Notice its all about the Child Camps NOW in effect since b4 2014 btw and NOT the IG report?? Hmmmm

a reply to: SailorJerry

literally thanks for saying nothing with any facts or meaning yet again.

you have now resorted to breaking down statements msm style to make false points and spout invalid opinions.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: lakenheath24

so we traumatize every kid that crosses the border because they may be the one in god only knows what the percentage is... that might be trafficked? immigration workers do not change diapers, they can't. the one facility in tx that the video I was watching was about had only four social workers... and not much else was said about the staff at that facility...
but they did mention that a 16 year old that was also being held was going around changing diapers because no one else was.
so, I assume that at least at this place.... they don't have an adequate staff to care for these kids...
so I suggest that either we hire the staff to adequately take care of them, or we just leave them with their moms, who would be doing it for free if given a chance...
and so, I got you and a few others giving all this crap about obama???
the but.... obama... bit is really getting quite old and tiresome! and, it does absolutely nothing to solve the current problem!
if we're are gonna take the kids.... then by god we darned should be making sure we are taking care of the kids!

I believe what you are witnessing and griping about is the bottleneck created from not transferring the cargo onto the next stop now that the trafficking is being halted.
Since we know this policy began with Bill Clinton and Janet Reno every president has been doing this. How was it done before? Maybe it was just a warehousing issue up till now

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: SailorJerry

literally thanks for saying nothing with any facts or meaning yet again.

you have now resorted to breaking down statements msm style to make false points and spout invalid opinions.

Lol you mean hes addressing your statement point by point and you don't like it........

Sorry kiddo that's how debates and discussion work....... If you don't like it don't engage.....

Or better yet make sure your facts are in order instead of trying to present your opinions as fact......

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: SailorJerry

literally thanks for saying nothing with any facts or meaning yet again.

you have now resorted to breaking down statements msm style to make false points and spout invalid opinions.

Im not here to coddle you, im too old and disinterested to handle people with kid gloves who cant handle facts and discussing issues like adults.

So yes, im going to break down your statements one by one and address them when they are false, like another poster said, if you dont like it dont inject yourself into the discussion.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Are the asylum seekers entering legally?
That really is a question I'd like an answer too.

If they enter illegally isn't that a crime?

Or are we in a situation where we have to admit ANYONE and ALL, seeking to enter at Border Crossings claiming asylum?

And if that is the case..............just how F'd up is THAT!

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

lol

that is much unneeded nonsense

Do you actually have any thing of value to add or are you in the permanent polar state?


The op is very much incorrect in stating it is all about camps that were in existence for years.

It is about the new policy.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Are the asylum seekers entering legally?
That really is a question I'd like an answer too.

If they enter illegally isn't that a crime?

Or are we in a situation where we have to admit ANYONE and ALL, seeking to enter at Border Crossings claiming asylum?

And if that is the case..............just how F'd up is THAT!

i been checkin

it is a misdemeanor for first offense

now even if seeking asylum one is still being charged

the scotus ruled that unaccompanied minors can be detained for no more than 20 days.

i have not found any info on how long they can detain if they even can detain accompanied minors

a reply to: dawnstar

I will tell you why people mention Obama. Because people want to make this a conservative issue, when in fact, as stated, this has been going on since Clinton. Yet somehow it's a Trump issue, and therefore people who voted for him must be child haters, which is tiresome as well. By denying that this situation has been at hand loooong before Trump got in office you and others are making it a biased issue. It's a 'Your guy did this...not mine' attitude.

As far as those kids, it sucks...they probably came from one of Trumps POS countries, but you know what. It's not my problem. Don't come here illegally. And don't give me that asylum crap. One normally seeks asylum at the closest friendly country you come to, not crossing the entirety of Mexico. And BTW, why isn't Mexico helping to stop this crap? What did Bush Jr. say, if you aint with us, you are against us.

a reply to: TonyS

If the asylum seeker can demonstrate "credible fear" or "reasonable fear" even with crossing outside of a port of entry then they can still be granted asylum.
Asylum in the United States

Noncitizens who are encountered by, or present themselves to, a U.S. official at a port of entry or near the border are subject to expedited removal, an accelerated process which authorizes DHS to perform rapid deportations of certain individuals.

To ensure that the United States does not violate international and domestic laws by returning individuals to countries where their life or liberty may be at risk, the credible fear and reasonable fear screening processes are available to asylum seekers in expedited removal processes.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Tripped across Trump making one of his speeches today and he made the statement that US Immigration Laws are the worst in the world and are totally messed up.

His hair may be orange, but he's right on that one!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The laws need to be changed and they need to be changed fast.

Otherwise, I honestly don't see much reason to even have a Border Patrol. This situation is totally out of control.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TonyS

If the asylum seeker can demonstrate "credible fear" or "reasonable fear" even with crossing outside of a port of entry then they can still be granted asylum.
Asylum in the United States

Noncitizens who are encountered by, or present themselves to, a U.S. official at a port of entry or near the border are subject to expedited removal, an accelerated process which authorizes DHS to perform rapid deportations of certain individuals.

To ensure that the United States does not violate international and domestic laws by returning individuals to countries where their life or liberty may be at risk, the credible fear and reasonable fear screening processes are available to asylum seekers in expedited removal processes.

Mean while we have jeffery sessions now claiming that anyone receiving fear or violence from gangs are not eligible.

Most are fleeing from violence created by drug manufacturing and transport all run by gangs across the globe.

a reply to: TonyS

I feel like if we addressed the issue of why these people are flooding over the border versus trying to shut it down or police then we'd have a lot more success and a lot less public backlash to immorality. Though ending the war on drugs seems unlikely, so good luck with that.

a reply to: howtonhawky

Jeff Sessions' tactics on the border are clearly an extension of his racism that we've known about since the 80's. He was practically giddy with excitement when he announced this policy a few months back. And now, while the Trump administration is desperately trying to blame Democrats for their own policy decisions Sessions is trying to quote the bible to justify this policy. Funnily enough it is the very same quote that slavers in the past used to justify slavery and then again trying to justify segregation.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Washington Post this week published a long piece showing how the illegal immigration of young people from Central America, facilitated and even encouraged by the Obama administration, has led to the rebirth of the vicious MS-13 gang in the U.S.

National Review

One of many news items out there

a reply to: Krazysh0t

From what I read these people are fleeing drug gangs working through out central america. Honduras, Guatemala, etc.

Failed states. Now, Brazil, itself a failed state, is suffering influx of 10's of thousands out of Venezuela, another failed state.

Sounds to me like a whole lot of regime change and target practice on narco gangs is in order.

a reply to: MetalThunder

A National Review article taking a WaPo article out of context to blame Obama for MS-13 resurgence? Not sure why you'd call that news. The WaPo article itself is very informative about the MS-13 resurgence, but that NR article is clearly partisan tripe.

Say what you want bout dictatorships but they do not have near the number of refugees as say a country like Libya does.

a reply to: TonyS

I can't say I have an answer to the problems plaguing the countries below our southern border, but you can't succeed if you don't try. IMO, ending the war on drugs would go a LONG way to cutting out a lot of the power those cartels have access to.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So you were fine with immigration policy prior to this? No probs? you were cool with that racist Janet Reno?