NYTimes reports on conditions in US Immigrant Children Camps and says conditions are really bad

a reply to: Krakatoa

How would you fund the enacting of that law? The embassies would be required to protect all those people, as well as house, feed and provide medical treatment. I think the United States is better equipped to meet those requirements than a foreign embassy.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

Then we'd probably have a worse situation, with people setting up camps on the embassy grounds. And then we'd have public outcry about a facility that wasn't even meant to house a whole bunch of people, therefore we'd end up having to expand every embassy around the world to include that capability.

No matter what is done, even if it is solved, left-wingers like Sookie will continue to try to blame POTUS Trump... It's their mo...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

How would you fund the enacting of that law? The embassies would be required to protect all those people, as well as house, feed and provide medical treatment. I think the United States is better equipped to meet those requirements than a foreign embassy.

Could you show us your threads, or posts from back when Obama was POTUS and this was happening?... Show us how you blamed Obama and demanded what you are demanding now... If no such thread or posts exists stfu.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

This post has little to nothing to do with the Trump administration's effort to claim that the Flores Settlement doesn't require them to proved basic toiletries, like soap, toothbrushes, toothpaste, blankets and beds.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

How would you fund the enacting of that law? The embassies would be required to protect all those people, as well as house, feed and provide medical treatment. I think the United States is better equipped to meet those requirements than a foreign embassy.

Have you ever been outside the country? An embassy is where you go to file paperwork not live there. Suppose you want to apply to be a citizen of Germany you go to the German embassy you apply for citizenship.

To many people give opinions and not know what they are talking about. We have embassy in Guatemala in fact all the countries the migrants are from. If they applied there they can wait for paperwork and enter legally.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Krakatoa

How would you fund the enacting of that law? The embassies would be required to protect all those people, as well as house, feed and provide medical treatment. I think the United States is better equipped to meet those requirements than a foreign embassy.

No, they would not. Example: Person enters embassy and applies for asylum...then leaves. They return when needed for interviews, background checks, and health screenings (which would be done in the country of origin). Once processed, if accepted, then they return to the embassy and it arranges for transport to the United States as long as they have a sponsor here where they can be guaranteed housing and initial care until they can stand on their own (and are assisted with govt food vouchers for a predetermined amount of time).

It provides them a cheap and easy access to asylum, which locally could be anonymous to protect them. Unless they can prove their life or the life of their children would be in jeopardy by the local govt (according to existing asylum laws).

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

"This" wasn't happening when Obama was president. Trump's "no tolerance" policy is his and his administration's alone. They own it.

In March of last year, John Kelly told CNN that the administration was considering taking children from their parents if they crossed the border illegally. At the time, Kelly was secretary for the Department of Homeland Security.

JOHN KELLY: Yes, I am considering - in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network, I am considering exactly that. They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents.

JEFF SESSIONS: If you don't want your child to be separated, then don't bring them across the border illegally. It's not our fault that somebody does that.

www.npr.org...

a reply to: Krakatoa

Example: Person enters embassy and applies for asylum...then leaves.

People seeking asylum are running for their lives, seeking immediate safety and sanctuary. They can't legally be turned away at the border, so they couldn't be legally turned away if embassies were designated for asylum.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Fallingdown
The Liberals are using the welfare of children to their advantage again .

The way to end this mess is with a wall or permanent barrier .

Instead the Liberals would rather see children suffer .

We (the liberals....all of us) would like to state that we collectively agree that we believe that the mistreatment of children should be above partisan politics and that even the right should agree that children suffering is wrong regardless of politics.

We understand that this may be politically inconvenient for you lot but we would ask that you rise above the politics of this and call out the mistreatment of children regardless.

Yours kindly...

The collective hive mind that is "the liberals"

For once I totally agree with the liberals, this is a disgusting state of affairs and all these children should be sent back to their countries of origin immediately.

a reply to: dragonridr

You cannot claim asylum from an embassy. You can only claim asylum if you are standing inside the borders of the USA.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Breakthestreak

In March of last year, John Kelly told CNN that the administration was considering taking children from their parents if they crossed the border illegally. At the time, Kelly was secretary for the Department of Homeland Security.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
JOHN KELLY: Yes, I am considering - in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network, I am considering exactly that. They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents.

JEFF SESSIONS: If you don't want your child to be separated, then don't bring them across the border illegally. It's not our fault that somebody does that.

www.npr.org...


And what you knuckle dragging Trumpites ignore and refuse to accept, and why Trump keeps screaming for Congress to change the laws, is that it's not illegal to cross the border, in any area, to claim asylum. As a matter of fact, it's a legal requirement to be eligible to do so.

If they claim asylum, then they’re not illegal immigrants are they?

If they DONT claim asylum, then they ARE illegal immigrants

And what you low IQ libs fail to understand is, if someone opposes ILLEGAL immigration that does NOT make them ‘anti immigration’ in ANY way

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: dragonridr

You cannot claim asylum from an embassy. You can only claim asylum if you are standing inside the borders of the USA.

Unless we decide to change that horrendous law that forces these poor people to travel thousands of dangerous miles, children in tow, just to get to U/S. soil. We should change the law to save them that burden, after all, if we could save one child then it would be worth it, right?

The VAAAAST majority of these people DO NOT seek asylum and ARE NOT asylum seekers.

But hey, no other country on earth has immigration laws right? So why does the USA?

HONK HONK

a reply to: Breakthestreak

These children, that the US Federal Government took custody of, and whose care they are responsible for, are not criminals, and don't deserve to be treated as such. For all intents and purposes these children, by their very situation, are eligible for asylum.

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – The Trump administration argued in front of a Ninth Circuit panel Tuesday that the government is not required to give soap or toothbrushes to children apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border and can have them sleep on concrete floors in frigid, overcrowded cells, despite a settlement agreement that requires detainees be kept in “safe and sanitary” facilities.

www.courthousenews.com...

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Breakthestreak

These children, that the US Federal Government took custody of, and whose care they are responsible for, are not criminals, and don't deserve to be treated as such. For all intents and purposes these children, by their very situation, are eligible for asylum.

Did they come alone? Were the adults with them ACTUALLY their relatives, with their best interest in mind?

You see, that needs to be investigated and determined, before releasing them to return with them, for their own safety. That takes time, time that happens to be longer than that law allows. So, what is the solution, if you MUST follow the law?

Perhaps changing that law is a good thing, to take onto account the ti,e the investigation needs to take to ensure the safety of those children before returning them to potential human traffickers as sex slaves, or worse. Wouldn;t you agree that is important?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: dragonridr

You cannot claim asylum from an embassy. You can only claim asylum if you are standing inside the borders of the USA.

The false positive irony is:

They break laws to get on U.S. soil therefore it's fruit from a poisonous tree 😎

It's unConstitutional to gather gains from breaking a law 😎

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Breakthestreak

These children, that the US Federal Government took custody of, and whose care they are responsible for, are not criminals, and don't deserve to be treated as such. For all intents and purposes these children, by their very situation, are eligible for asylum.

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – The Trump administration argued in front of a Ninth Circuit panel Tuesday that the government is not required to give soap or toothbrushes to children apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border and can have them sleep on concrete floors in frigid, overcrowded cells, despite a settlement agreement that requires detainees be kept in “safe and sanitary” facilities.

www.courthousenews.com...

I guess that’s true
They’re also eligible to be denied asylum

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Where in that Flores Agreement does it say they must provide soap and toothbrushes ?

Did the "other side" bring that before the Judge Panel ? 😬

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

You are either comfortable with the way these camps are being run, or you're not. You are defined by your answers, simple as that.

Well first they are not camps, they are detention centers. There is a difference, but I'm not sure if you care, but if they are in temporary camps due to over crowding from complete inundation of the system we have a problem we both can agree on I think.

A big part of that problem is that the left has been saying non-stop that there is no problem, no crisis, no emergency, so no support. Trump pretty much has begged for funds for infrastructure which includes everything needed including more borders security.

I'm not comfortable with any of this, and Trump wants to fix it, but it is an area the left will fight tooth and nail for him not to succeed in. You need to remember this is something both sides has been playing hot potato with for over 30 years, and Trump is the only one willing to do anything about it in all that time. You also need to remember the libtards under Obama talked a good talk about fixing it and did nothing, Obama even deported more than Trump but did nothing. If you are OK with doing nothing then I guess everyone but Trump is doing what you want them to do.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Common sense: If a family crosses the border illegally, send the entire family back. No need to separate them. They all broke the law and should be treated/deported equally.