Jump to content


Photo

Because Trump 2.0


  • Please log in to reply
4934 replies to this topic

#4921 Paul G.

Paul G.

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,886 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted Today, 11:29 AM

Is there any logistical reason why families couldn't be detained as a solid unit while their status is established? Would you support legislation that bypassed the previous legal issue?

I just explained above. The 2015 case found the government in VIOLATION because it was housing Mothers and kids in the same unlicensed facilities.

Do you think there's any logistical reason why a facility with secure holding, air conditioning, privacy for women and kids, medical facilities, class rooms, kitchens, places to eat, etc, etc, etc And LICENSED by a state agency for holding children can't be built rapidly to satisfy demand of thousands of illegals who just show up at multiple places along the southern US Border?

Here's the agreement from the 1996 Flores v Reno case.
https://www.aclu.org...ement011797.pdf

And here's guidance from DHS on the issue.
https://www.oig.dhs....0-117_Sep10.pdf

Apparently the dear leader disagrees with you.

https://www.reuters....x-idUSKBN1JG26J
  • 0

#4922 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,029 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted Today, 11:30 AM


  • 0

#4923 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,656 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted Today, 11:35 AM

Is there any logistical reason why families couldn't be detained as a solid unit while their status is established? Would you support legislation that bypassed the previous legal issue?


I just explained above. The 2015 case found the government in VIOLATION because it was housing Mothers and kids in the same unlicensed facilities.

Do you think there's any logistical reason why a facility with secure holding, air conditioning, privacy for women and kids, medical facilities, class rooms, kitchens, places to eat, etc, etc, etc And LICENSED by a state agency for holding children can't be built rapidly to satisfy demand of thousands of illegals who just show up at multiple places along the southern US Border?

Here's the agreement from the 1996 Flores v Reno case.
https://www.aclu.org...ement011797.pdf

And here's guidance from DHS on the issue.
https://www.oig.dhs....0-117_Sep10.pdf


I have a hard time believing the current shelters for kids are licensed.

In any case, the argument has apparently been overtaken by events as Paul noted:

https://www.nytimes....WT.nav=top-news
  • 0

#4924 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted Today, 01:29 PM

In any case, the argument has apparently been overtaken by events as Paul noted:

https://www.nytimes....WT.nav=top-news

Get your tissues handy, the assumption is that Trumps order will essentially be the Cruz bill but without the increase of judges* necessary to streamline and expedite the cases.

*Because authorizing judges and funding for them really, really is a legislative duty.
  • 0

#4925 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted Today, 02:19 PM

Kinda starting to think a major opportunity was missed here. Just imaine, if after FLOTUS weighed in...

 

"Fellow Americans, as you know, I am strictly against the illegal immigration and tend to drive the hard line, however what my lovely wife said recently made me look deeper into the issue of families and I found that this inhumane policy was set up by the previous administration under Barack Obama - because I value families and human rights, I have signed an EO suspending this practice immediately amd I hope the Democratic party will join the Republican in search for a solid solution of a mess they helped to create..."

 

If nothing else, it would confuse everyone, stick to the "AntiObama" line and put Democrats into the spotlight. And the GOP. 


  • 0

#4926 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,656 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, New York City

Posted Today, 02:38 PM

In any case, the argument has apparently been overtaken by events as Paul noted:

https://www.nytimes....WT.nav=top-news

Get your tissues handy, the assumption is that Trumps order will essentially be the Cruz bill but without the increase of judges* necessary to streamline and expedite the cases.

*Because authorizing judges and funding for them really, really is a legislative duty.


Oh most certainly. But that wasn't the issue that had most people's attention. That said he hasn't signed it yet, and with all things Trump, it is never over until box goes into the hole.
  • 0

#4927 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,241 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted Today, 02:40 PM

Kinda starting to think a major opportunity was missed here. Just imaine, if after FLOTUS weighed in...

 

"Fellow Americans, as you know, I am strictly against the illegal immigration and tend to drive the hard line, however what my lovely wife said recently made me look deeper into the issue of families and I found that this inhumane policy was set up by the previous administration under Barack Obama - because I value families and human rights, I have signed an EO suspending this practice immediately amd I hope the Democratic party will join the Republican in search for a solid solution of a mess they helped to create..."

 

If nothing else, it would confuse everyone, stick to the "AntiObama" line and put Democrats into the spotlight. And the GOP. 

 

 

What? I have only barely registered that families are being separated at the moment at the border. This is a policy by the Obama admin? :huh:

 

any proof for that like an official document on a .gov server or some such? I gratefully would pass that along.


  • 0

#4928 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,234 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted Today, 02:45 PM

The roots of the policy go back to the Clinton years. Flores v Reno.

The INS detains people. The challenge is caring for them, protecting them and dealing with medical complications as well as language issues while doing so. The patterns of illegal immigration and asylum seeking also means that there's going to be surges that will exceed capacity.

At this point they ought to just put up some fences around some University campuses and use the dorms for housing the illegals.  Screw the cost. Spread the pain to the left.


Also:
https://www.dhs.gov/...olerance-policy


Edited by rmgill, Today, 02:58 PM.

  • 0

#4929 Marek Tucan

Marek Tucan

    Powerpoint Ranger, Chairborne

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,921 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Versailles, France

Posted Today, 03:23 PM

Basically Obama started detentions of migrant families, thgus running into the Reno vs. Flores case restricting detention of children, leading to children being separated. 


  • 0

#4930 Andres Vera

Andres Vera

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Becoming a helicopter pilot for the Pinochet administration

Posted Today, 03:33 PM

Hitler had grandiose plans, didn't turn out to well for him in the end.

Just to be clear, Turmp is Hitler this week, not Drumpf? OK, I get confused with the terminology.


  • 0

#4931 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,029 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted Today, 03:54 PM

Sounds like Mexicans should quit bringing their kids into the US illegally.


  • 0

#4932 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted Today, 04:06 PM

These pictures are from 2014-2016 when the exalted one, the Immortal Icon, The Obama was president.  Funny, I don't recall our resident NeverTrumpers and leftists being at all concerned about the wretched conditions children, separated from their parents, were living during Dear Obama's reign.  Maybe because Leftist Shit don't stink?

http://dailycaller.c...tion-facilities

 

RTR3UJ9V.jpg

RTR3UIPM.jpg

RTR3UIBF.jpg


  • 0

#4933 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,241 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted Today, 04:36 PM

thanks all. In the media here there is only breathless "satan trump is eating babies" about what is going on.

 

Basically Obama started detentions of migrant families, thgus running into the Reno vs. Flores case restricting detention of children, leading to children being separated. 

 

But actually putting the children in detention, because they cannot let them run around without supervison from their parents for obvious reasons. :wacko:

 

wow. just wow. What a circle jerking FUBAR situation of a royal fuckup. and the self-rightous left is screaming for ICE and or Trump blood. Doesn't matter why they are forced to do this (hey congress, change the laws) and that the water jogger did this too without oing anything about it. Wow.

 

 

But it is of course all Trump's fault. :glare:


  • 0

#4934 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,805 posts

Posted 55 minutes ago

http://www.politifac...t-families-was/

 

 

Critics of the Trump administration’s separating of families illegally crossing the U.S. border with Mexico have characterized the practice as a distinctly cruel feature of Donald Trump’s presidency.

 
But some Republican commentators argue the policy is essentially a continuation of previous administrations.
 
"You know what's ironic? It's the same way Barack Obama did it," conservative commentator Matt Schlapp said during the June 15 broadcast of Fox News' America's Newsroom. "This is the problem with all of these things, the outrage you see coming from the left. There wasn't outrage over Barack Obama separating kids from adults."
 
While the Obama administration's immigration approach was not without controversy, it’s simply untrue to say he had a policy of separating families.
 
Trump policy
Let’s recap what the Trump administration is doing, before turning to Obama’s handling of immigration.
 
Attorney General Jeff Sessions in April announced a "zero-tolerance" policy, meaning every person caught crossing the border illegally would be referred for federal prosecution.
 
A good number of these people are adult migrants traveling with children. By law, when adults are detained and criminally prosecuted, their children cannot be housed with them in jail. Instead, kids are placed in a Department of Health and Human Services shelter until they can be released to a legal guardian.
 
Some 2,000 children have been separated from the adults they were traveling with across the U.S. border, according to the latest figures from the Department of Homeland Security. The children were separated from 1,940 adults from April 19 through May 31 as a result of border-crossing prosecutions.
 
Obama policy
Immigration experts we spoke to said Obama-era policies did lead to some family separations, but only relatively rarely, and nowhere near the rate of the Trump administration. (A Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman said the Obama administration did not count the number of families separated at the border.)
 
"Obama generally refrained from prosecution in cases involving adults who crossed the border with their kids," said Peter Margulies, an immigration law and national security law professor at Roger Williams University School of Law. "In contrast, the current administration has chosen to prosecute adult border-crossers, even when they have kids. That's a choice — one fundamentally different from the choice made by both Obama and previous presidents of both parties."
 
Denise Gilman, a law professor who directs the immigration clinic at the University of Texas School of Law, said immigration attorneys "occasionally" saw separated families under the Obama administration.
 
"However, these families were usually reunited quite quickly once identified," she said, "even if that meant release of a parent from adult detention."
 
In Trump’s case, family separations are a feature, not a bug, of the administration’s border policies, said David Fitzgerald, who co-directs the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies.
 
"The family separations are not the small-scale collateral consequences of a border policy, but rather, a deliberate initiative," he added.
 
Former Obama officials in recent interviews drew sharp distinctions between Trump’s policy and that of his predecessors.
 
The Trump administration's current approach is modeled after Operation Streamline, a 2005 program under the administration of George W. Bush, according to Obama spokesman Eric Schultz. The key difference, he said, is that while the 2005 program referred all illegal immigrants for prosecution, it made exceptions for adults traveling with children.
 
Jeh Johnson, Obama’s Homeland Security secretary from 2013 to the end of his presidency, said such separations occurred in rare cases, but never as a matter of policy.
 
"I can't say that it never happened. There may have been some exigent situation, some emergency," Johnson told NPR June 9. "There may have been some doubt about whether the adult accompanying the child was in fact the parent of the child. I can't say it never happened — but not as a matter of policy or practice. It's not something that I could ask our Border Patrol or our immigration enforcement personnel to do."
 
Obama’s top domestic policy adviser, Cecilia Muñoz, said the Obama administration briefly weighed the separation of parents from children, before deciding against it.
 
"I do remember looking at each other like, ‘We’re not going to do this, are we?’ We spent five minutes thinking it through and concluded that it was a bad idea," she told the New York Times. "The morality of it was clear — that’s not who we are."
 
Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute, said that, as a deterrent, the Obama administration began prosecuting border-crossers who had already been deported at least once.
 
"But very few of those people crossed with children, so it didn’t become as visible an issue," he said. "There was some child separation and some pushback by immigrant advocacy groups around that, but the numbers were quite limited.
 
"The idea of prosecuting people who cross the border illegally the first time they are caught is entirely new," he added. "So we haven’t seen children separated from their parents on anything near this scale before."
 
The Obama administration’s immigration policy was not without controversy, to be sure.
 
In 2014, amid an influx of asylum seekers from Central America, the administration established large family detention centers to hold parents and children — potentially indefinitely — as a means of deterring other asylees. The practice eventually lost a legal challenge, resulting in a 2016 decision that stopped families from being detained together.
 
Schlapp told us that his claim referred to the fact that both Obama and Trump are bound by the same procedures prohibiting family detention.
 
However, Schlapp’s full comment gives the misleading impression that Trump is essentially continuing Obama’s policy, when in fact Trump’s zero tolerance policy is quite different.  

  • 0

#4935 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,029 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted 31 minutes ago

These pictures are from 2014-2016 when the exalted one, the Immortal Icon, The Obama was president.  Funny, I don't recall our resident NeverTrumpers and leftists being at all concerned about the wretched conditions children, separated from their parents, were living during Dear Obama's reign.  Maybe because Leftist Shit don't stink?

http://dailycaller.c...tion-facilities

 

RTR3UJ9V.jpg

RTR3UIPM.jpg

RTR3UIBF.jpg

 

Because they had not been told to be concerned yet. They had yet to get their marching orders from MSM. 


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users