to the rate at which we can process candidates. I would like to see the process sped up if we are to try and accommodate the higher numbers, again all part of much needed reform. I do think that the open borders, and lack of border security yield increased crimes like drug and human trafficking and that is certainly worth action.

That's not how asylum seeking works though.  It's not something that can be 'throttled back'.  They are fleeing because they'll die if they stay where they are.  Telling them that immigration isn't a priority so they have to turn back because you haven't bothered to hire enough people is not a reasonable position to take.

Targeted Legal immigration rates does not just mean asylum seekers. If the Immigration Department is saturated with normal people going through the immigration system, then they are less able to process the emergency asylum seekers. I agree that the US should position itself to better host asylum seekers but upping target numbers without fixing the infrastructure creates an unfair burden on people that have not seen progress in 5 years.

toganet

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
  • Location: Buffalo, NY
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2106 on: June 20, 2018, 11:40:09 AM »
We need immigrants in this country, as our birthrate overall is declining.  An overall solution would be great, but will probably need to be one that actually accepts more immigrants, not fewer.

If you're afraid that the US is going to look browner and sound spanishier 25 years from now, your fears will probably be realized, no matter what policies are adopted.  I suggest we open our eyes to the reality of things, and take ownership of how we integrate our new Americans, vs. trying to keep them out.  But that's just me, a "far left" capitalist who wants to make sure we have a healthy, hardworking population not just now but for perpetuity.

I'm not sure what DACA has to do with the current ZT policy, as it only applied to folks who came to the United States without documents before June 15, 2012.

I think there may also be some confusion about what benefits immigrants are entitled to, documented vs. undocumented.  The fear machine on the Right pushes the idea of "Schrodinger's immigrant": A scary (but lazy) brown-skinned guy who simultaneously takes your job and lives off welfare.  Problem is, immigrants aren't eligible for those benefits: https://www.thenation.com/article/the-truth-about-immigrants-and-public-benefits/

Agreed completely. Immigration reform is way over due! I just argue that any attempt to accept immigrants should be done with a path to citizenship. Not required citizenship, but at least a path. Some want to come here just to work abroad, some want a better life for their families. Wanting border security does not mean I don't want immigrants.

Right, you agree we need immigrants?  But earlier you mentioned that Trump had a solution for DACA but obstructionists blocked it.  You do realize a big part of the reason it was blocked  was because it slashed legal immigration to rates not seen since the 1920s? (Not mention the ridiculous, expensive and ineffective wall).

I think with the current backlog in the Immigration Department, it is reasonable to throttle back until the system catches up. There are people that sought asylum and got here 5 years ago that are tangled up in paperwork and have not even got their work permits. While the initial immigration process is ongoing, they cannot travel or have their families travel here. Many have a hard time getting work permits and the backlog is unfair to them. I think the rate of immigration should be ethically tied to the rate at which we can process candidates. I would like to see the process sped up if we are to try and accommodate the higher numbers, again all part of much needed reform. I do think that the open borders, and lack of border security yield increased crimes like drug and human trafficking and that is certainly worth action.

I would argue that we should increase spending on immigration processing to meet demand, increase our aid to the countries these folks are fleeing (Honduras, Guatemala, etc) and adopt policies that reduce demand for the things people are arbitrating across the border.  In other words, decriminalize the drugs that are coming in so that the economics don't work.  Create a clear, open way for folks to enter legally, to reduce the market for coyote services.  Enforce tax law compliance for employers to make it harder for them to pay falsely-documented workers.

Remember that borders are arbitrary, human constructions, not some natural law.  The natural-est thing about borders is that they create opportunities for arbitrage.  Once a line is drawn and rules are changes on either side, human beings will find a way to exploit those differences.  In this case, our relative prosperity, rule of law, and general openness for people from different backgrounds differs from what's on the other side.  No surprise folks want to join us.  This is not a land of scarcity, right?

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2107 on: June 20, 2018, 11:49:50 AM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Johnez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 838
  • Location: Southern California
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2108 on: June 20, 2018, 12:21:07 PM »


That's not how asylum seeking works though.  It's not something that can be 'throttled back'.  They are fleeing because they'll die if they stay where they are.  Telling them that immigration isn't a priority so they have to turn back because you haven't bothered to hire enough people is not a reasonable position to take.

The asylum seekers fleeing Central America come through Mexico first. Why isn't Mexico taking them in? Apparently we're not allowed to turn back asylum seekers, but I'd argue they aren't seeking asylum if they are crossing the Mexico/USA border. They aren't in danger in Mexico.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2018, 12:23:34 PM by Johnez »

Freedom2016

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 545
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2109 on: June 20, 2018, 12:23:19 PM »
I was chatting with a relative, a person of faith who supports what's happening re family separation, and she was aghast that I "played the morality card" by pointing her to the many statements of faith leaders condemning the practice.

I learned she's a big "law & order" person who sees this as a purely black-and-white legal issue - and not a moral one. "They're breaking the law, what's the big deal." I did point out that if that shit was happening to her, both she and her husband would be using their guns to fuck up the assholes who were fucking with their family. I didn't think to ask her whether, as a law & order person, she supports the Mueller investigation into the potential illegal activities of various Trump connected people.

Exchanges like that are fucking exhausting. That meme, "I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people" hits close to home right now.

OtherJen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 493
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2110 on: June 20, 2018, 12:27:58 PM »
Exchanges like that are fucking exhausting. That meme, "I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people" hits close to home right now.

Yep.

ematicic

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Virginia
  • Money Enthusiast
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2111 on: June 20, 2018, 12:29:28 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

partgypsy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2215
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2112 on: June 20, 2018, 12:41:35 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

Um, did you read the article? Once you read it, get back to us.

Well, I guess we know what this is all about. In addition to providing a "deterrent" to would be immigrants and asylum seekers, these kids are being used as hostages. Trump and Sarah Sanders have both said they are not going to look at stand- alone legislation to undo Sessions "zero tolerance" policy that criminalizes illegal immigration, which is used to justify separating children from their parents. This started May of this year. Instead he is going to insist only undoing this cruel and arbitrary new policy, contingent on getting HIS legislation passed. Including the wall, which is unasked for, unwanted, and known to be a huge waste of taxpayers money, by law enforcement, mayors and governors all along the US/Mexican border.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want criminals crossing the border and coming into the US to commit crimes. But Trumps policies aren't DOING that. They are just making any immigrant or asylum seeker criminals, because the backlog to officially seek asylum, is so long they then try to get in at another entry point.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2018, 01:15:25 PM by partgypsy »

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3442
  • Location: Avalon
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2113 on: June 20, 2018, 12:49:17 PM »


That's not how asylum seeking works though.  It's not something that can be 'throttled back'.  They are fleeing because they'll die if they stay where they are.  Telling them that immigration isn't a priority so they have to turn back because you haven't bothered to hire enough people is not a reasonable position to take.

The asylum seekers fleeing Central America come through Mexico first. Why isn't Mexico taking them in? Apparently we're not allowed to turn back asylum seekers, but I'd argue they aren't seeking asylum if they are crossing the Mexico/USA border. They aren't in danger in Mexico.
There is nothing in USA law which says that asylum seekers have to come directly from the country from which they are in danger.  It would be possible to have a law which required asylum seekers to request asylum in the first safe country they come to - the EU has such a law between its countries.  But it would mean the USA entering into new treaties with those "first safe refuge" countries.  Good luck with getting any such country to enter into a new international agreement to help Trump out, especially countries like Mexico which he has spent the last couple of years throughly insulting and alienating.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1143
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2114 on: June 20, 2018, 12:53:09 PM »
Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf


sui generis

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2115 on: June 20, 2018, 12:55:06 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

No one has denied that there were "some Pre-Trump Immigration issues."  But if you are conflating those with what's happening now...that's some serious what-about-ism.  Plenty of liberals were mad about this stuff at the time.  I spent part of my summer as a clerk at the ACLU working on related issues.  My firm now is using an existing settlement agreement that requires counsel to have access to site inspections and interviews with minors to schedule inspections and interviews under this new policy.  But, the existence of problems before doesn't mean Trump hasn't turned this into a giant shit show of bad policy and actual human rights abuses, the size of which makes those of us who have been complaining for years remember those years fondly.

OtherJen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 493
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2116 on: June 20, 2018, 12:55:49 PM »
There is nothing in USA law which says that asylum seekers have to come directly from the country from which they are in danger.

True. Otherwise, my friend and her parents would have gone no further than Thailand when they escaped Vietnam by boat and applied for refugee resettlement in the USA.

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2117 on: June 20, 2018, 12:57:48 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

Could you point me to the page of that report that discusses the new zero-tolerance policy or the previous policy of processing asylum claims before prosecution?

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1857
  • Age: 186
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2118 on: June 20, 2018, 01:26:02 PM »
You know it's bad when Michael Cohen says you're acting unethically:
http://thehill.com/homenews/393278-michael-cohen-resigns-from-rnc-committee-position-report
Quote
"As the son of a Polish holocaust survivor, the images and sounds of this family separation policy is heart wrenching,” Cohen wrote. “While I strongly support measures that will secure our porous borders, children should never be used as bargaining chips."


ematicic

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 101
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Virginia
  • Money Enthusiast
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2119 on: June 20, 2018, 01:29:40 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

No one has denied that there were "some Pre-Trump Immigration issues."  But if you are conflating those with what's happening now...that's some serious what-about-ism.  Plenty of liberals were mad about this stuff at the time.  I spent part of my summer as a clerk at the ACLU working on related issues.  My firm now is using an existing settlement agreement that requires counsel to have access to site inspections and interviews with minors to schedule inspections and interviews under this new policy.  But, the existence of problems before doesn't mean Trump hasn't turned this into a giant shit show of bad policy and actual human rights abuses, the size of which makes those of us who have been complaining for years remember those years fondly.

I know Conflating and what-about-ism are popular buzz words. Someone asked about pre-trump immigration policy and I sent a report discussing pre-trump immigration policy.  I think you are to eager to use your little buzz words.

sui generis

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2120 on: June 20, 2018, 01:43:17 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

No one has denied that there were "some Pre-Trump Immigration issues."  But if you are conflating those with what's happening now...that's some serious what-about-ism.  Plenty of liberals were mad about this stuff at the time.  I spent part of my summer as a clerk at the ACLU working on related issues.  My firm now is using an existing settlement agreement that requires counsel to have access to site inspections and interviews with minors to schedule inspections and interviews under this new policy.  But, the existence of problems before doesn't mean Trump hasn't turned this into a giant shit show of bad policy and actual human rights abuses, the size of which makes those of us who have been complaining for years remember those years fondly.

I know Conflating and what-about-ism are popular buzz words. Someone asked about pre-trump immigration policy and I sent a report discussing pre-trump immigration policy.  I think you are to eager to use your little buzz words.

Nice avoidance of the substance of my post.  But let's be clear here that the article you voluntarily posted clearly refutes the case you've been making for pages, that stuffs been happening since long before Trump and no one has been complaining about it.  To then choose to post an article that shows just that a lot of people have been documenting and fighting this for years...do you even realize how you undercut yourself and demonstrate hypocrisy at every turn (as pointed out deftly in several posts above), and see no problem with it?  Of course, there are so many people pointing out the myriad of faults in your sources and reasoning that it is just easy for you to skip all the substance and skip to the occasional thing that you can turn into an accusation against someone else.

The weight of the posts here being against you may not be because we are all raging leftists communists conspiring against you, you know.  Sometimes, when everyone is appalled by your statements, it's because they are actually appalling.

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2121 on: June 20, 2018, 01:44:18 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

No one has denied that there were "some Pre-Trump Immigration issues."  But if you are conflating those with what's happening now...that's some serious what-about-ism.  Plenty of liberals were mad about this stuff at the time.  I spent part of my summer as a clerk at the ACLU working on related issues.  My firm now is using an existing settlement agreement that requires counsel to have access to site inspections and interviews with minors to schedule inspections and interviews under this new policy.  But, the existence of problems before doesn't mean Trump hasn't turned this into a giant shit show of bad policy and actual human rights abuses, the size of which makes those of us who have been complaining for years remember those years fondly.

I know Conflating and what-about-ism are popular buzz words. Someone asked about pre-trump immigration policy and I sent a report discussing pre-trump immigration policy.  I think you are to eager to use your little buzz words.

I did not ask about pre-trump immigration policy in general.  I asked what was being done by the previous administration in similar situations, provided a possible answer that you have not refuted and asked why you had a problem with the solution implemented by the previous administration.  I'm still awaiting your answers to those questions.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2122 on: June 20, 2018, 04:35:47 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

Is the "Human Rights Watch" organization reputable?  This discusses some Pre-Trump Immigration issues.

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/report_pdf/uscaliforniaimmigration0517_web.pdf

No one has denied that there were "some Pre-Trump Immigration issues."  But if you are conflating those with what's happening now...that's some serious what-about-ism.  Plenty of liberals were mad about this stuff at the time.  I spent part of my summer as a clerk at the ACLU working on related issues.  My firm now is using an existing settlement agreement that requires counsel to have access to site inspections and interviews with minors to schedule inspections and interviews under this new policy.  But, the existence of problems before doesn't mean Trump hasn't turned this into a giant shit show of bad policy and actual human rights abuses, the size of which makes those of us who have been complaining for years remember those years fondly.

I know Conflating and what-about-ism are popular buzz words. Someone asked about pre-trump immigration policy and I sent a report discussing pre-trump immigration policy.  I think you are to eager to use your little buzz words.

Nice avoidance of the substance of my post.  But let's be clear here that the article you voluntarily posted clearly refutes the case you've been making for pages, that stuffs been happening since long before Trump and no one has been complaining about it.  To then choose to post an article that shows just that a lot of people have been documenting and fighting this for years...do you even realize how you undercut yourself and demonstrate hypocrisy at every turn (as pointed out deftly in several posts above), and see no problem with it?  Of course, there are so many people pointing out the myriad of faults in your sources and reasoning that it is just easy for you to skip all the substance and skip to the occasional thing that you can turn into an accusation against someone else.

The weight of the posts here being against you may not be because we are all raging leftists communists conspiring against you, you know.  Sometimes, when everyone is appalled by your statements, it's because they are actually appalling.

I realized a couple days ago after calling out his/her straw-man that they were just simply trolling.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3200
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2123 on: June 21, 2018, 07:28:58 AM »
Well, in an IPSOS poll conducted a few days ago, Republicans had a higher approval raiting for Kim Jong Un than Nancy Pelosi.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/06/20/republicans-now-prefer-kim-jong-un-to-nancy-pelosi/?utm_term=.e6ef7ae5676a

That’s where we are now.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1735
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2124 on: June 21, 2018, 07:49:50 AM »
When shit gets really crazy under Trump, I will go check the front page stories and comments at RedState.com.  The last few days have been amazing!  First off, this site did not support Trump for president, and has often been critical of him (along with McConnell, Ryan,etc, as not conservative). However, as the months have passed, I note the tone (especially in the comments) has shifted to much more support of Trump's policies and to a lesser extent, Trump.

When the child-separation scandal hit the news, I was genuinely curious about their reaction, given that the whole site is full of fire breathing 'family first' social conservatives.  The articles seemed generally neutral or negative toward the results of this policy, while still supporting prosecuting the adults as criminals.  But the comments seemed to ALL support Trump 100% and support the child separation policy.

Then recently, Ted Cruz introduced a bill that would put the kids back with their families (among other things).  This site (both stories and comments) usually worships Ted Cruz like the next coming.  So now a whole bunch of the commenters have decided that they CAN support Cruz in this b/c they think he must be introducing a Trojan horse bill that is designed not to go against Trump's policy, but just to make sure Dems vote against legislation to put the kids and parents back together.  In other word, the commenters admire Ted Cruz so much they think he can't possibly want to reunite the families.  For all I know, they are right about Cruz.  But it's really incredible.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11601
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2125 on: June 21, 2018, 07:56:45 AM »
Well, in an IPSOS poll conducted a few days ago, Republicans had a higher approval raiting for Kim Jong Un than Nancy Pelosi.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/06/20/republicans-now-prefer-kim-jong-un-to-nancy-pelosi/?utm_term=.e6ef7ae5676a

That’s where we are now.

I could have told you that without the poll.  I mean, look at who they elected.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3200
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2126 on: June 21, 2018, 08:05:34 AM »
Well, in an IPSOS poll conducted a few days ago, Republicans had a higher approval raiting for Kim Jong Un than Nancy Pelosi.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/06/20/republicans-now-prefer-kim-jong-un-to-nancy-pelosi/?utm_term=.e6ef7ae5676a

That’s where we are now.

I could have told you that without the poll.  I mean, look at who they elected.

True.

It's just... good lord, the idiocy, and the banal evil of it all. There are days I'm surprised that I can still be shocked by anything.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1754
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2127 on: June 21, 2018, 09:32:29 AM »
True.

It's just... good lord, the idiocy, and the banal evil of it all. There are days I'm surprised that I can still be shocked by anything.

Just watch a few clips of Anne Coulter and Trump voters telling everyone not to believe the 'paid child actors' from clips of immigrants separated at the border.  The fact that we simultaneously withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council during this crisis is just icing on top.

Yeah, getting beaten down so hard for so long (has it really only been 1.5 years out of 4?) has made me numb.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1857
  • Age: 186
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2128 on: June 21, 2018, 09:38:49 AM »
Just your friendly reminder/PSA: This is not normal.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1143
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2129 on: June 21, 2018, 09:55:38 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-centers-force-migrant-children-drugs-lawsuit-030012069.html

Quote
Immigrant children are being routinely and forcibly given a range of psychotropic drugs at U.S. government-funded youth shelters to manage their trauma after being detained and in some cases separated from parents, according to a lawsuit.

Children held at facilities such as the Shiloh Treatment Center in Texas are almost certain to be administered the drugs, irrespective of their condition, and without their parents' consent, according to the lawsuit filed by the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights & Constitutional Law.

Also not normal.  WTF.

OtherJen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 493
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2130 on: June 21, 2018, 09:57:51 AM »
'White Civil Rights Rally' Approved For D.C. In August

Won't it be lovely to have Nazi flags against a backdrop of the White House? /sarcasm

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2131 on: June 21, 2018, 09:58:36 AM »
Just your friendly reminder/PSA: This is not normal.

It's normal for roughly 40% of folks. Clinton's deplorable comment is an understatement.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3200
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2132 on: June 21, 2018, 10:43:10 AM »
True.

It's just... good lord, the idiocy, and the banal evil of it all. There are days I'm surprised that I can still be shocked by anything.

Just watch a few clips of Anne Coulter and Trump voters telling everyone not to believe the 'paid child actors' from clips of immigrants separated at the border.  The fact that we simultaneously withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council during this crisis is just icing on top.

Yeah, getting beaten down so hard for so long (has it really only been 1.5 years out of 4?) has made me numb.

And Trump himself suggested the kids are being coached.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/06/trump-suggests-immigrant-kids-hes-holding-hostage-crisis-actors/

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 902
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2133 on: June 21, 2018, 10:47:06 AM »
I wish I could say he was being coached.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3200
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2134 on: June 21, 2018, 10:49:39 AM »
I wish I could say he was being coached.

He is. By Fox News, Putin, and Kim Jong Un, at the very least.

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 902
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2135 on: June 21, 2018, 10:51:37 AM »
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/21/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-meeting/index.html

Maybe he will get more talking points at the forthcoming Summit!

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1152
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2136 on: June 21, 2018, 11:03:01 AM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but it basically negates any border enforcement.  Cross illegally and get caught, claim asylum, then disappear and you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  Cross illegally and not get caught, but then get caught later, claim asylum and (provided they don't have easily available evidence that you have been here more than a year), disappear and then you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  I think solid majority of voters on the left and right would be against that if you proposed it to them.  How many would be against it if you told them the alternative is to leave approximately 2,000 kids in U.S. custody when no relative other than the one being prosecuted is available to take them (or alternatively to defy a court order and hold the kids and families together)?  I'm not sure.  I think a lot of people really don't like immigration.  I think a lot of people on the left and right are also tired of politicians lying to them about wanting to stop or slow down illegal immigration. 

Although, shockingly, almost 40%  of asylum claimers do show up to hearings after being released.  Not sure if they continue to show up until the end or not, but unless they can show up for a few hearings to determine whether their chances are good, I would have expected the number to be closer to like 5%, or whatever percentage have a very solid case for asylum (which I would have thought is well less than 40%, but that's an uneducated guess). 

craiglepaige

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2137 on: June 21, 2018, 11:05:23 AM »
'White Civil Rights Rally' Approved For D.C. In August

Won't it be lovely to have Nazi flags against a backdrop of the White House? /sarcasm


I mean, some "very fine people" are going to be there.
Why would it be an issue?

Wonder if the Trump clan will stop by and shake hands...

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1152
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2138 on: June 21, 2018, 11:05:58 AM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

Can you at least agree, that the only reason children were being separated from their parents, did not have anything to do with their safety and well-being, but to traumatize the parents and serve as a general deterrent for people considering immigrating? While it may serve as a deterrent, the very act is considered abuse, and also opens the door to additional abuse, victimization and even possibly human trafficking. Though you don't believe it, even people who are not US citizens still have have rights in the US. You can't just throw people in cages. This is what the UN is warning our administration this is considered a human rights abuse.

There "are no solutions" How about not criminalizing immigrants? When you seek asylum, you have not broken any laws as yet. There is no reason to treat these people as hardened crimminals and separate families and jail them. Only Trump decided this.

For those who say, who cares, they are immigrants, etc. The fact that Trump is doing this, and willing to play fast and loose with laws and protections of human rights, AND do it on US soil, means he has very little respect for human rights in general. Are you OK with less human rights in the US?  In addition to his outspoken admiration of dictatorships as well as his desire to increase the scope and powers of the presidency, that should give us serious pause.

Unless DHS is lying (which is always a possibility with a government agency), they are not prosecuting people who show up at a port of entry and make a claim for asylum.  They are only prosecuting people who make an illegal crossing and then get caught. 

StarBright

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 974
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2139 on: June 21, 2018, 11:11:03 AM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

Can you at least agree, that the only reason children were being separated from their parents, did not have anything to do with their safety and well-being, but to traumatize the parents and serve as a general deterrent for people considering immigrating? While it may serve as a deterrent, the very act is considered abuse, and also opens the door to additional abuse, victimization and even possibly human trafficking. Though you don't believe it, even people who are not US citizens still have have rights in the US. You can't just throw people in cages. This is what the UN is warning our administration this is considered a human rights abuse.

There "are no solutions" How about not criminalizing immigrants? When you seek asylum, you have not broken any laws as yet. There is no reason to treat these people as hardened crimminals and separate families and jail them. Only Trump decided this.

For those who say, who cares, they are immigrants, etc. The fact that Trump is doing this, and willing to play fast and loose with laws and protections of human rights, AND do it on US soil, means he has very little respect for human rights in general. Are you OK with less human rights in the US?  In addition to his outspoken admiration of dictatorships as well as his desire to increase the scope and powers of the presidency, that should give us serious pause.

Unless DHS is lying (which is always a possibility with a government agency), they are not prosecuting people who show up at a port of entry and make a claim for asylum.  They are only prosecuting people who make an illegal crossing and then get caught.

But it is also being reported that they have closed the ports of entry for several days at a time. I think someone posted a link on the last page that was talking about that.

Roadrunner53

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1325
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2140 on: June 21, 2018, 11:18:11 AM »
Saw on one of the on line papers that Donny Boy is going to the UK. First of all WHY?

Second I read that they will protest his visit. GOOD! I thought he was supposed to go over there before and cancelled because of protesting.

He is supposed to meet with the Queen! OMG, Mr. Ignorant goes to the UK and meets the Queen...WHY?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11601
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2141 on: June 21, 2018, 11:22:27 AM »
'White Civil Rights Rally' Approved For D.C. In August

Won't it be lovely to have Nazi flags against a backdrop of the White House? /sarcasm


I mean, some "very fine people" are going to be there.
Why would it be an issue?

Wonder if the Trump clan will stop by and shake hands...

It's spelled with a 'k' for the Trumps.

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1767
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2142 on: June 21, 2018, 12:00:19 PM »
He is supposed to meet with the Queen! OMG, Mr. Ignorant goes to the UK and meets the Queen...WHY?
So he can ride in that carriage.  He can think he is emperor. 

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2143 on: June 21, 2018, 12:00:34 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but it basically negates any border enforcement.  Cross illegally and get caught, claim asylum, then disappear and you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  Cross illegally and not get caught, but then get caught later, claim asylum and (provided they don't have easily available evidence that you have been here more than a year), disappear and then you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  I think solid majority of voters on the left and right would be against that if you proposed it to them.  How many would be against it if you told them the alternative is to leave approximately 2,000 kids in U.S. custody when no relative other than the one being prosecuted is available to take them (or alternatively to defy a court order and hold the kids and families together)?  I'm not sure.  I think a lot of people really don't like immigration.  I think a lot of people on the left and right are also tired of politicians lying to them about wanting to stop or slow down illegal immigration. 

Although, shockingly, almost 40%  of asylum claimers do show up to hearings after being released.  Not sure if they continue to show up until the end or not, but unless they can show up for a few hearings to determine whether their chances are good, I would have expected the number to be closer to like 5%, or whatever percentage have a very solid case for asylum (which I would have thought is well less than 40%, but that's an uneducated guess).

I don't know how the asylum seeking process goes, but wouldn't they need to keep in touch with the entity processing the asylum claim in order to complete the process?  Couldn't we just issue a warrant or something like that if someone claims asylum upon initial entry but then never follows through with the rest of the process?

Roadrunner53

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1325
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2144 on: June 21, 2018, 12:25:20 PM »
He is supposed to meet with the Queen! OMG, Mr. Ignorant goes to the UK and meets the Queen...WHY?
So he can ride in that carriage.  He can think he is emperor.

LOL!

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 819
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2145 on: June 21, 2018, 12:26:56 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but it basically negates any border enforcement.  Cross illegally and get caught, claim asylum, then disappear and you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  Cross illegally and not get caught, but then get caught later, claim asylum and (provided they don't have easily available evidence that you have been here more than a year), disappear and then you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  I think solid majority of voters on the left and right would be against that if you proposed it to them.  How many would be against it if you told them the alternative is to leave approximately 2,000 kids in U.S. custody when no relative other than the one being prosecuted is available to take them (or alternatively to defy a court order and hold the kids and families together)?  I'm not sure.  I think a lot of people really don't like immigration.  I think a lot of people on the left and right are also tired of politicians lying to them about wanting to stop or slow down illegal immigration. 

Although, shockingly, almost 40%  of asylum claimers do show up to hearings after being released.  Not sure if they continue to show up until the end or not, but unless they can show up for a few hearings to determine whether their chances are good, I would have expected the number to be closer to like 5%, or whatever percentage have a very solid case for asylum (which I would have thought is well less than 40%, but that's an uneducated guess).

I don't know how the asylum seeking process goes, but wouldn't they need to keep in touch with the entity processing the asylum claim in order to complete the process?  Couldn't we just issue a warrant or something like that if someone claims asylum upon initial entry but then never follows through with the rest of the process?

If the asylum seeker was honest about seeking asylum, yes. But once they're across the border, it seems like it would be very, very difficult to track those people down, after they disappear and begin using stolen SSNs and identities. Then you have 'sanctuary' cities/states who border on obstruction of justice by refusing to cooperate or proactively exchange information with the departments involved in enforcing these laws. So it seems best to contain them while the merit of their asylum is vetted.

That could probably be done without splitting up families. And should probably result in a lot of discretionary asylum claims being denied. Asylum should not be a short-cut on the legal immigration process. 

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1152
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2146 on: June 21, 2018, 12:27:47 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but it basically negates any border enforcement.  Cross illegally and get caught, claim asylum, then disappear and you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  Cross illegally and not get caught, but then get caught later, claim asylum and (provided they don't have easily available evidence that you have been here more than a year), disappear and then you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  I think solid majority of voters on the left and right would be against that if you proposed it to them.  How many would be against it if you told them the alternative is to leave approximately 2,000 kids in U.S. custody when no relative other than the one being prosecuted is available to take them (or alternatively to defy a court order and hold the kids and families together)?  I'm not sure.  I think a lot of people really don't like immigration.  I think a lot of people on the left and right are also tired of politicians lying to them about wanting to stop or slow down illegal immigration. 

Although, shockingly, almost 40%  of asylum claimers do show up to hearings after being released.  Not sure if they continue to show up until the end or not, but unless they can show up for a few hearings to determine whether their chances are good, I would have expected the number to be closer to like 5%, or whatever percentage have a very solid case for asylum (which I would have thought is well less than 40%, but that's an uneducated guess).

I don't know how the asylum seeking process goes, but wouldn't they need to keep in touch with the entity processing the asylum claim in order to complete the process?  Couldn't we just issue a warrant or something like that if someone claims asylum upon initial entry but then never follows through with the rest of the process?

Yes.  In fact, that's what happens in most of the cases where the immigrants aren't detained.  They don't show up, and they are ordered removed in absentia, and then it's just a question of whether they come across ICE's radar again.   

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1143
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2147 on: June 21, 2018, 01:10:57 PM »
http://theweek.com/speedreads/780527/melania-trump-flew-texas-visit-detained-immigrant-children-apparently-wore-jacket-that-said-really-dont-care

Melania Trump flew to Texas to visit detained immigrant children. She apparently wore a jacket that said 'I really don't care, do you?'

Nice PR stunt by the First Lady.  (NOTE - NOT The Onion)

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2148 on: June 21, 2018, 01:39:14 PM »
There will be no reputable press reporting this as a positive. I can find negative articles all day long. This is a horrible situation but one that will hopefully lead to immigration policy reform that is both moral, and enduring. That is the conversation I have been searching for but keep getting blasted as I go against the left grain. If I say anything other than "Boo Trump", the "you hate children" retort comes out.

You didn't suggest alternatives; you suggested a false dichotomy (let them all in or lock the children up) and mocked the situation. This was pointed out to you several times.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

And now you're claiming to be the victim. That's rich.

Well you have not offered anything of value. And I did. There are limited alternatives and none of them are appealing. 1. Keep the family together and let them in 2. Keep the family together and turn them away. 3. Separate the family. You missed it. And just because you cannot comprehend, read, or generally disagree, it does not make it a fallacy. Yes, you use that in every post as if to take the higher ground, sound familiar?

What should the President have done with the existing laws? I meant to mock everyone thinking there was some easy fix. There isn't.

What was being done before the current administration changed their policy to criminally prosecute everyone who enters illegally?  This article seems to indicate that we simply processed their asylum claim before deciding whether to prosecute them.  What was wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but it basically negates any border enforcement.  Cross illegally and get caught, claim asylum, then disappear and you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  Cross illegally and not get caught, but then get caught later, claim asylum and (provided they don't have easily available evidence that you have been here more than a year), disappear and then you are good until you come across ICE's radar again.  I think solid majority of voters on the left and right would be against that if you proposed it to them.  How many would be against it if you told them the alternative is to leave approximately 2,000 kids in U.S. custody when no relative other than the one being prosecuted is available to take them (or alternatively to defy a court order and hold the kids and families together)?  I'm not sure.  I think a lot of people really don't like immigration.  I think a lot of people on the left and right are also tired of politicians lying to them about wanting to stop or slow down illegal immigration. 

Although, shockingly, almost 40%  of asylum claimers do show up to hearings after being released.  Not sure if they continue to show up until the end or not, but unless they can show up for a few hearings to determine whether their chances are good, I would have expected the number to be closer to like 5%, or whatever percentage have a very solid case for asylum (which I would have thought is well less than 40%, but that's an uneducated guess).

I don't know how the asylum seeking process goes, but wouldn't they need to keep in touch with the entity processing the asylum claim in order to complete the process?  Couldn't we just issue a warrant or something like that if someone claims asylum upon initial entry but then never follows through with the rest of the process?

Yes.  In fact, that's what happens in most of the cases where the immigrants aren't detained.  They don't show up, and they are ordered removed in absentia, and then it's just a question of whether they come across ICE's radar again.

Thought the statistics from this DOJ report (automatic pdf download) were useful.

The most striking to me is the Figure on page 34: the massive increase of 'defensive' asylum requests. Also on page 39 you can see the approval rate of asylum requests (around 30% for defensive). So at what point can we say that people are taking advantage of our asylum process? I'm glad we do take in those that are facing persecution in other countries, and it's sad that others will try to take advantage of that system.

Also the stats for 'in absentia' hearings beginning on page 49. So here's my issue, of which I don't know a good solution. There seems to be 10s of thousands of aliens who simply don't show up to court proceedings. How many families are included in those numbers? How many simply duck under the radar after being released? I think the big fear of the 'catch-and-release' policy of Obama's administration is that there are probably at least several thousand kids that we have no idea what happened to them. This is why I'm not hysterical about Trump's new policy. It may be bad, but it's such a complex issue that we don't even understand the trade-offs of two bad policies.

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1857
  • Age: 186
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #2149 on: June 21, 2018, 02:08:22 PM »
http://theweek.com/speedreads/780527/melania-trump-flew-texas-visit-detained-immigrant-children-apparently-wore-jacket-that-said-really-dont-care

Melania Trump flew to Texas to visit detained immigrant children. She apparently wore a jacket that said 'I really don't care, do you?'

Nice PR stunt by the First Lady.  (NOTE - NOT The Onion)
I had to check that to make sure it wasn't a satire site I didn't know about. But, nope, she's just that classy.


A relevant quote I saw in some NYT comments:
Quote
“In my work with the defendants (at the Nuremberg Trials 1945-1949) I was searching for the nature of evil and I now think I have come close to defining it. A lack of empathy. It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants, a genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow men. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.”

- Captain G. M. Gilbert, U.S. Army Psychologist