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.

 

Illegal US border crossings swell to 76,000 in February!

page: 5
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: ker2010

Your title is misleading, as these people are considered 'legal' asylum seekers.


yeah, I'm sure all 76,000 are just good people wanting a better life.........wake up.


our system is broken, and most of our politicians want it to stay that way. any thoughts on why you think that is?


Bernie Sanders does not want it to stay that way. Or, at least, his ideas for change speak otherwise.

www.politico.com...
edit on 03CST07America/Chicago01270731 by InTheLight because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: InTheLight

Many are fleeing politically motivated violence and that translates to political persecution, which makes them legal asylum seekers.



It says political volatility, and so it seems you translated it to your own narrative, also running from perceived crime is not a reason for asylum. Finally, they should be seeking asylum in the next country such as Mexico that has offered it to them not multiple countries where they pick and choose.

Their asylum seeking is total BS as the border lawyers tell them the magic words to use to get in. I agree it is the fault of our laws, but I'm not going to do the bleeding heart route that you want to go to justify that they are truly asylum seekers.



I translated it into the narrative of the people crossing the border. Just do some of your own digging to find out what types of violence, political and gang, these people are fleeing from.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bloodworth
What a joke.....this is overwhelming the system and In zero way beneficial to the American way of life


Really, would that be in the same way most American's previous generations were?



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
The number is derived from people who crossed and then turned themselves into border agents and then claimed asylum.

I could have sworn I read that Trump had issued an EO (or something) that said that only people who entered at established ports of entry could claim asylum, and anyone who crossed the border illegally couldn't?

Yeah, here it is

Hopefully he sticks to his guns and sends these people packing...



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
The number is derived from people who crossed and then turned themselves into border agents and then claimed asylum.

I could have sworn I read that Trump had issued an EO (or something) that said that only people who entered at established ports of entry could claim asylum, and anyone who crossed the border illegally couldn't?

Yeah, here it is

Hopefully he sticks to his guns and sends these people packing...



Yes he tried to circumvent the laws with an eo and the scotus ruled 5-4 against him in the middle of last december. The law allows them to cross between ports legally if they claim asylum.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
So, the courts have been illegally granting asylum to them?

Obviously, yes.

They ignore the fact that they are not qualified to even request asylum here, because it is not the first country they reached.


And, if a President writes up an executive order, and a judge rules against it (on legal grounds as allowed by the constitution).

Sorry, but when a judge unilaterally rules that a legitimate use of the Executive Poweris 'illegal', what that judge is doing is what is 'illegal', and it is the judge that should be disbarred and lose their judgeship.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Nope, he's not wrong. See, the U.S. under W, added to U.S. Asylum law, making it legal for an citizen from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, traveling with children, or unaccompanied minors from those countries to bypass requesting asylum in mexico first. William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008

Read it, don't see it, by all means elaborate...



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
www.justice.gov...

Page 33

Is this perhaps your source?

I don't see it. Those figures do not say what you think they say.

The point being discussed is, what percentage of those who are caught/give themselves up, then released, fail to show up for their hearing.

These figures include all Immigration cases.

Apples and Oranges.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
www.justice.gov...

Page 33

Is this perhaps your source?

I don't see it. Those figures do not say what you think they say.

The point being discussed is, what percentage of those who are caught/give themselves up, then released, fail to show up for their hearing.

These figures include all Immigration cases.

Apples and Oranges.


It is a graph with the bottom line specifically representing ASYLUM cases. The average % is around 90 of asylum seekers that go to their hearing.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: ker2010

The media doesn't want you to know this, but America is becoming more attractive everyday for those who seek opportunity. Both legal and illegal.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   
The wall is a dumb idea. Not to mention there is no national emergency. Stop the fake news, please.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
Yes he tried to circumvent the laws with an eo and the scotus ruled 5-4 against him in the middle of last december.

First, there is a big difference between 'exercise legitimate Executive authority' and 'circumvent the law'.

Second, scotus didn't completely 'rule against him' - they simply let the ban issued by the lower court judge stand. The court has not heard arguments on the merits of the case yet, so it is definitely not 'case closed'.

Third, on 2/7, Trump extended this rule for another 90 days, noting that they are appealing the case, which means there will be arguments heard.

I'm thinking maybe he is waiting/hoping to be able to replace RBG, since she is basically incapable of fulfilling her duties as a supreme Court Justice.


The law allows them to cross between ports legally if they claim asylum.

The law is being ignored/abused.

The law is only supposed to allow claims for Asylum from people who have already been granted asylum status by the first country they entered. The only person/people who can legally apply for asylum status in the USA would be Mexicans (or Canadians).

So, if someone from Honduras or Guatamala enters Mexico and makes the trek to the USA without requesting asylum status in Mexico, they are not legally eligible for Asylum here, regardless of where or how they enter.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
It is a graph with the bottom line specifically representing ASYLUM cases. The average % is around 90 of asylum seekers that go to their hearing.

Those figures are:

a) for all Asylum seekers, including those who applied at ports of entry, and waited in Mexico, as they are required by law to do, and

b) only for ones who were tried in absentia.

So, again, the numbers don't mean what you think/are saying they do.

Show me the following numbers...

Of those who entered illegally, surrendered/claimed asylum, then are released:

a) how many showed up for all hearings until their case was adjudicated,

b) how many failed to show up and were tried in absentia, and

c) how many failed to show up, but were never tried in absentia because the immigration court system is so overwhelmed.

Show me those percentages, then maybe - maybe - you'll have an argument.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: tabularosa
The wall is a dumb idea. Not to mention there is no national emergency. Stop the fake news, please.

The claim that the wall is a dumb idea and that there is no emergency is a really ignorant and uninformed opinion based purely on 'orange man bad'.

Stop the TDS, please.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
Yes he tried to circumvent the laws with an eo and the scotus ruled 5-4 against him in the middle of last december.

First, there is a big difference between 'exercise legitimate Executive authority' and 'circumvent the law'.

Second, scotus didn't completely 'rule against him' - they simply let the ban issued by the lower court judge stand. The court has not heard arguments on the merits of the case yet, so it is definitely not 'case closed'.

Third, on 2/7, Trump extended this rule for another 90 days, noting that they are appealing the case, which means there will be arguments heard.

I'm thinking maybe he is waiting/hoping to be able to replace RBG, since she is basically incapable of fulfilling her duties as a supreme Court Justice.


The law allows them to cross between ports legally if they claim asylum.

The law is being ignored/abused.

The law is only supposed to allow claims for Asylum from people who have already been granted asylum status by the first country they entered. The only person/people who can legally apply for asylum status in the USA would be Mexicans (or Canadians).

So, if someone from Honduras or Guatamala enters Mexico and makes the trek to the USA without requesting asylum status in Mexico, they are not legally eligible for Asylum here, regardless of where or how they enter.


Bunch of hogwash.

Mexico is granting them asylum when they enter the country. Then they make sure buses are waiting to pick them up and cross to the next border.

Potus lawsuit and eo is indeed a circumvention of the law because he can not get the law changed so he tries illegal tactics.

He is definitely stressing the courts.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl




Of those who entered illegally

It is legal for them to cross between ports then surrender and claim asylum. So your request is invalid from the start

When a person is granted an asylum hearing no matter how they arrived they are givin a court date. On that court date if they do not show up to court the hearing is done in absentia and if they show up then they are not included in the stats.

Therefore the absentia rates fully cover all asylum claimants who do not show up for their hearing.

Your point is invalid.


I do appreciate the fact that you bring a level of debate that is up to par even though you keep presenting nonsense it is done so in a very witful manner.




posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You aren't stupid, so why use this data? It is a one off payment versus an ongoing and increasing amount.
It's a stupid argument.



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
Mexico is granting them asylum when they enter the country.

Oh... really?

Proof please, or your response is... to use your own words... "Bunch of hogwash"



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
It is legal for them to cross between ports then surrender and claim asylum.

Please provide a link to the law that states that it is legal to cross our nation's border 'in between ports of entry'.


When a person is granted an asylum hearing no matter how they arrived they are givin a court date. On that court date if they do not show up to court the hearing is done in absentia and if they show up then they are not included in the stats.

Therefore the absentia rates fully cover all asylum claimants who do not show up for their hearing.

Proof please...



posted on Mar, 7 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: UncleTomahawk
Mexico is granting them asylum when they enter the country.

Oh... really?

Proof please, or your response is... to use your own words... "Bunch of hogwash"


It was reported months ago that the mexican president granted them all papers but they did not want to stay.

They were offered jobs there too.

The issue is that mexico is not considered to be a safe third country for them.




top topics



 
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join