What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

[Flopper]

Trump is separating parents from kids because they committed a misdemeanor. That being the case, you had better not exceed the speed limit in your state.

You shouldn't exceed the speed limit, anyway. But yeah, you definitely shouldn't do anything in a car, with your kids present, that gets you arrested. You shouldn't do anything AT ALL that carries with it the chance of being arrested when you have your kids with you, because they will ALWAYS be taken away from you while you're in the pokey. I have no idea why it's a shock to you that kids aren't jailed along with their parents.

But this really cuts to the heart of the matter. You leftists keep yabbling mindlessly about "just a misdemeanor", when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

The difference is in most traffic violations you don't go to jail and if you do, you can request bail.

And yes, our immigration laws do consider a first time offense of crossing the boarder illegally a misdemeanor, a minor wrongdoing by definition. A first time offense carries a maximum of 6 mos in jail which is rarely used. To give you an idea how minor the offense is, Misdemeanor Trespassing carries a heavier penalty in most states and it wasn't until the 1996 immigration reform law that there was any legal penalty at all.

The first step in fixing the immigration system is to fix the law.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Neither applying for asylum nor being denied asylum is a crime. Children should not be separated in either case.

Haha...oh I get it now. You want to believe the cockroaches from Mexico, Central and South America can quality for asylum?
You realize that whether applying for asylum or not, an illegal alien standing on American soil is a federal criminal...right?

Anyone can apply and 40% of applicants are granted asylum. Prosecuting them is not required. It is done as a matter of policy.

Nice conflation. How many of those applicants went about it the proper way, and how many swarmed across the border first chance they got, and only mentioned asylum when they got caught and arrested?

There's no conflation. Asylum seekers were not prosecuted prior to thle implementation of this new policy.
Zero tolerance, meaning 100% prosecutions, is a new policy, fool.

Asylum seekers aren't prosecuted NOW, unless they commit a crime. Too bad for you that crossing the border IS still a crime.

However, if someone who has crossed the border illegally THEN asked for asylum is actually granted the asylum, then they certainly aren't prosecuted for anything.

Meanwhile, none of this answers the question you're either too stupid to understand, or too cowardly and dishonest to acknowledge:

Neither applying for asylum nor being denied asylum is a crime. Children should not be separated in either case.

Haha...oh I get it now. You want to believe the cockroaches from Mexico, Central and South America can quality for asylum?
You realize that whether applying for asylum or not, an illegal alien standing on American soil is a federal criminal...right?

Anyone can apply and 40% of applicants are granted asylum. Prosecuting them is not required. It is done as a matter of policy.

Nice conflation. How many of those applicants went about it the proper way, and how many swarmed across the border first chance they got, and only mentioned asylum when they got caught and arrested?

There's no conflation. Asylum seekers were not prosecuted prior to thle implementation of this new policy.
Zero tolerance, meaning 100% prosecutions, is a new policy, fool.

Asylum seekers aren't prosecuted NOW, unless they commit a crime. Too bad for you that crossing the border IS still a crime.

However, if someone who has crossed the border illegally THEN asked for asylum is actually granted the asylum, then they certainly aren't prosecuted for anything.

Meanwhile, none of this answers the question you're either too stupid to understand, or too cowardly and dishonest to acknowledge: 40% of WHICH applicants? You're conflating asylum applicants who go about it the legal way with people who only request asylum when they get caught breaking the law.

You're conflating asylum applicants who go about it the legal way with people who only request asylum when they get caught breaking the law.

Asylum seekers aren't prosecuted NOW, unless they commit a crime. Too bad for you that crossing the border IS still a crime.

All asylum seekers who crossed illegally are prosecuted now under this policy, dope.

However, if someone who has crossed the border illegally THEN asked for asylum is actually granted the asylum, then they certainly aren't prosecuted for anything

This just contradicted your first pargraph, dope.

: 40% of WHICH applicants?

All applicants, dope.

 

[forkup]

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration. Just like Jackson didn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of getting gold. They both thought they had the right to do this because they considered themselves as representing America's best interests. I'm giving Trump the benefit of the doubt since I believe he's doing it because he wants to placate his base. I believe, if your willing to disregard morality when going after goals, you are nothing more then a thug and history will judge you accordingly.

That's IF you think what he's doing is immoral; enforcing the law and trying to provide a deterrent.

I don't think taking kids away from "people" who dragged them across a place like Mexico, dirty, hungry and confused, putting them someplace where they get showers, food, medical care, new clothing, a bed to sleep in; something they probably haven't seen in over two weeks, as being immoral.

I see. This is only if you

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration. Just like Jackson didn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of getting gold. They both thought they had the right to do this because they considered themselves as representing America's best interests. I'm giving Trump the benefit of the doubt since I believe he's doing it because he wants to placate his base. I believe, if your willing to disregard morality when going after goals, you are nothing more then a thug and history will judge you accordingly.

That's IF you think what he's doing is immoral; enforcing the law and trying to provide a deterrent.

I don't think taking kids away from "people" who dragged them across a place like Mexico, dirty, hungry and confused, putting them someplace where they get showers, food, medical care, new clothing, a bed to sleep in; something they probably haven't seen in over two weeks, as being immoral.

By that logic everybody who ever emigrated with kids should all lose their parental rights. See the only way your argument works is, if you see parents who try to cross the border as reckless and not desperate. By the way I love how you so studiously used air quotes when saying people. So you didn't have to use parents. Like taking away parents from their children because of something that is even by law a simple misdemeanor is not by it's very nature immoral and makes them undeserving of raising a kid.

A "simple misdemeanor" that puts your kids into a risky, dangerous situation.

So do I, every time I let my kid cross the street,I do it because crossing that street gets her to school, that school is how she gets a future. Does this mean I should lose my parental rights? In the end, sometimes as a parent you take certain risks in order to provide a better future for your kid.

You should never have been allowed to reproduce, simply because you're pig-stupid enough to compare crossing the street (presumably at an intersection, but given your shocking level of brain damage, I won't assume anything) with entering the country illegally.

Your post is invalid, your presumption of functional intelligence is invalid, your existence is invalid. Maybe you should send your kid in to debate on your behalf.

I wasn't comparing crossing the street with illegal immigration. I was comparing putting kids in risky situations, to establish that doing so can be in the child's best interest in certain circumstances. I used hyperbole to make a point. The fact that you aren't capable of recognizing it for what it was and the fact that it prompted you to do an ad hominem attack, tells me everything I need to know about your debating skills.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Coyote

If you don't mind me bringing you back to this discussion, I've had a burning question. What is the probability that every adult who crosses our border illegally with a child is related to the child? How do we know they aren't lying? In that case, the moral onus lies on the adults who bring them here and use them as tools to leverage our government.

Of the 12,000 children who came here, 10,000 of them came here alone. The other 2,000 were brought here by adults claiming to be their parents. When DHS could not verify their relationship, they were separated. Once again, in accordance with existing law.

So I ask again, how can we know that these so called "parents" aren't lying and simply using the child as a tool? Do you wonder why so many children are classified as unaccompanied? Because their "sponsors" abandon them for fear of being discovered and deported themselves.

How can your side of the aisle claim to care about the relationship between parent and child when the parent willfully separates (yes, separates, something you're currently making a bid deal about) themselves from their child via sending them across the dangerous frontier and across our border? Where is the outcry over that? Oh, is it because the parent is trying to "make a better life for their child"? Where is your concern over the possibility of child trafficking?

Could it be possible you are ignoring, forgetting, or downright dismissing the fact that the separation in about 80% of the cases has already occurred?

Why all the emotion and no solution?

If there is any evidence of child trafficking, the immigration authorities should definitely act. However it is not logical to make that assumption without evidence of such. One of the few rights illegal immigrants have is Due Process. Since most of these families came with the intent of applying for asylum, most of them will have some documentation.

First... I can contend that the exact opposite is true. You can't assume that all of these adults with minors are in fact families.

Second, these people had no rights in America (constitutional or otherwise) before they crossed the border illegally, why should they suddenly attain them when they do? If you aren't a citizen, you should not be entitled to constitutional rights until you go through the proper channels. Period. Full stop.

So there are no basic human rights?

You want compassion to overrule the law. I want the law to stand sacrosanct against emotional arguments like yours. Too much emotion and compassion can erode the rule of law. You can have your basic human rights, but you surrender all others when you commit a crime against justly enacted law. That's what you fail to understand.

I'm beginning to think people like you and Coyote hold no respect for the law. Otherwise you would demand that it be enforced. But you want the law to be selectively applied.

I SAID NOTHING ABOUT DENYING THEM THEIR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This isn’t a “law” nor is it a requirement. This is Trump torturing children for political gain and you cheering the abuse.

This is who you are. A selfish, amoral xenophobe who supports child abuse

They are illegal aliens, they have no constitutional rights. Who gives a fucking shit about them

Wrong.
Asylum seekers have a constitutional right to due process of their claim. Making that process criminal is decidedly unconstitutional.

No one has made seeking asylum criminal, you outrageous frigging liar.

Sure they did, dope.

If a person crosses illegally and immediately turns themselves in and claims asylum, they crossed for that reason.

Prosecuting them and separating them as a result is a new policy.

Sorry, asshole, but seeking asylum is not illegal. Crossing the border between ports of entry is, and committing a crime "for a really good reason" is still committing a crime. They are being prosecuted for their criminal act, not for seeking entry. There is no earthly reason whatsoever for a legitimate asylum seeker to EVER cross the border illegally.

You're cordially invited to stop lying and making shit up any time now.

All asylum seekers who cross illegally are prosecuted now. That was not the case six weeks ago, dope.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Trump is separating parents from kids because they committed a misdemeanor. That being the case, you had better not exceed the speed limit in your state.

You shouldn't exceed the speed limit, anyway. But yeah, you definitely shouldn't do anything in a car, with your kids present, that gets you arrested. You shouldn't do anything AT ALL that carries with it the chance of being arrested when you have your kids with you, because they will ALWAYS be taken away from you while you're in the pokey. I have no idea why it's a shock to you that kids aren't jailed along with their parents.

But this really cuts to the heart of the matter. You leftists keep yabbling mindlessly about "just a misdemeanor", when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

No. What we really mean is there are ways to deal with this without separation being a result. Trump knows this. Separation was always their intention.

From march of 17. Video in link.

"Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly says the Trump administration is considering separating children from their parents to deter families from trying to enter the United States illegally"

Kelly: Separating families under consideration - CNN Video

No, what you really mean is that unrestricted, unregulated immigration was always your intention. There is a way to deal with this, but it runs through Congress, not the President.

I don't give a tin shit what stupid stuff Kelly spewed out. People are always saying dumb things, and unlike you, I don't focus my whole life around people and personalities and who-said-what. Every single bit of my argument is based on the actual laws, and you have yet to dispute a one of them.

Dispute my points, or admit defeat. Trying to move the goalposts is the same as admitting defeat.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Trump is separating parents from kids because they committed a misdemeanor. That being the case, you had better not exceed the speed limit in your state.

/----/ Trump isn't separating anyone. It's a consequence of breaking the law.

“I hate the children being taken away. The Democrats have to change their law. That’s their law.”
— President Trump, in remarks to reporters at the White House, June 15

“We have the worst immigration laws in the entire world. Nobody has such sad, such bad and, actually, in many cases, such horrible and tough — you see about child separation, you see what’s going on there.”
— Trump, in remarks at the White House, June 18

“Because of the Flores consent decree and a 9th Circuit Court decision, ICE can only keep families detained together for a very short period of time.”
— Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in a speech in Bozeman, Mont., June 7

It's a result of their zero tolerance policy, dope.

Please tell us what they did during their first year. Did they separate families in this way? Of course not. It's a new policy.

/——/ It’s better than the democRAT Policy of Turing America into a shythole.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This isn’t a “law” nor is it a requirement. This is Trump torturing children for political gain and you cheering the abuse.

This is who you are. A selfish, amoral xenophobe who supports child abuse

Is this all you can say? Are you so wrapped up in emotion you're willing to claim someone supports child abuse purely because they disagree with you politically?

You certainly aren't in opposition in this case.

Ha. Of what? Child abuse? That's weaksauce man.

My father was a victim of child abuse, he routinely told me horror stories. He was molested by his brother and beaten with a crossiron. He was starved, and his father tried to kill him.

No. Don't you dare insinuate that I support child abuse. None of what our President does to these children comes remotely close to that level of child abuse. Nor does it rise to the level of child abuse at all.

Causing mental and emotional harm to children over prolonged periods of time is certainly child abuse. Especially when done when discrestion allows for altenatives.

Then perhaps their parents shouldn't do it.

And we all know about your "discretion allows for alternatives", otherwise known as "just stop enforcing the border!"

Then perhaps their parents shouldn't do it.

And we all know about your "discretion allows for alternatives", otherwise known as "just stop enforcing the border!"

The parents aren't doing it. The govt is.

Discretion as in prosecutorial discretion, dope.

All of the people will be dealt with. Those who don't qualify or apply for asylum are deported immediately. Those who qualify are processed. Those granted asylum can stay and those denied are immediately deported.

Where is there "no enforcement" in that?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Over the last 26 years we have granted asylum to 1.9 million people. That's only .5% of the US population. The average is about 20,000/yr. 40% of those that apply and pass pre-screening are granted asylum after 3 to 6 mos of interviews and investigation. I seriously doubt that Trump would allow that many in the country. In fact, I don't see any reason he would allow any. There's nothing political or financial in it for him.

Exactly right and the rates of those granted asylum have been dropping for decades.

The truth is, they don't want any immigrants at all from the south. It's more about keeping a white majority nation than anything else. None of them will admit that though.

So even if that was the case, what's wrong with that? Show me one race of people that would support being made a minority in their own country outside of Surrender First whites.

Is race more important than being American?

Both are important, especially if you are the race the Democrats want to wipe out.

Just admit that for you, it's all about keeping brown people out of America.
Don't be a pussy and stop dancing around that point you so desperately are trying to make.

/———/ Ahhh the good old race card has been dealt

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Obviously, we need to cut through the rhetorical bullshit one more time.

1) The rules about detaining children HAVE NOT changed. Trump IS NOT doing anything new in regards to detaining children. The government has been required to release children from detention within 20 days ever since the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals extended the Flores Consent Decree (aka the Flores Settlement) to include accompanied minors in 2016. What Trump has changed is how we deal with adults. Where Obama used the Flores Settlement and the accompanying Ninth Circuit ruling as an excuse to give adults a free pass if they could claim to be part of a family unit, Trump is insisting on treating those adults like the criminals they are.

2) Separation of children from adults happens only in three cases: if the adult is not the child's parent, if the adult is a threat to the child, or if the adult is put into criminal proceedings. In other words, the exact same circumstances under which a child would be taken from an adult even among our own citizenry.

3) When an illegal is prosecuted, he is taken into custody by the US Marshals. The US Marshals do not, EVER, take care of the children of people they take into custody, no matter who that person is or what they're being arrested for. Just as with anyone in this situation, the children are taken custody of by HHS, which cares for them in temporary shelters until they know whether the adult will be deported or will apply for asylum.

4) Assuming the illegal has not committed another crime, the criminal proceedings are short. Usually, the illegal pleads guilty, they are sentenced to time served, and they are returned to ICE. This typically happens in one day. At that point, the adult is reunited with the child, and the whole kit and kaboodle are deported back to where they came from. If the adult is truly concerned about being separated from the child, they can easily put an end to it.

5) The separation only becomes extended if the illegal immigrant himself chooses to make it so by applying for asylum. THAT procedure pretty much always takes longer than the government is allowed, by law, to hold the child. When that time limit is reached, the child is placed with a responsible party. Quite often, that is a relative or friend of the illegal immigrant, because illegal immigrants often have connections to people who are already in the country.

6) If the adult is held while their asylum claim is processed, it is likely to go through the system much more quickly, a couple of months as opposed to dragging on for years. If the adult is released into the population, he is highly unlikely to return for his court dates. We know this from experience.

7) There is no reason whatsoever for someone who is legitimately looking for asylum to cross the border illegally. They have only to approach a port of entry and state their desire for asylum. They are NOT arrested when they do this, and not separated from their children. The fact that border crossings dried up at the beginning of the Trump administration and only started again when rumors went around that the policy on the border had not changed indicates that the vast majority of these people are NOT refugees fleeing persecution, but simply prefer the economic benefits of being in the US.

8) In April, the New York Times reported:

Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

"It is common to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.” - azcentral.com

But since our policies have favored family units over single adults, we have created an incentive to put children in peril. How can anyone who claims to care about the well-being of these children advocate policies which encourage their endangerment?

9) Congress has the power to change all of this by one simple vote. They can pass a law overruling the Flores Settlement; they can pass a law mandating family detention, and providing funding to make it possible. So why is it that the only bill that has been introduced in Congress to address this situation has come from the Republicans, who are being vilified, and the Democrats are too busy grandstanding for the media to propose anything at all?

Lots of good information but the fact remains there is no law that requires Trump to separate the kids from their parents at the border. This is policy which can be changed at the discretion of the president. Claiming the law made me do it is just bullshit. He clearly feels separating the kids from the parents is a determent so why doesn't he admit it. I'm sure most of his supporters would agree.

The fact remains that there ARE laws that require it. I realize that you think the President can just pick and choose what laws to obey and how to do so, but don't think for a second that I believe you wouldn't be screaming about "imperial Presidency" if Trump started acting like Obama.

It is the law that crossing the border without permission is a criminal act. It is the law that the President is required to enforce the law. And it is the law that children cannot be held longer than 20 days.

It is not President Trump's job to make law, or to ignore it.

The fact remains that there ARE laws that require it.

Only after the parents are prosecuted which is the new policy, fool.

No, dumbshit, the law requires that if the parents are arrested, the children cannot be detained for longer than 20 days. Period. End of discussion. You can say, "Trump can just sign an order to ignore that" and force me to say it for 100 more times on top of the 100 you've done it so far, but the answer will remain the same.

The only fool here is the one who deliberately forgets what he's told five seconds after it's said, because he REALLY wants to believe he can wish the world different.

Let me save you some time.

The law requires that children whose parents have been arrested MUST not be detained longer than 20 days.

"Trump could just issue and executive order and change that."

The President does not have the legal authority to ignore or change the law unilaterally. Congress could change it, but I notice you're not spending ANY time excoriating the people who have that power, and ALL your time blaming someone who doesn't.

Until I hear you say something about "Why doesn't Congress do something?" you lack all moral credibility on this subject, and have summarily lost the debate.

There. Now copy and paste that somewhere, and stop chasing your tail.

No, dumbshit, the law requires that if the parents are arrested, the children cannot be detained for longer than 20 days.

"If"

The new policy changed that to "when".

The separation is the result of their zero tolerance, 100% prosecution policy, dope.

There's no getting around that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration. Just like Jackson didn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of getting gold. They both thought they had the right to do this because they considered themselves as representing America's best interests. I'm giving Trump the benefit of the doubt since I believe he's doing it because he wants to placate his base. I believe, if your willing to disregard morality when going after goals, you are nothing more then a thug and history will judge you accordingly.

That's IF you think what he's doing is immoral; enforcing the law and trying to provide a deterrent.

I don't think taking kids away from "people" who dragged them across a place like Mexico, dirty, hungry and confused, putting them someplace where they get showers, food, medical care, new clothing, a bed to sleep in; something they probably haven't seen in over two weeks, as being immoral.

I see. This is only if you

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration. Just like Jackson didn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of getting gold. They both thought they had the right to do this because they considered themselves as representing America's best interests. I'm giving Trump the benefit of the doubt since I believe he's doing it because he wants to placate his base. I believe, if your willing to disregard morality when going after goals, you are nothing more then a thug and history will judge you accordingly.

That's IF you think what he's doing is immoral; enforcing the law and trying to provide a deterrent.

I don't think taking kids away from "people" who dragged them across a place like Mexico, dirty, hungry and confused, putting them someplace where they get showers, food, medical care, new clothing, a bed to sleep in; something they probably haven't seen in over two weeks, as being immoral.

By that logic everybody who ever emigrated with kids should all lose their parental rights. See the only way your argument works is, if you see parents who try to cross the border as reckless and not desperate. By the way I love how you so studiously used air quotes when saying people. So you didn't have to use parents. Like taking away parents from their children because of something that is even by law a simple misdemeanor is not by it's very nature immoral and makes them undeserving of raising a kid.

A "simple misdemeanor" that puts your kids into a risky, dangerous situation.

A "simple misdemeanor" that puts your kids into a risky, dangerous situation.

Which is of course much better than the situation they're fleeing.

There's an old saying regarding the actions of refugees. " Parents only put their children in a boat whe the land is no longer safe."

What a load of horseshit. I realize you want to pretend that every single one of these people is fleeing horrible persecution, but the fact is that most of them just want to take advantage of our standard of living. Which is understandable, but it's also not my fucking problem.

I don't have to pretend anything. We have a process that determines that. It's you pretending that is not the case.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The parents aren't doing it. The govt is.

No.

Do you think these children suddenly developed a sudden societal and environmental awareness and decided to come here on their own? No. The parents chose to send them here, alone. Adults claiming to be parents smuggled them here, only to leave them alone when they were detained for crossing illegally. You are so damned ignorant that you can't see these people are taking advantage of our system. That system must be changed. With or without your help.

 

[forkup]

Trump is separating parents from kids because they committed a misdemeanor. That being the case, you had better not exceed the speed limit in your state.

You shouldn't exceed the speed limit, anyway. But yeah, you definitely shouldn't do anything in a car, with your kids present, that gets you arrested. You shouldn't do anything AT ALL that carries with it the chance of being arrested when you have your kids with you, because they will ALWAYS be taken away from you while you're in the pokey. I have no idea why it's a shock to you that kids aren't jailed along with their parents.

But this really cuts to the heart of the matter. You leftists keep yabbling mindlessly about "just a misdemeanor", when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

The difference is in most traffic violations you don't go to jail and if you do, you can request bail.

And yes, our immigration laws do consider a first time offense of crossing the boarder illegally a misdemeanor, a minor wrongdoing by definition. A first time offense carries a maximum of 6 mos in jail which is rarely used. To give you an idea how minor the offense is, Misdemeanor Trespassing carries a heavier penalty in most states and it wasn't until the 1996 immigration reform law that there was any legal penalty at all.

The first step in fixing the immigration system is to fix the law.

There is another difference. If they take away your kids for speeding, unlikely but I'll accept it. You have an actual idea were they are, and you can be certain that you will get them back after you get out of the "pokey" as you so colorfully said, providing that's the only thing you did, not only that you will have the benefit of assured legal representation. The people who get caught here have none of these assurances.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Obviously, we need to cut through the rhetorical bullshit one more time.

1) The rules about detaining children HAVE NOT changed. Trump IS NOT doing anything new in regards to detaining children. The government has been required to release children from detention within 20 days ever since the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals extended the Flores Consent Decree (aka the Flores Settlement) to include accompanied minors in 2016. What Trump has changed is how we deal with adults. Where Obama used the Flores Settlement and the accompanying Ninth Circuit ruling as an excuse to give adults a free pass if they could claim to be part of a family unit, Trump is insisting on treating those adults like the criminals they are.

2) Separation of children from adults happens only in three cases: if the adult is not the child's parent, if the adult is a threat to the child, or if the adult is put into criminal proceedings. In other words, the exact same circumstances under which a child would be taken from an adult even among our own citizenry.

3) When an illegal is prosecuted, he is taken into custody by the US Marshals. The US Marshals do not, EVER, take care of the children of people they take into custody, no matter who that person is or what they're being arrested for. Just as with anyone in this situation, the children are taken custody of by HHS, which cares for them in temporary shelters until they know whether the adult will be deported or will apply for asylum.

4) Assuming the illegal has not committed another crime, the criminal proceedings are short. Usually, the illegal pleads guilty, they are sentenced to time served, and they are returned to ICE. This typically happens in one day. At that point, the adult is reunited with the child, and the whole kit and kaboodle are deported back to where they came from. If the adult is truly concerned about being separated from the child, they can easily put an end to it.

5) The separation only becomes extended if the illegal immigrant himself chooses to make it so by applying for asylum. THAT procedure pretty much always takes longer than the government is allowed, by law, to hold the child. When that time limit is reached, the child is placed with a responsible party. Quite often, that is a relative or friend of the illegal immigrant, because illegal immigrants often have connections to people who are already in the country.

6) If the adult is held while their asylum claim is processed, it is likely to go through the system much more quickly, a couple of months as opposed to dragging on for years. If the adult is released into the population, he is highly unlikely to return for his court dates. We know this from experience.

7) There is no reason whatsoever for someone who is legitimately looking for asylum to cross the border illegally. They have only to approach a port of entry and state their desire for asylum. They are NOT arrested when they do this, and not separated from their children. The fact that border crossings dried up at the beginning of the Trump administration and only started again when rumors went around that the policy on the border had not changed indicates that the vast majority of these people are NOT refugees fleeing persecution, but simply prefer the economic benefits of being in the US.

8) In April, the New York Times reported:

Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

"It is common to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.” - azcentral.com

But since our policies have favored family units over single adults, we have created an incentive to put children in peril. How can anyone who claims to care about the well-being of these children advocate policies which encourage their endangerment?

9) Congress has the power to change all of this by one simple vote. They can pass a law overruling the Flores Settlement; they can pass a law mandating family detention, and providing funding to make it possible. So why is it that the only bill that has been introduced in Congress to address this situation has come from the Republicans, who are being vilified, and the Democrats are too busy grandstanding for the media to propose anything at all?

Lots of good information but the fact remains there is no law that requires Trump to separate the kids from their parents at the border. This is policy which can be changed at the discretion of the president. Claiming the law made me do it is just bullshit. He clearly feels separating the kids from the parents is a determent so why doesn't he admit it. I'm sure most of his supporters would agree.

The fact remains that there ARE laws that require it. I realize that you think the President can just pick and choose what laws to obey and how to do so, but don't think for a second that I believe you wouldn't be screaming about "imperial Presidency" if Trump started acting like Obama.

It is the law that crossing the border without permission is a criminal act. It is the law that the President is required to enforce the law. And it is the law that children cannot be held longer than 20 days.

It is not President Trump's job to make law, or to ignore it.

The fact remains that there ARE laws that require it.

Only after the parents are prosecuted which is the new policy, fool.

No, dumbshit, the law requires that if the parents are arrested, the children cannot be detained for longer than 20 days. Period. End of discussion. You can say, "Trump can just sign an order to ignore that" and force me to say it for 100 more times on top of the 100 you've done it so far, but the answer will remain the same.

The only fool here is the one who deliberately forgets what he's told five seconds after it's said, because he REALLY wants to believe he can wish the world different.

Let me save you some time.

The law requires that children whose parents have been arrested MUST not be detained longer than 20 days.

"Trump could just issue and executive order and change that."

The President does not have the legal authority to ignore or change the law unilaterally. Congress could change it, but I notice you're not spending ANY time excoriating the people who have that power, and ALL your time blaming someone who doesn't.

Until I hear you say something about "Why doesn't Congress do something?" you lack all moral credibility on this subject, and have summarily lost the debate.

There. Now copy and paste that somewhere, and stop chasing your tail.

Most Dem Voters just don't have the mental capacity to understand how our three branches of government work.

Most Dem Voters just don't have the mental capacity to understand how our three branches of government work

Explain it to us, professor.

 

[Flopper]

The equivalent is that Trump doesn't let morality stand in the way of his goal of ending immigration..

Trump's Not Seizing Their Lands
Marching Them Off To Death
Or Rescinding Any Of Their Rightful Citizenship Claims

To Compare What Is Happening Along Our Border Now
To What Jackson Did Then And NAZIism
Is The Height Of Hyperbole

You Folks Cheapen Words Like
'Hitler' And 'Atrocity' Every Time You Use Them
Because You Use Them To Describe Everything
From Having Your Feelings Hurt To Stubbing Your Toes

So Save It
There Is NO Equivalence
Not In The Analogy That Was Used To Compare Trump To Jackson Or NAZIs

But The Equivalence Does Apply To Jackson (A Democrat)
To Your 'Hitlers' And Your 'Atrocities'

He is just abusing children. No big deal to his base.

If one child slipped through, and ended up dead or trafficed as a sex slave, because we did not find out DEFINITIVELY that the adult was the child's parent, you would cry foul on the administration.

How proud that must make you, getting your cake and eating it too.

How proud you must be supporting a policy that tears children from their parents arms WITHOUT regard. Stop pretending it has anything to do with stopping trafficking, you and I both know it doent and that is directky from the mouths of those who impmemented it as a deterrant. At least have the integrity to be honest about it.

------------------------- i don't care about the TRAFFICKING . I just want to scare the zhit out of the third worlders that they might have their kids taken from them if they violate American Law Coyote . --------------------- just a comment .

Scare them? You have to be joking. In Guatemala children 10 to 15 are routinely kidnapped, raped and murdered and the police don't even investigation. Teens are forcibly recruitment by street gangs and transnational drug cartels, after witnessed the murders of family members, friends and classmates. Exactly how do you plan to scare the shit out of them?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trump is separating parents from kids because they committed a misdemeanor. That being the case, you had better not exceed the speed limit in your state.

You shouldn't exceed the speed limit, anyway. But yeah, you definitely shouldn't do anything in a car, with your kids present, that gets you arrested. You shouldn't do anything AT ALL that carries with it the chance of being arrested when you have your kids with you, because they will ALWAYS be taken away from you while you're in the pokey. I have no idea why it's a shock to you that kids aren't jailed along with their parents.

But this really cuts to the heart of the matter. You leftists keep yabbling mindlessly about "just a misdemeanor", when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

when what you REALLY mean is "crossing the border is unimportant and should be ignored".

No. What we really mean is there are ways to deal with this without separation being a result. Trump knows this. Separation was always their intention.

From march of 17. Video in link.

"Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly says the Trump administration is considering separating children from their parents to deter families from trying to enter the United States illegally"

Kelly: Separating families under consideration - CNN Video

No, what you really mean is that unrestricted, unregulated immigration was always your intention. There is a way to deal with this, but it runs through Congress, not the President.

I don't give a tin shit what stupid stuff Kelly spewed out. People are always saying dumb things, and unlike you, I don't focus my whole life around people and personalities and who-said-what. Every single bit of my argument is based on the actual laws, and you have yet to dispute a one of them.

Dispute my points, or admit defeat. Trying to move the goalposts is the same as admitting defeat.

No, what you really mean is that unrestricted, unregulated immigration was always your intention.

That's not what I mean at all and I've told you that several times now, dope.

Obviously the process for determining eligibility for asylum is neither unresricted nor unregulated.

I've disputed and debunked your argument each time.

It is their policy to separate families as a deterrent. Period.
If you won't take the word of the then DHS secretary, then you're truly lost.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Exactly right and the rates of those granted asylum have been dropping for decades.

The truth is, they don't want any immigrants at all from the south. It's more about keeping a white majority nation than anything else. None of them will admit that though.

So even if that was the case, what's wrong with that? Show me one race of people that would support being made a minority in their own country outside of Surrender First whites.

Is race more important than being American?

Both are important, especially if you are the race the Democrats want to wipe out.

Just admit that for you, it's all about keeping brown people out of America.
Don't be a pussy and stop dancing around that point you so desperately are trying to make.

/———/ Ahhh the good old race card has been dealt

^Another cowardly denier.

 

[forkup]

Trump's Not Seizing Their Lands
Marching Them Off To Death
Or Rescinding Any Of Their Rightful Citizenship Claims

To Compare What Is Happening Along Our Border Now
To What Jackson Did Then And NAZIism
Is The Height Of Hyperbole

You Folks Cheapen Words Like
'Hitler' And 'Atrocity' Every Time You Use Them
Because You Use Them To Describe Everything
From Having Your Feelings Hurt To Stubbing Your Toes

So Save It
There Is NO Equivalence
Not In The Analogy That Was Used To Compare Trump To Jackson Or NAZIs

But The Equivalence Does Apply To Jackson (A Democrat)
To Your 'Hitlers' And Your 'Atrocities'

He is just abusing children. No big deal to his base.

If one child slipped through, and ended up dead or trafficed as a sex slave, because we did not find out DEFINITIVELY that the adult was the child's parent, you would cry foul on the administration.

How proud that must make you, getting your cake and eating it too.

How proud you must be supporting a policy that tears children from their parents arms WITHOUT regard. Stop pretending it has anything to do with stopping trafficking, you and I both know it doent and that is directky from the mouths of those who impmemented it as a deterrant. At least have the integrity to be honest about it.

------------------------- i don't care about the TRAFFICKING . I just want to scare the zhit out of the third worlders that they might have their kids taken from them if they violate American Law Coyote . --------------------- just a comment .

Scare them? You have to be joking. In Guatemala children 10 to 15 are routinely kidnapped, raped and murdered and the police don't even investigation. Teens are forcibly recruitment by street gangs and transnational drug cartels, after witnessed the murders of family members, friends and classmates. Exactly how do you plan to scare the shit out of them?

Yes how insanely irresponsible off parents to try to go to the US when they so obviously live in paradise. You should definitely punish parents like that and send them on their way minus the children. After all they deserve no better. (I hope I laid on the sarcasm thick enough)

 

[Cellblock2429]

So even if that was the case, what's wrong with that? Show me one race of people that would support being made a minority in their own country outside of Surrender First whites.

Is race more important than being American?

Both are important, especially if you are the race the Democrats want to wipe out.

Just admit that for you, it's all about keeping brown people out of America.
Don't be a pussy and stop dancing around that point you so desperately are trying to make.

/———/ Ahhh the good old race card has been dealt

^Another cowardly denier.

/—-/ When all else fails call your opponent a racist.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The parents aren't doing it. The govt is.

No.

Do you think these children suddenly developed a sudden societal and environmental awareness and decided to come here on their own? No. The parents chose to send them here, alone. Adults claiming to be parents smuggled them here, only to leave them alone when they were detained for crossing illegally. You are so damned ignorant that you can't see these people are taking advantage of our system. That system must be changed. With or without your help.

The govt, through policy, is deciding to prosecute 100% them. Including those seeking asylum.The result of said prosecution is separation. This was not the case six weeks ago.