DeSantis provides great answer to soy boy parrot reporter asking him how he can defend transporting migrants.

[BackAgain]

Nope. Official US policy does.

No. It doesn’t. There is a difference between asylum and immigration.

Questions and Answers: Affirmative Asylum Eligibility and Applications | USCIS

Moot.

Because you really don't or you would demand that the reason they come (jobs) was addressed.

Wrong again. our immigration policy is fair and even generous. Complying with our immigration laws isn’t too much to ask especially since our laws serve a very important purpose.

And that has zero to do with asylum.

I already know that lots of immigrants come here to seek jobs. Good for them. But they still need to comply with our laws. We need them to comply with our laws.

 

[pknopp]

/---/ The contractor could hire legals but they would get a higher salary and render him non-competitive. Labor is his biggest overhead.

If they all had to hire legal workers he is not at a disadvantage.

 

[Orangecat]

Don't forget the mental anti-friction lube.

Your Stupid-Reply app is working overtime today.

 

[pknopp]

No. It doesn’t. There is a difference between asylum and immigration.

Moot.

Wrong again. our immigration policy is fair and even generous. Complying with our immigration laws isn’t too much to ask especially since our laws serve a very important purpose.

And that has zero to do with asylum.

I already know that lots of immigrants come here to seek jobs. Good for them. But they still need to comply with our laws. We need them to comply with our laws.

We were discussing asylum. Asylum laws are always relevant when discussing asylum laws.

I shouldn't have to point this out.

Oddly we do not demand that employers abide by out laws.

 

[j-mac]

It has NOTHING to do with treaties. It's our law.

Questions and Answers: Affirmative Asylum Eligibility and Applications | USCIS

Can I Still Apply for Asylum Even if I Am in the United States Illegally? ​

​

Yes. You may apply for asylum with USCIS regardless of your immigration status if:

• You are not currently in removal proceedings
• You file an asylum application within 1 year of arriving to the United States or demonstrate that you are within an exception to that rule.

Ill see your cut and past and raise you:

"Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States."

DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule | Homeland Security

On July 16th, a joint Interim Final Rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security will publish in the Federal Register.

www.dhs.gov

 

[BackAgain]

We were discussing asylum. Asylum laws are always relevant when discussing asylum laws.

Wrong. Asylum laws were introduced into the broader discussion. And asylum laws are categorically different than immigration laws.

I shouldn't have to point this out.

You didn’t. There was never any such need. It was a non sequitur.

Oddly we do not demand that employers abide by out laws.

False. In fact, some employers are terrified of failure to comply because such laws are enforced. It may be true that the enforcement is scattershot. But to claim we don’t enforce the laws in employers is false.

Also, to be a bit more blunt, your argument is an old red herring. While I absolutely concede that it would help us enforce our immigration laws and policies if we more uniformly enforced those laws ON our employers, that still doesn’t authorize anyone to simply enter our country without complying with our laws, rules and regulations.

 

[pknopp]

Ill see your cut and past and raise you:

"Specifically, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security are revising 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(c) and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border, but who did not apply for protection from persecution or torture where it was available in at least one third country outside the alien’s country of citizenship, nationality, or last lawful habitual residence through which he or she transited en route to the United States."

DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule | Homeland Security

On July 16th, a joint Interim Final Rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security will publish in the Federal Register.

www.dhs.gov

A temporary rule does not over ride the law. Are people coming here through other counties? Yes.

Are they granted the right to seek asylum? Yes.

 

[pknopp]

Wrong. Asylum laws were introduced into the broader discussion.

Yes, the discussion we were having.

Seriously you tell me I'm wrong and then reinforce what I said.

 

[BackAgain]

A temporary rule does not over ride the law. Are people coming here through other counties? Yes.

Are they granted the right to seek asylum? Yes

Is there a proper legal process for seeking asylum?

Yes.

Does that proper legal process for seeking asylum include doing so via illegal entry?

No.

Is an illegal immigrant nevertheless often permitted (or always permitted) to seek asylum despite having entered the U.S. illegally.

Yes.

 

[j-mac]

A temporary rule does not over ride the law. Are people coming here through other counties? Yes.

Are they granted the right to seek asylum? Yes.

Their claim will ultimately be denied, as happens with most claims....

Asylum claims granted - USAFacts

Explore government data on the number of asylum claims granted in the US year over year. Download the data or use our visualizations to better understand how these numbers have changed over time.

usafacts.org

So, with the majority of these "asylum seekers" being released into the interior of the country, or worse being transported by our Government, and or NGO's scattering them throughout, what gives anyone the belief that these people are EVER going to show up for a determination hearing? They won't, and that's the plan...You support that?

 

[pknopp]

Is there a proper legal process for seeking asylum?

Yes.

Does that proper legal process for seeking asylum include doing so via illegal entry?

No.

I posted the law. I have no desire to argue what you wish was the case.

Is an illegal immigrant nevertheless often permitted (or always permitted) to seek asylum despite having entered the U.S. illegally.

Yes.

Mindless double speak.

 

[pknopp]

Their claim will ultimately be denied, as happens with most claims....

Asylum claims granted - USAFacts

Explore government data on the number of asylum claims granted in the US year over year. Download the data or use our visualizations to better understand how these numbers have changed over time.

usafacts.org

So, with the majority of these "asylum seekers" being released into the interior of the country, or worse being transported by our Government, and or NGO's scattering them throughout, what gives anyone the belief that these people are EVER going to show up for a determination hearing? They won't, and that's the plan...You support that?

It very well might get denied. I never argued that all would get asylum.

In that case they simply continue to work here illegally in many cases.

 

[j-mac]

Back Again (posts): Is an illegal immigrant nevertheless often permitted (or always permitted) to seek asylum despite having entered the U.S. illegally.

Mindless double speak.

No, why? Did you not post a section of law to me that said precisely what BA said here?

Or is it the term Illegal immigrant you are opposed to?

 

[j-mac]

It very well might get denied. I never argued that all would get asylum.

In that case they simply continue to work here illegally in many cases.

Well, ain't that great? You think that's ok?

 

[pknopp]

Well, ain't that great? You think that's ok?

I'm the one arguing to hammer the business hiring them and to hammer them hard.

 

[j-mac]

I'm the one arguing to hammer the business hiring them and to hammer them hard.

Yes, yes, we all know you want to destroy business in America....Nothing new.

What I am saying is that we (not can) MUST seal off our borders, right now, and deal with the evil people making a profit in our great nation....

 

[BackAgain]

I posted the law. I have no desire to argue what you wish was the case.

No ma’am. In fact, you did not. You only selectively posted some of the law.

So? Don’t argue when you’re not being honest then.

Mindless double speak.

Most of what you post is indeed mindless doublespeak.

Give honesty a try someday.

Since honest debate isn’t part of your skill set, I’ll move on from a rube like you and just post more factually than you like.

It happens to be the case that asylum is on our books for things such as trying to escape a tyrannical government and governments who persecute any of their people on a religious basis or for other insidious purposes.

It also happens to be true that our asylum laws do not include economic grounds as a valid basis for asylum. The concern for economic benefit is a compelling reason to seek to immigrate into our land; it is not a basis for asylum.

Further, while our asylum laws don’t actually authorize illegal entry when seeking asylum, it doesn’t deny the alien the right to seek asylum merely because of the illegal entry.

Finally, just because an asylum seeker is allowed to petition our government FOR asylum does not mean that asylum must be granted. For example, when one of our immigration “courts” hears an asylum case, an illegal alien (whose claims truly raise only an economic basis for seeking “asylum”) can be denied asylum and ordered removed from America.

 

[pknopp]

Yes, yes, we all know you want to destroy business in America....Nothing new.

What I am saying is that we (not can) MUST seal off our borders, right now, and deal with the evil people making a profit in our great nation....

I'm not interested in sci-fi non excuses.

Odd you say that removing illegal labor from businesses would destroy them.

What a sad statement ..

 

[pknopp]

No ma’am. In fact, you did not. You only selectively posted some of the law.

So? Don’t argue when you’re not being honest then.


Most of what you post is indeed mindless doublespeak.

Give honesty a try someday.

Since honest debate isn’t part of your skill set, I’ll move on from a rube like you and just post more factually than you like.

It happens to be the case that asylum is on our books for things such as trying to escape a tyrannical government and governments who persecute any of their people on a religious basis or for other insidious purposes.

It also happens to be true that our asylum laws do not include economic grounds as a valid basis for asylum. The concern for economic benefit is a compelling reason to seek to immigrate into our land; it is not a basis for asylum.

Further, while our asylum laws don’t actually authorize illegal entry when seeking asylum, it doesn’t deny the alien the right to seek asylum merely because of the illegal entry.

Finally, just because an asylum seeker is allowed to petition our government FOR asylum does not mean that asylum must be granted. For example, when one of our immigration “courts” hears an asylum case, an illegal alien (whose claims truly raise only an economic basis for seeking “asylum”) can be denied asylum and ordered removed from America.

You said nothing I've ever argued against. I never once said being granted the right to seek asylum means you will get it.

You say I am wrong and then pretty much simply repeat what I've said.

Bravo.

 

[pknopp]

If they all had to hire legal workers he is not at a disadvantage.

No one had to. If we had strong enforcement, few would be able to.