As of 2009 they found that at least 70% of asylum requests were fraudulent, given the ridiculous increase lately that's probably considerably higher today.
you are wrong. 61% denied which is appropriate considering all the false claims coming from illegal immigrants from Mexico. http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/491/
it's going to backfire when Schumer attempts to filibuster a bill to fix the separation problem, he wants the issue for the midterms
I'm referring to their policy as of the past month when they ramped up the "zero tolerance" policy. There are reports on legal checkpoints that they are denying all asylum seekers and aren't even checking if they are valid or not.
The Democrats in the Senate already have a bill that stops this but doesn't give in to the hostage negotiations of keeping kids detained for funding the wall.
gonna call bullshit on your claims and wait for data. 'zero tolerance' policy refers to those who broke the law (they won;t tolerate and will punish to the full extent of the law), so wouldn't apply to those legally seeking asylum. your claim makes no sense.
that doesn't say that all asylum seekers are blocked. it says 'Yet in several cities along the border, asylum seekers who follow those instructions are turned away and told to return later.' The response to this article would be 'no ****', just because you legally apply for asylum doesn't mean you will get it. If you don't get asylum, that's not justification to break our immigration laws.
I explicitly stated that they are blocked at certain points of entry without even seeing if their claims are valid. And it's easy for someone from an arm chair who luckily slipped out of a vagina within the borders of a modern and relatively safe first world nation to tell families fleeing conditions you probably couldn't handle a few weeks in to "come back at some indefinite period of time". I personally don't see people who wwre placed in predicaments that are not of their own free will and having a yearning to get out of that predicament "criminals" that deserve their family being split apart.
Well you know how it works, if you don't get your way immediately, it's best to just break the law and it's "cruel" if you face consequences for that.
you said they were blocking all asylum cases. here is your quote. you were even asked why the Trump administration would block all asylum cases. I am blessed. Not just to be born in good old USA but to have parents who raised me better than most these ******* illegal immigrant parents. Not sure how that's relevant. BTW, I also wouldn't bring a kid into this world if I had to break laws to provide for them. That's an ******* thing to do to a kid.
These people need to feel a pop in the mouth. My guess is they’ve lost respect and need to be reminded.
I don't think in your entire life youvyo experienced the condition that these familes have faced where they feel the need for "immediacy" where it isn't seen as being "spoiled". Wanting a BMW without proper income and credit immediately? That's being spoiled. You don't have a high horse to sit on to tell these people their "immediate" desires are them being spoiled because you are a psychopath who can't understand the pressing needs of familes that are in predicaments you will never face because you luckily slipped out of a vagina inside the borders of a safe first world nation.
Read my post carefully. Ya that's not what being "thankful" means. Being thankful means understanding that these familes are not automatically placed in the "*******" bin for a desire to live in a safe enviroment without a 15 year waiting period. I'm sure some of them are but it isn't because of a desire to "immediately" live in a safe country .
I did and you were wrong. maybe you misspoke or something and didn't mean that 'all asylum cases are denied', but then you even tried to defend the statement in the next post and in another.
That bill is essentially open borders. Prohibiting ICE from making arrests within 100 miles of the border? That is a farce. Democrats should be embarrassed for even writing that bill.
Ostensibly, Mexico is better than where they came from. They should have requested asylum there if it's truly legitimate. The fact that they didn't, that there is no state of war in their country, and that their country has a government and basic services, drives home the fact that these are economic migrants. I know it and you know it even if you won't admit it.
If an illegal immigrant is caught money laundering, I doubt very much that they would get extra sympathy if jailed and separated from their kids compared to a legal resident. The key thing here is not the nationality of the people committing the violation, but rather the nature of the violation and the motivations behind it. People who commit a harmful violation get less sympathy than people who commit a comparatively harmless violation. People who commit a violation out of individual greed get less sympathy than people committing a violation because they want a better life for their family. This isn’t a double standard. It’s just normal, human compassion. If you have it, you get it. If you don’t, you won’t.
Yeah but wouldn't that solve the problem? If you aren't allowed to arrest anyone for breaking the law, there will be no one caught breaking the law!
Oh, so in every other instance other than being detained and prosecuted for being an illegal immigrant it is no big deal to forcibly separate people from their children? You are doing a bang up job defending this form a moral standpoint LOL Also, deciding to skip the immigration process and just hop a fence is a violation of the law out of individual greed, they believe that they are far too important to wait in line like everyone else....which is why by far the most anti illegal immigration people I know are legal immigrants. They resent the selfish assholes who think that they are above the law. Also, when you claim that it is wrong to separate one group of people caught breaking the law from their children and it's not wrong to do so for literally everyone else, do you really think I'll believe you that it isn't a double standard? It's just you doing your best to make an emotional argument despite that argument running completely counter to logic.
