kellyanne conway caught in another lie trying to blame Democrats for trump's inhumane policy separating children from their parents... https://thinkprogress.org/conway-at...30a05f/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
trump dhs secretary caught in a lie "that families requesting asylum are not being separated" by republican senator...
Let's get the facts straight. There is no congressional action needed to stop this policy of imprisoning children away from their parents. It is an executive action and the executive branch could stop it at any point. 1. Ending this policy would not allow more illegal immigrants to enter our nation. 2. Ending this policy would not allow people currently detained for illegal immigration to stay in the nation. 3. It is not comparable to United States citizens with children being imprisoned for crimes. Their children aren't locked in a prison. Their children still get to stay with family most of the time. Their children actually get to visit their imprisoned family member. So I will ask again to the those that are supporting Trump and this policy. 1. How is our nation better off by implementing this policy? Can anyone answer the question? @Aceshigh7 @Cohete Rojo @Bobbythegreat
I'll answer your question since you are feigning ignorance. How is our nation better off by implementing this policy? Because it is a deterrent. And at this point in time, without a wall and with catch & release laws that neuter any ability to enforce our border laws, every possible deterrent must be attempted. There is a crisis happening and we cannot allow it to continue. Border crossings dropped at the start of the Trump presidency. Why? Because potential illegal crossers were afraid of what Trump was might do in regards to the border. After several months, when it became apparent that nothing had really changed and catch and release was still in effect, crossings rose back to Obama-era levels. And now, they are even higher than that. Over 50,000 apprehensions of illegal border crossers a month. How many do you think are getting through? Likely 2 or 3 times more than that. That is an invasion of historic proportions and no nation can withstand that indefinitely. Again. All the liberals pointing out that "There is no Democrat driven policy saying that kids must be separated from their parents" are taking the Trump administration's statements literally, on purpose, in order to try to obfuscate why this is necessary. This is being done because the Democrat continually fight efforts to actually secure the border. They stymie, obstruct, and attempt to neuter every single initiative this administration makes to address border enforcement. Again, if we had a wall, and if we had mandatory e-verify, there would be absolutely no need to separate the families of these criminals because there would be far fewer of them invading this country. THAT is why this is the result of Democrats. If Democrats really care about family separation, stop obstructing efforts to secure the border.
It's absolutely comparable to what happens with US citizens. If the incarcerated illegals have family members here legally, the children go to stay with them. if they don't, the children have to go in to government care. Every single one of these criminals knew what they were doing and the position they were placing their children in when they chose to invade another country. Personally, I would not only charge them with illegal entry, but also child endangerment.
Thank you for answering. I would argue that implementing cruelty in the hopes of deterrence isn't something consistent with American values, and certainly not something we should strive for or support. There is no reason to not take the president literally. In addition, his administration acting like it can only be stopped by some type of Democratic action is needed to stop the policy. It isn't. Most illegal immigration is not done at border crossings. So this isn't the best way to combat illegal immigration. Most illegal immigration happens at the airport. It is people who overstay their visas. Illegal immigration isn't at any sort of record level, and it isn't that big of a problem in the first place.
Except for most American citizens who go to prison do have family here, most illegal immigrants don't, so it isn't really comparable. Again they aren't responsible for the unjust and cruel punishment. Those that put the policy in place are the ones that are responsible. Stop avoiding blame.
Simple solutions 1. Only us citizens can give birth to us citizens - anchor babies will have no rights 2. Educate poor on birth control, particularly in poor nations. This is common sense but they tend to put all their value in having as many kids as possible to show their strength. It hurts them in the end.
Your proposal would require a constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship and that's not happening and IMO it shouldn't happen.
I believe if you are born in a country, you should be a citizen of that country. Now that said, I don't believe that means the parents should be allowed to stay in an "anchor baby" situation. I think in the case of a minor who is a US citizen the parents should be given the option of taking the child back to their home country or that child being given up for adoption here in the states. If the parents choose to bring the kid back with them, the child can move back to the US when they are of age....but they'd still have to come without their parents. IMO that's the fair thing to do.
I know that's what you believe, but why do you believe it? What purpose does it possibly serve other than illegals sneaking into the country to give birth to as many babies as possible? Your proposed solution involves a lot more paperwork and an issue of acclimating to a new environment at 18... although it's very doable. The parents are 100% at fault for the pain they cause their children, theres no way around it, but this gives them more incentive to complete illegal activities.
The principle of jus soli dates back over 2500 years and is a right guaranteed by the constitution. I personally don't think it's right for ANYONE born in a country to not be a citizen of that country, no matter what country it is. I don't think you have to throw that away simply to eliminate the "anchor baby" situation. While you say my solution requires a lot more paperwork, it doesn't require a constitutional amendment which yours would require meaning in short that my proposal, while complicated, is possible while I don't believe yours is even possible.
The asylum seekers are legally presenting themselves for asylum at a US P.O.E. and they are being separated from their families. This is simply a fact that cannot be argued or justified.
Who cares about principles made up 2500 years ago? What does that have to do with the reality of 2018? That is a low IQ argument, similar to refusing to ban the sale of semi auto because it's not constitutional... times have changed , be realistic. You need to provide an actual concrete argument as to why an illegal parent can gove birth to a legal citizen.
If they were legitimate asylum seekers then that would be one thing, but the asylum system is being exploited as nothing more than a way to circumvent the immigration system and gain immediate (not "immediate" immediate, but something like 6 months compared to potentially years if they do it the right way) entry to the US. The influx of "my country sucks so let me in yours" asylum seekers has forced changes to be made. When there were maybe 2k a month, that was one thing, but when we're talking about 12-16k a month? Something had to be done.
Your argument makes no sense. If they apply and are rejected they go back. There is no reason to lock their children in these prison camps.
From a practical standpoint, if you are going to have 10-16k of them a month and you are going to have to house them for several months no matter what happens, it makes more sense to split them up into children's facilities, men's facilities, and women's facilities while they are going through the process. Due to the massive numbers, it doesn't make sense to give every single family their own housing space. You can do that when the numbers are low, but now that the tactic of saying "give me asylum because my country sucks" has gotten so popular, it makes sense to change how you handle them. If they are legitimate asylum seekers they'll be reunited with their families and admitted into the country when the paperwork goes through, if they aren't then they'll be reunited with their families and deported when the paperwork goes through.
