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.

 

Former ICE Director Homan Completely Owns AOC At Congressional Hearing

page: 4
67
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Just saw that, with the one activist judge desenting.


The activist judges are getting exposed !!





posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar


Well I will just tell you what I wouldn't do. I wouldn't think the parents of that kid was so horrible that they deserved me taking their kid, locking him up in my attic, occasionally throwing up a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and letting him out to use the bathroom, never letting him even wash his hands let alone take a shower, and making him wear the same clothes for weeks on end. It wouldn't matter how crappy I thought his parents were, I wouldn't take it out on the child!

Do you really think we're going to Guatemala or Honduras and bringing these kids here to be locked up? We're trying to keep them from coming here illegally!

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

I haven't either although I did hear some of them talking about about allowing them to apply for refugee status in their home country, which I guess they can't do at the present time. That might have some merit also and would enable us to tap into UN funds if I understood it right.



posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:53 PM
link   
The NGOs and their donors need to be exposed and prosecuted 😎



posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: rickymouse

Not really sure how much help knowing the cops would be once they are in child protection. Knowing the judge in family court would probably move things along. Knowing someone in child protection would probably move things along faster. But while I can agree that its probably unnecessary to separate the kids from their parents in some of these cases, and that might be what is bothering some. I am more bothered by the quality of care they are getting before they are transferred out of ins care. If the reports are true it falls far short of the care they would get in a foster home.


The grandparents taking control of the kids is what I am talking about. The court can make it happen slow or fast. Who you know around here, the grandparent, makes a difference. But if the parent of the kid that got in trouble does not approve of grandpa taking the kid, it winds up in foster home.

I have seen kids taken away from younger mothers and families over the years around here. Usually drug problems or stealing or something. I know a lot of people, so I do keep in the loop of what is happening, being on the grandparent end of things. Most of the people I know are grandparents now. Some even great grandparents..



posted on Jul, 12 2019 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Well you think I'm gonna go to my neighbors home and snatch her??
This is a true story. We had a family of nitwits down the street from us. All summer long, half the neighborhood would gather in their front yard, their kids would be running up and down the street, music would be blaring and they would be yelling half the night. Well the poor girl that lived there would show up at my house at least a few times every week asking if she could eat with us. Mommy and daddy was drunk. She wasn't just coming to my house either, she was making the rounds through the neighborhood till she found someone to feed her. Na, I wouldn't have had to go hunting for kid, in my neighborhood they came to me.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

I was just explaining how your analogy didn't hold up.

I understand (and admire!) the fact that you provided the kid with a hot meal; I'd probably do the same. That's awesome, no sarcasm intended. But now consider if 200 kids showed up. Would you invite them all in? Now consider you did invite them in, and you're trying to feed them as fast as you can, but you're literally running out of food. You call another neighbor and ask them to pick up some food for you (since you can't very well leave 200 kids in your house alone) and they refuse... but then they call the police and complain that you're mistreating a bunch of kids by not feeding them fast enough!

Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? But that's very close to what's happening on the border. They're simply getting in many times the normal number of illegal immigrants, and all of them know exactly what English phrases to use to state "I want asylum." They can't say "Hello" in English, but they can damn sure say "I want asylum."

Now Congress, who should be working with the administration to make sure they have enough resources, is blocking funds while at the same time complaining there's not enough funds. Just like that neighbor in my example won't help you get some food, but they'll complain to the police about you not having enough.

Now, do you get the picture about what's happening and why the resident failure in Congress (abbreviated AOC) is so far off base? She's the neighbor who refused to help!

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Child Protective Services is a oxymoron, children are regularly taken from homes for very slight offences by the parents IF the child is of prime adoptive age, while horrific offences are overlooked by CPS in the case of age ( everyone wants to adopt a baby, most can't handle their own teens ), and particularly sexual abuse victims that tend to act out in foster parent households with their natural children present.
I think of most foster parents, as terminal middle class welfare recipients, over 1800 bucks for each kid, and they ( the bad ones) run them like puppy mills...Sickening, at at a much higher rate than you expect.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Telling AOC that they should go through ports of entry is owning AOC? I guess mundane things are wins for Trump supporters.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: SpaceForceAlien
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Telling AOC that they should go through ports of entry is owning AOC? I guess mundane things are wins for Trump supporters.


I'm sorry? You think they shouldn't?



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

originally posted by: SpaceForceAlien
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Telling AOC that they should go through ports of entry is owning AOC? I guess mundane things are wins for Trump supporters.


I'm sorry? You think they shouldn't?


Never said they shouldn't. Good try though.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:07 AM
link   
a reply to: SpaceForceAlien

AOC is suggesting they are fine coming in outside legal points of entry.
So yes by stating legal code and her misinterpretation of law, he did.
Can you be consistent in your point?



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: SpaceForceAlien

AOC is suggesting they are fine coming in outside legal points of entry.
So yes by stating legal code and her misinterpretation of law, he did.
Can you be consistent in your point?


I can. Refugees coming at the wrong locations have to travel further to enter ports of entry.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: SpaceForceAlien

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: SpaceForceAlien

AOC is suggesting they are fine coming in outside legal points of entry.
So yes by stating legal code and her misinterpretation of law, he did.
Can you be consistent in your point?


I can. Refugees coming at the wrong locations have to travel further to enter ports of entry.


Refugees are not asylum candidates automatically.
Illegal is illegal, and not welcome. Even though we sympathies.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 02:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

originally posted by: SpaceForceAlien

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
a reply to: SpaceForceAlien

AOC is suggesting they are fine coming in outside legal points of entry.
So yes by stating legal code and her misinterpretation of law, he did.
Can you be consistent in your point?


I can. Refugees coming at the wrong locations have to travel further to enter ports of entry.


Refugees are not asylum candidates automatically.
Illegal is illegal, and not welcome. Even though we sympathies.


What would you have done with genuine asylum seekers who went to the wrong locations for some reason?



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 03:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Tell me, so when they arrest someone for dwi and there's a child in the car, how long do you reckon that child spends locked up in a cell?? My guess is the child isnt locked up at all. My guess is one of the first things they ask the drunk is who would you like us to call to have come and get the kid. My guess is that once at the police station, they have one of the officers entertaining that kid till someone comes to pick them up and only in the worst cases where there is no one to call they call child protective to come and get the kid. My guess is that at no time are they locked up with a bunch of other kids of various ages and left for days or weeks or close to a month with little supervision. My guess is that if the kid is too young to take care of themselves, they aren't gonna dump the kid onto another kid to change the diapers, bottle feed, ect.
My guess is that the kid is gonna have a bed to sleep in, probably that same night!


where should the children go?



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 04:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

If I have to 200 kids in my house and am begging someone to come up with food to feed them, think maybe someone should be calling the cops about the crazy lady who's graduating from hoarding cats to hoarding kids??
But seriously, weather it be one, five, or 50 kids, there is no law that says I have to feed any of them and I can tell them all to go home to their own parents anytime I want or call their parents to come get them, or if all else fails, call the police myself to help me remove the kids. I have neither signed or in any way agreed to take care of them. And I am not forcing them to stay.
The govt has a legal obligation, and has agreed to a court settlement that they will provide care to these children they chose to detain according to the standards set out in that agreement. And they've had help offered to them which they have refused. And, they have an alternative to detaining many of them. They've just decided to go with this zero tolerance policy. They could just let the kids stay with the parents and load them onto a bus and drop them off in the nearest town, and have done so a few times. Or they could take that bus a few hundred miles and drop them off in some Mexican town. Sure, they would be breaking the laws by doing this, but they are breaking the law now by not following the settlement agreement. Either of those two options would be a kinder, less destructive alternative than what they are doing now.
And while I agree the govt, congress, is falling flat in their face on this I would like to point out the trump seemed to have no problem declaring a national emergency so he could start diverting money into his wall which isnt really a solution to the current problem. I fail to see why he can't use that same emergency power to allow the charities. Doctors and mental health professionals to help out all of which wouldn't require any funding from Congress because it's all being offered free of charge. Heck the pediatricians in the area had been providing care in these places for previous administrations when it was needed and stepped up to do the same this time. They were told their help wasn't needed.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Tell me, so when they arrest someone for dwi and there's a child in the car, how long do you reckon that child spends locked up in a cell?? My guess is the child isnt locked up at all. My guess is one of the first things they ask the drunk is who would you like us to call to have come and get the kid. My guess is that once at the police station, they have one of the officers entertaining that kid till someone comes to pick them up and only in the worst cases where there is no one to call they call child protective to come and get the kid. My guess is that at no time are they locked up with a bunch of other kids of various ages and left for days or weeks or close to a month with little supervision. My guess is that if the kid is too young to take care of themselves, they aren't gonna dump the kid onto another kid to change the diapers, bottle feed, ect.
My guess is that the kid is gonna have a bed to sleep in, probably that same night!


That's a lot of guesses.



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: TheRedneck

If I have to 200 kids in my house and am begging someone to come up with food to feed them, think maybe someone should be calling the cops about the crazy lady who's graduating from hoarding cats to hoarding kids??
But seriously, weather it be one, five, or 50 kids, there is no law that says I have to feed any of them and I can tell them all to go home to their own parents anytime I want or call their parents to come get them, or if all else fails,call the police myself to help me remove the kids. I have neither signed or in any way agreed to take care of them. And I am not forcing them to stay.


incorrect. if you are a child care provider, or assume temporary custody (like babysitting or what have you), and you neglect the children, you can be charged with child endangerment.

i don't understand the circumstance you laid out. You have 200 children in your home, you said in your hypothetical statement : " I have neither signed or in any way agreed to take care of them. And I am not forcing them to stay". So either you're implying you kidnapped the kids and are allowing them to leave, or their parents dropped them off at your house without your consent and you took them anyway. Now we go back to what I originally said, if you accept for the care of children to be in your private residence, you're responsible for them, regardless if you signed anything or not. For example, if you kill someone, but didn't have the intent, is it still a crime? Yeah...yeah it is.

Further more, if you have 200 children in your home, and begging people to help you feed them, maybe you shouldn't have so many children in your home jeffey...
edit on 13-7-2019 by JoeGee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Sources close to the White House claim that President Trump has changed the name of illegal aliens to "Fetuses" and has changed the name of the detention centers to "Planned Citizenship" Centers.

House democrats immediately increased funding for a wall and have budgeted 100 billion for several new centers along the border.



IMadeThisUp.com



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join