Is the Summit the biggest news this offseason?

[Big_Blue79]

It's apples and apples vis-a-vis what you raised: new law versus new policy. I see that, like most, your view of that issue changes with the policy in question.

As far as what to do, is there evidence suggesting that the supposed deterrent effect here is meaningful? In other words, is the juice worth the squeeze? I suggest no, but I'm basing that on the limited effectiveness of deterrence re general criminal law versus the general cruelness of this choice the president and his minions.

Edit: I also take it that you concede that it was a choice by the Trump administration to implement this new policy, and that your argument re: new law was a red herring.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

It's apples and apples vis-a-vis what you raised: new law versus new policy. I see that, like most, your view of that issue changes with the policy in question.

As far as what to do, is there evidence suggesting that the supposed deterrent effect here is meaningful? In other words, is the juice worth the squeeze? I suggest no, but I'm basing that on the limited effectiveness of deterrence re general criminal law versus the general cruelness of this choice the president and his minions.

You only see perceived cruelness from one side. You see no value in acknowledging the actions of the families are putting those kids in the situation they are in. The fact is, they are taking a risk by entering the country illegally. They know the risks. All of them. They know that if they get caught, there is a chance they will be separated from their kids. Yet, they still choose to take that chance. And that is just talking about the kids who are actually with a parent / family member.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I see what the entire country sees, again there's a better way to fix this.

In your opinion, what is a better fix?

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

You only see perceived cruelness from one side. You see no value in acknowledging the actions of the families are putting those kids in the situation they are in. The fact is, they are taking a risk by entering the country illegally. They know the risks. All of them. They know that if they get caught, there is a chance they will be separated from their kids. Yet, they still choose to take that chance. And that is just talking about the kids who are actually with a parent / family member.

What makes you think that liberals are gonna start holding anyone but ‘pubs responsible for actions?

 

[treyforuk]

It's apples and apples vis-a-vis what you raised: new law versus new policy. I see that, like most, your view of that issue changes with the policy in question.

As far as what to do, is there evidence suggesting that the supposed deterrent effect here is meaningful? In other words, is the juice worth the squeeze? I suggest no, but I'm basing that on the limited effectiveness of deterrence re general criminal law versus the general cruelness of this choice the president and his minions.

Edit: I also take it that you concede that it was a choice by the Trump administration to implement this new policy, and that your argument re: new law was a red herring.

I'm not good at posting source. But nationalreview.com has a very good explanation on splitting "families". Worth a read. Sorry for my tech skills..

 

[TheDude1]

You only see perceived cruelness from one side. You see no value in acknowledging the actions of the families are putting those kids in the situation they are in. The fact is, they are taking a risk by entering the country illegally. They know the risks. All of them. They know that if they get caught, there is a chance they will be separated from their kids. Yet, they still choose to take that chance. And that is just talking about the kids who are actually with a parent / family member.

This isn't true.

Every liberal here has acknowledged that the parents know the risk.

But they also have said that the risk is essential, that we, as parents, understand they wouldn't be taking this risk unless the other option was worse.

Letsgo, it shouldn't be hard for you to condemn this. It really shouldn't. There are ways to enforce the law without doing so in an unnecessarily cruel way. This is unnecessarily cruel.

This is also new. You said it isn't; that is not true.

"Contrary to the president’s public statements, no law requires families to necessarily be separated at the border. Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s “zero tolerance” announcement this spring that the government will prosecute all unlawful immigrants as criminals set up a situation in which children are removed when their parents are taken into federal custody.

Previous administrations made exceptions to such prosecutions for adults traveling with minor children, but the Trump administration has said it will not do so."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/17/us/politics/melania-trump-family-separation.html

And it isn't just liberals saying this. It isn't just all of us being fooled by the liberal media elite. This is the result of an actual directive from the current administration to do this. And it isn't just a bunch of complaining liberals...

Former First Lady and First Lady of Texas wrote about it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...df517a-7287-11e8-9780-b1dd6a09b549_story.html

"I live in a border state. I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our international boundaries, but this zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart."

Susan Collins, a Republican senator, spoke out against it...

"What the administration has decided to do is to separate children from their parents to try to send a message that, if you cross the border with children, your children are going to be ripped away from you. That is traumatizing to the children, who are innocent victims. And it is contrary to our values in this country.”

Paul Ryan spoke against it...

"We don’t want kids to be separated from their parents."

Franklin Graham, who led the prayer at Trump's inauguration, said...

"It's disgraceful. It's terrible to see families ripped apart and I don't support that one bit."

Ben Sasse, a Republican senator, said...

The policy decision is a "new, discretionary choice" and is "wicked" and "harmful to kids."

Will Hurd, a Republican representative from Texas, said...

The new policy is "absolutely unacceptable... taking kids from their mothers is not preventing terrorists or drugs from coming into this country."

So yeah. You are making this seem like some liberal media ploy, calling people brainwashed and all of this. It isn't. It just isn't. The law was in effect, but both Democratic and Republican presidents alike were decent enough to not split children from their families.

This should be an easy issue, and not getting it seems to me to be lacking a certain empathy.

You are only apparently able to blame the parents and call them out. You do not seem willing to actually address the politicians themselves who changed how these things are handled.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

@TheDude1 , every one of them can gaim asylum by entering at a legal port of entry. Why don't they? You are also ignoring how most of these kids are separated from their families. Trump enforcing immigration laws = monster. Kids being smuggled in by coyotes and human trafficking = doesn't fit my narrative.

 

[Big_Blue79]

^ again do you have a source on the "most" claim re: smugglers?

Sorry for any formatting/grammar errors this afternoon, on my phone.

 

[Big_Blue79]

You only see perceived cruelness from one side. You see no value in acknowledging the actions of the families are putting those kids in the situation they are in. The fact is, they are taking a risk by entering the country illegally. They know the risks. All of them. They know that if they get caught, there is a chance they will be separated from their kids. Yet, they still choose to take that chance. And that is just talking about the kids who are actually with a parent / family member.

Literally had a post discussing this very point.

 

[AWilli6995]

In your opinion, what is a better fix?

Conduct the interviews for a few hours then reunite the kids with their parents. If the interviews last over a period of days that shouldn’t mean the kids shouldn’t see thier parents.

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

Reality is nobody really knows what's going on unless you are one of the kids being detained or someone that is running one of these places. I have a feeling you would see an ugly truth behind all sides of it. It's why we need to go to extremely strict border regulations and immigration laws. Sh!t has been out of control for 30-35 years and is really bad now. We need to adopt a concept like Switzerland where they are flexible on foreign people working abroad but tight as hell on citizenship regulations and actually enforcing them when they are broken.

My response to this post is just two words:

HELL YES!

 

[Big_Blue79]

@TheDude1 , every one of them can gaim asylum by entering at a legal port of entry. Why don't they?

It's not that easy to get asylum. And if illegal immigrants are cognizant enough about administration policies re: separating families (the deterrent effect, to whatever degree it exists), they are certainly aware that asylum under Trump has also become more difficult.

There are issues with immigration as it currently exists and as it has existed. I, and many across the political spectrum, believe this is a cruel and ineffective way to address those problems.

 

[Big_Blue79]

There's a PBS story about asylum seekers being separated from their kids (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/sh...y-at-the-u-s-border?__twitter_impression=true). Officials say insufficient documentation of paternity. There's a lot of gray area in there, and room for discretion (here, the station says they saw the documents). There's a lot of wiggle room re third world documentation, and the US seems to be erring on the side of separating in close cases. And that's for asylum seekers who, to get asylum, have a lot of uphill battles to win. There's a lot of scammers, too.

There will be an immigration issue so long as there are such Stark differences in the living situations between nation states. Really, the best solution is improving the conditions in places like El Salvador.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

It's not that easy to get asylum. And if illegal immigrants are cognizant enough about administration policies re: separating families (the deterrent effect, to whatever degree it exists), they are certainly aware that asylum under Trump has also become more difficult.

There are issues with immigration as it currently exists and as it has existed. I, and many across the political spectrum, believe this is a cruel and ineffective way to address those problems.

I have said many times that it is hard to have this conversation without coming off as unsympathetic. But it would be a better bet to get asylum and not be separated from your kids if you chose the legal route, no?

This being an example of cruelness is an exaggeration. It is very unfortunate, and I as well as you hope that we can resolve the issue very quickly with common sense policies.

There's a PBS story about asylum seekers being separated from their kids (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/sh...y-at-the-u-s-border?__twitter_impression=true). Officials say insufficient documentation of paternity. There's a lot of gray area in there, and room for discretion (here, the station says they saw the documents). There's a lot of wiggle room re third world documentation, and the US seems to be erring on the side of separating in close cases. And that's for asylum seekers who, to get asylum, have a lot of uphill battles to win. There's a lot of scammers, too.

There will be an immigration issue so long as there are such Stark differences in the living situations between nation states. Really, the best solution is improving the conditions in places like El Salvador.

Again, at the risk of coming off as unsympathetic, let's discuss this scenario. Can you acknowledge that some of these kids are not related to some of the adults who are claiming to be their parent/guardian? Are you as concerned about human trafficking as you are about measures the border patrol takes to verify the relationship of the child and the adult?

There are going to be situations that make each side more right than the other. But what needs to happen in order to resolve anything is for both sides to stop blaming the other and work together to do it.

Making this issue a big deal when it wasn't a big deal for a lot of people 5 years ago is disgustingly hypocritical.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Conduct the interviews for a few hours then reunite the kids with their parents. If the interviews last over a period of days that shouldn’t mean the kids shouldn’t see thier parents.

What is the interview for?

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

There's a PBS story about asylum seekers being separated from their kids (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/sh...y-at-the-u-s-border?__twitter_impression=true). Officials say insufficient documentation of paternity. There's a lot of gray area in there, and room for discretion (here, the station says they saw the documents). There's a lot of wiggle room re third world documentation, and the US seems to be erring on the side of separating in close cases. And that's for asylum seekers who, to get asylum, have a lot of uphill battles to win. There's a lot of scammers, too.

There will be an immigration issue so long as there are such Stark differences in the living situations between nation states. Really, the best solution is improving the conditions in places like El Salvador.

Well why didn't you say so?? Sounds easy!

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

What is the interview for?

A job. Of course.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

Well why didn't you say so?? Sounds easy!

Fck Chicago. Fix El Salvador.

 

[brooky03]

This is a simpler argument than we're making it. The current administration is separating children from their parents as a punishment. It's not due to a lack of facilities or it being unduly stressful on the system to keep parents with their kids. It's punishment. It's a punishment that many, perhaps most, would consider cruel and unusual for the kids and the parents.

The punishment should fit the crime. Having your child ripped away and stuck in a holding cell, where physical contact with the 'caretakers' is not permitted, does not seem to fit the crime of walking from one piece of land to another but fvck me, right? I don't care whose fault this is, the government needs to man the fvck up, accept responsibility, and do the right thing. It's not that god damn hard.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

This is a simpler argument than we're making it. The current administration is separating children from their parents as a punishment. It's not due to a lack of facilities or it being unduly stressful on the system to keep parents with their kids. It's punishment. It's a punishment that many, perhaps most, would consider cruel and unusual for the kids and the parents.

The punishment should fit the crime. Having your child ripped away and stuck in a holding cell, where physical contact with the 'caretakers' is not permitted, does not seem to fit the crime of walking from one piece of land to another but fvck me, right? I don't care whose fault this is, the government needs to man the fvck up, accept responsibility, and do the right thing. It's not that god damn hard.

What did Obama do about it?

 

[Deathclutch]

What did Obama do about it?

What did Reagen do about it? Abraham Lincoln?

 

[AWilli6995]

What is the interview for?

Wow

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

What did Reagen do about it? Abraham Lincoln?

So we agree that it is not healthy to place blame on one president?

 

[brooky03]

What did Obama do about it?

what does that matter? is he the president right meow?

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

This is a simpler argument than we're making it. The current administration is separating children from their parents as a punishment. It's not due to a lack of facilities or it being unduly stressful on the system to keep parents with their kids. It's punishment. It's a punishment that many, perhaps most, would consider cruel and unusual for the kids and the parents.

The punishment should fit the crime. Having your child ripped away and stuck in a holding cell, where physical contact with the 'caretakers' is not permitted, does not seem to fit the crime of walking from one piece of land to another but fvck me, right? I don't care whose fault this is, the government needs to man the fvck up, accept responsibility, and do the right thing. It's not that god damn hard.

Your argument might be compelling if it were correct.

If brooky and his wife goes out and robs a bank, guess what? They separate you from your children. Because they put the perps in jail. Normal operating procedure. What are they supposed to do? If you do a crime the children don't have to go to jail with the parent. This argument is so stupid that it just reeks of politics.

Additionally 80% of the children are not with their fvcking parent to start with.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

what does that matter? is he the president right meow?

It matters because we are exploiting a problem that has existed for over a decade in order to demonize the sitting president. What we should be saying is, let's sit down and fix this. This may not be your fault, but you are in position to do something about it. Instead, you guys are acting like our immigration laws should be ignored.

 

[brooky03]

It matters because we are exploiting a problem that has existed for over a decade in order to demonize the sitting president. What we should be saying is, let's sit down and fix this. This may not be your fault, but you are in position to do something about it. Instead, you guys are acting like our immigration laws should be ignored.

The sitting POTUS is the one who enacted the policy to split up families crossing the border. This isn't a policy that Obama had enforced. This is Trump's shiny new turd.

 

[brooky03]

Your argument might be compelling if it were correct.

If brooky and his wife goes out and robs a bank, guess what? They separate you from your children. Because they put the perps in jail. Normal operating procedure. What are they supposed to do? If you do a crime the children don't have to go to jail with the parent. This argument is so stupid that it just reeks of politics.

Additionally 80% of the children are not with their fvcking parent to start with.

And guess what? The children go into foster care or to the care of a family member, not a cell. Don't parrot the nonsense Tucker Carlson craps out of his mouth.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

The sitting POTUS is the one who enacted the policy to split up families crossing the border. This isn't a policy that Obama had enforced. This is Trump's shiny new turd.

Our sitting president has enacted a policy that enforces laws that should have been enforced long ago. And that is one of the reasons he was elected.

Why are you outraged about families being separated now and not 5 years ago?

 

[brooky03]

Our sitting president has enacted a policy that enforces laws that should have been enforced long ago. And that is one of the reasons he was elected.

Why are you outraged about families being separated now and not 5 years ago?

because they weren't being separated 5 years ago; not on this scale, at the very least. that was an easy one. what else you got?

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

And guess what? The children go into foster care or to the care of a family member, not a cell. Don't parrot the nonsense Tucker Carlson craps out of his mouth.

So children were not being held in cells before Trump? Interesting.

because they weren't being separated 5 years ago; not on this scale, at the very least. that was an easy one. what else you got?

Cop out.

Remember when you claimed you weren't a lib?

 

[brooky03]

So children were not being held in cells before Trump? Interesting.


Cop out.

Remember when you claimed you weren't a lib?

Nobody said kids weren't held in cells briefly under prior administrations. We are all aware of the photo during the Obama administration that shows the unaccompanied minors held in detention cells while they actively figured out where to send them and tried to locate family members. If you don't see the difference between that and what's going on now, then you're being intentionally obtuse.

 

[brooky03]

So children were not being held in cells before Trump? Interesting.


Cop out.

Remember when you claimed you weren't a lib?

I'm a lib for noticing the glaring difference between two policies and thus feeling differently about the two different policies that are different. Good point, chief. Happy to be a bleeding heart liberal with my outrage and triggerdness and whatnot. I have to go change my tampon now.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

Nobody said kids weren't held in cells briefly under prior administrations. We are all aware of the photo during the Obama administration that shows the unaccompanied minors held in detention cells while they actively figured out where to send them and tried to locate family members. If you don't see the difference between that and what's going on now, then you're being intentionally obtuse.

So what is happening to these kids now? Are we using them for hard labor? Selling them to the highest bidder? Christ, you aren't lib at all.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

I'm a lib. I have to go change my tampon now.

All you had to say.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

And guess what? The children go into foster care or to the care of a family member, not a cell. Don't parrot the nonsense Tucker Carlson craps out of his mouth.

From February 2016:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/small-percentage-of-immigrant-children-deported-in-recent-years/


Federal law requires that children from countries that don't border the United States be transferred to the care of the Health and Human Services Department before being placed with a sponsor, usually a relative, while they wait for their immigration case to be heard by a judge. And with an immigration court backlog of more than 474,000 pending cases some cases can take years to move through the court system.

Juan Osuna, the Justice Department official who oversees the immigration court system, told lawmakers Tuesday that about 40 percent of immigrants are no shows at court. Those who don't show up can be and routinely are given deportation orders in their absence, Osuna said.

Finding immigrant children with outstanding deportation orders is also complicated by the fact that they often are no longer at the addresses provided to the government.

"We are out looking," Homan said. "But they are hard to find. A lot of these folks who don't show up in court, we don't know where they're at.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I'm a lib for noticing the glaring difference between two policies and thus feeling differently about the two different policies that are different. Good point, chief. Happy to be a bleeding heart liberal with my outrage and triggerdness and whatnot. I have to go change my tampon now.

To be fair, you have been pushing the liberal agenda harder than usual lately, no?

 

[brooky03]

So what is happening to these kids now? Are we using them for hard labor? Selling them to the highest bidder? Christ, you aren't lib at all.

Nope, just keeping them in cells for weeks at a time while slow-playing the effort to reunite families. You know, things that didn't happen before. You're right, no big deal; children should definitely be subjected to that because their parents crossed a border.

If I'm a lib for having compassion and recognizing their are plenty of other ways to handle the situation much more humanely, then I've never been happier to be a lib.

 

[brooky03]

To be fair, you have been pushing the liberal agenda harder than usual lately, no?

The liberal agenda. Classic, hail. Please never change.

 

[brooky03]

From February 2016:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/small-percentage-of-immigrant-children-deported-in-recent-years/


Federal law requires that children from countries that don't border the United States be transferred to the care of the Health and Human Services Department before being placed with a sponsor, usually a relative, while they wait for their immigration case to be heard by a judge. And with an immigration court backlog of more than 474,000 pending cases some cases can take years to move through the court system.

Juan Osuna, the Justice Department official who oversees the immigration court system, told lawmakers Tuesday that about 40 percent of immigrants are no shows at court. Those who don't show up can be and routinely are given deportation orders in their absence, Osuna said.

Finding immigrant children with outstanding deportation orders is also complicated by the fact that they often are no longer at the addresses provided to the government.

"We are out looking," Homan said. "But they are hard to find. A lot of these folks who don't show up in court, we don't know where they're at.

I'm aware of all of this. What's your argument?