It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Media accidentally admits Trump was right about 1997 law

page: 3
43
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: face23785

nope your op is trash bin worthy

you have no valid point other than fluffing your own ego

you care not for spreading knowledge


No matter how many times you say that, it doesn't make it true. The OP has a clear point, with supporting links. You're in denial because you were sold a false narrative and now you can't let it go. You think you're too smart to have been tricked the way you were. The media accidentally outed themselves and it's plain for anyone with an objective eye to see. They tricked you. It happens. But I can see you're a devout believer in the DNC talking points, so there's no point in replying to you further. Enjoy your blissful ignorance.


^^^THIS ^^^


since you seem to be onthe same page as the op perhaps you could tell me what the point of the op is.

Something bout the media lying again.

I get that much but wheres the beef?




posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Anyone with partial brain working can see that the xo was not to the point at all.

He only needed to say not to separate families.

the xo was not designed to end separation of families but it was just another authoritarian power grab.

It will be trimmed down by the courts and in the end they will not be held for more than 20 days unaccompanied.

The legal definitions clearly state that any child that crosses the border with an adult is accompanied.

They are trying to claim that by separating the child from family it puts them in the unaccompanied minor category but that is not legal according to current definitions.

The status of being accompanied or unaccompanied is decided by if one crosses the border alone rather than if the feds make them unaccompanied.

The xo was a dictators wishlist

it will be trimmed into legality

nice try by the op but trash bin worthy



posted on Jun, 21 2018 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Nobody denied that the Flores Settlement says children must be released in 20 days. What it does not say is that families must be separated. In fact, the whole point of it is to make sure children are with their family members.


Well, now they are ... in detention.

I hope you are all happy.

Of course, letting the adults go is what we all know you actually want - de facto amnesty in an equally illegal manner because once they are released they mostly never show up and have to be caught and kicked out again - but you won't any of you admit it, and it would also take a change of the law to happen and make it legal.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 01:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: notsure1

I was critical of Obama's immigration policy as well. So much for your attempted whataboutism deflection.

What about you though? Are you saying that the Obama administration did something right or that the Trump administration is doing something wrong? People keep bringing up what was done in the past as justification for what is being done in the present but they never actually say whether or not they approve of those actions.

The fact remains though, since the policy in change in April, the ORR has been taking in more "unaccompanied" minors. So clearly this policy has led to the separation of more families than we have seen in the past.


I approve.

In fact, if any American treated their children's lives with such utter disregard (all so the parents have a chance at their "US Citizenship lottery ticket"...sick!) then CPS would take away those children, imprison the parents, and put those kids somewhere safe.

Maybe that is what we should be doing. Then after the parents prison sentence we ship their asses (without their children who would now be happy and safe) back to where they came from.

Put all the children, if there are at least enough children from a specific country to form at least a classroom of 15 children, in a special school designed to teach them how to, should they wish to, go back to their nation of origin and organize and motivate people to improve their living standards.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 01:39 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Do I get to bring my kids with me to jail or prison if I break a law? No. Nobody will shed a tear for my "seperated family! OMG!"

The ex o was probably a ploy of sorts, I agree. But not the way you are thinking. It wasn't Trumps dictator wishlist... He knew it was not legal. But he was essentially forced to "do something" (at this point his family was beginning to be threatened, and he knew the bloodthirsty leftists had to be appeased immediately because at that point it's just not worth it anymore, not when the evil bastards have got your family's safety held hostage and the battle can be fought another day) and so he did, changing the narrative and causing the media to expose itself.
edit on 6/22/2018 by 3n19m470 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky



The legal definitions clearly state that any child that crosses the border with an adult is accompanied.


No, they do not. A parent trying to enter the country is not in the country yet. A parent in detention is not able to provide care and custody.



(2) the term ‘‘unaccompanied alien child’’ means a child who—
(A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States;
(B) has not attained 18 years of age; and
(C) with respect to whom—
(i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or
(ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody


Getting caught crossing the border illegally and put in detention does not satisfy the requirement of being a parent in the US who can provide care and custody. People really need to start being realistic.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

idiotic

not even worth refute
edit on 22-6-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: howtonhawky

Do I get to bring my kids with me to jail or prison if I break a law? No. Nobody will shed a tear for my "seperated family! OMG!"

The ex o was probably a ploy of sorts, I agree. But not the way you are thinking. It wasn't Trumps dictator wishlist... He knew it was not legal. But he was essentially forced to "do something" (at this point his family was beginning to be threatened, and he knew the bloodthirsty leftists had to be appeased immediately because at that point it's just not worth it anymore, not when the evil bastards have got your family's safety held hostage and the battle can be fought another day) and so he did, changing the narrative and causing the media to expose itself.


welcome to reality

now join us in thought

strange how suddenly border crossings are not all being treated as a crime

what a difference some thought and a day makes

STATES RIGHTS

go texas



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: howtonhawky
a reply to: Vroomfondel

idiotic

not even worth refute


Translation: "You're right, but I'm a coward and can't admit it."



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

lol

no need to be mad

srry if i hurt your feelings


however if a person crosses the border with a child and then they are separated that child does not have unaccompanied minor status and i posted the link yesterday that shows the law states i am correct

the only way they would legally be unaccompanied is if they physically cross alone!

forced separation north of the border does not put them in the unaccompanied minor status legally.

STATES RIGHTS



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

You think you hurt my feelings by calling another poster idiotic?

What is with your complete inability to post without making things up?

Enjoy your day. You've still yet to refute anything from the OP, even though we all know you were faking not being able to understand it.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

you silly face

reality refutes your op!

Texas is not charging all crossings and the children are being released as you try to speak.

enjoy your day



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

He is a troll. Nothing more.

Mods will take care of him sooner or later.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
a reply to: face23785

He is a troll. Nothing more.

Mods will take care of him sooner or later.


If someone disagrees with you then you have come to the most logical conclusion...

No way in hell that there could be truth to what anyone says if it goes against your beliefs.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Then the idea is to prevent prosecution. That means all you need to do is come with a child and you won't be prosecuted and you will be released.

So your claim is that the law is to prevent crime from being prosecuted?



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04



It states in the law that any responsible party is acceptable to be considered guardian when applying for asylum.

Many cases they have no family alive.

One can see the feds taking custody in the manner they did was irresponsible in relation to the mental well being of children.

but just ignore me cause i am a troll apparently



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

Considering we have foster care in America it must be reasonable. Government takes custody of kids with criminal parents every day.



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: howtonhawky

Considering we have foster care in America it must be reasonable. Government takes custody of kids with criminal parents every day.


perhaps a bit more thought before you post

the equivalence is not there as you seen it to be

so many differences

your logic is since we have daycare then we can abuse children

better luck next time brohymen



posted on Jun, 22 2018 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

No, my logic is if we allow US children in daycare we can allow non US children in Daycare.



posted on Jun, 23 2018 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
Nobody denied that the Flores Settlement says children must be released in 20 days. What it does not say is that families must be separated. In fact, the whole point of it is to make sure children are with their family members.



Actually it does.

First -
Flores vs Reno (1993) was the original scotus ruling.
Flores vs Meese (1997) was the followup.

An example of domestic law -
A guy from Florida is speeding down a Washington state road with his 2 kids in the back seat and gets stopped. For whatever reason the driver ends up being arrested. His kids cannot be taken to the detention facility and placed into the same cell as dad is.

The first option is to contact the other parent to get the kids. In this case its not an option due to distance. A family member living in the state of Washington could take the kid but again, because he is from Florida, he has no family in Washington.

At that point the kids are in the custody of law enforcement until juvenile authorities / family services gets involved. The kids are placed in their custody and then placed with a host family until such time as dad is released or family can be contacted and make the journey to get the kids.

The same is true for illegal immigrants entering the US illegally. The parents broke the law (illegally entered the US). They are arrested and placed into a detention facility. Flores absolutely prohibits the placement of minors with adults in a detention facility. As with a US citizen the kids are taken into custody and transferred to the appropriate agency who will try to contact family (if they are in the US) to come get the kids. If there is no family in the US family from back home could come but they must enter the US legally with full identifications to have the kids released into their custody. If that is not possible then the kids remain at the facility until a host family can be located and the kids placed.

Flores requires a juvenile detention facility for immigrant minors here illegally. It also requires segregation by sex. All detention centers are licensed by the state they are located in and comply with all staffing requirements. Also showing up at a detention facility and demanding a tour and to interview children is a non starter - for anyone, including members of Congress and even law enforcement.

Minors are protected and as such its prohibits photographs of them and it also prohibits interviews. The exact same standard that applies with US juveniles in detention facilities.

This does not apply to immigrants coming thru a port of entrance.

Flores requires separation of minors from adults who have been arrested.


There are 3 recognized categories -
Asylum Seeker
Refugee
Migrant

Contrary to popular belief -
Immigrants can actually go to a US embassy or consulate in their country to start the asylum process.
Immigrants can actually go to a US embassy or consulate in their country to start the refugee process.

Migrants however are not a protected group and enjoy no special treatment / process when they come to the US. There is no such thing as an economic migrant nor can it be used as a reason for Asylum or Refugee.

There are 2 court rulings (technically 3) and 2 federal laws, the lat one being passed by Congress (Dems controlled both houses) unanimously in 2008 and signed by Bush.

The third court ruling occurred in 2015 with the Obama admin. His administration set up family detention centers to keep them together. The federal judge in that case ruled it as a violation of the Flores rulings. He was forced to separate them. That lawsuit was brought by advocacy groups for illegal immigrants who want open border.



edit on 23-6-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
43
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join