Black Sunday

[Dill]

(11-26-2018, 03:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, legal entry is the pragmatic answer.

You speak as if that were some untried alternative; but we had a program for legal entry in place before Sunday.

Trump just shut down legal entry. That was not a pragmatic answer. Unnecessary violence followed to "protect our borders."

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 11:54 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: OK, just how many are you prepared to allow to enter and in what frame of time?

100,000 a year.

How about you.  What is your number?

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 04:02 PM)Benton Wrote: Trump tried to deter them by arresting them and charging them, which resulted in separating them. That was his answer. It wasn't his goal (I don't think) but that was the result.

He actually tried to deter them when they were miles away from our border. Folks got mad because it was a political stunt.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 04:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He actually tried to deter them when they were miles away from our border.

Under a UN agreement we are required to address requests for asylum from refugees.

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 04:06 PM)Dill Wrote: You speak as if that were some untried alternative; but we had a program for legal entry in place before Sunday.

Trump just shut down legal entry. That was not a pragmatic answer. Unnecessary violence followed to "protect our borders."

I agree the violence was unnecessary. I'm simply placing the onus on the folks breaking the law instead of those protecting it.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 04:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree the violence was unnecessary. I'm simply placing the onus on the folks breaking the law instead of those protecting it.

There is nothing illegal about surrendering to authorities at the border to request asylum.

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 04:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is nothing illegal about surrendering to authorities at the border to request asylum.

There sure isn't fred.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 12:15 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Look I believe in the words on The Statue of Liberty, and i'm happy to welcome those fleeing oppression, but you do it our way, even if you think our way is stupid,  and if that is too much of a burden, then turn around.  

They are entitled to surrender to authorities at the border to request asylum.

[Au165]

(11-26-2018, 04:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Folks got mad because it was a political stunt.

It was, and still is, a political stunt. This has been a mountain turned into a mole hill for the sake of appealing to a political base who wants to find a scape goat for our struggles as a nation. As it has been laid out multiple times we have had far larger border issues in the past that didn't require a daily update on the "caravan", or sending exorbitant amounts of military personnel there ,or allowing an order that goes against the Posse Comitatus act to flex muscle in a way that isn't even legal.

There was a way to go about all of this that was not a circus, but a circus was meant by design.

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 04:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There sure isn't fred.

So how many have been allowed to do this?

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2018, 04:11 PM)Au165 Wrote: This has been a mountain turned into a mole hill for the sake of appealing to a political base who wants to find a scape goat for our struggles. 

For the last 40 years 90% of all new wealth created in the United States has gone to the top 5%.  And the top 5% have duped the rubes into believing that their biggest economic threat comes from poor immigrants.

[Au165]

(11-26-2018, 04:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: For the last 40 years 90% of all new wealth created in the United States has gone to the top 5%.  And the top 5% have duped the rubes into believing that their biggest economic threat comes from poor immigrants.

[Dill]

(11-26-2018, 04:02 PM)Benton Wrote: Trump tried to deter them by arresting them and charging them, which resulted in separating them. That was his answer. It wasn't his goal (I don't think) but that was the result.

No. Separation was the goal. The hope was that word would spread South--"We'll take your children if you reach our borders." 

Librals mucked up the policy by crying about children's rights and the media made Trump look cruel and insensitive--just like they did when he wanted soldiers to shoot rock throwers or when he gasses children. Imagine how much Trump could get done on the border if only the free press could be barred. 

https://psmag.com/news/how-the-trump-administration-built-a-family-separation-policy-while-denying-it-existed

On May 11th, in the midst of intense public backlash, Trump's incoming chief of staff John Kelly had defended family separation as a necessary evil that acted as a "deterrent" for illegal immigration. Five days later, Nielsen also defended the policy in a Senate hearing, though she continued to deny that Trump had ordered the separations. She held that "zero-tolerance" prosecution made every adult migrant a criminal, and therefore justified separating their children from them.

In June, a little over a week after Nielsen declared, "We will not apologize for doing our job" and separating families, a federal judge in California ordered the government to reunite separated children with their families.

[Dill]

(11-26-2018, 04:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree the violence was unnecessary. I'm simply placing the onus on the folks breaking the law instead of those protecting it.

Of course you are. That is the best defense of a choice to shut down the border and deny asylum seekers the opportunity to present themselves legally to U.S. authorities.

The jury is still out though, on whether the order to shut down the border is protecting the law or breaking it. The courts may have to decide that.

[Dill]

(11-26-2018, 04:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 100,000 a year.

How about you.  What is your number?

Just going by the pre-Trump standard, what's the problem with 110,000?  

[jj22]

(11-26-2018, 04:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: For the last 40 years 90% of all new wealth created in the United States has gone to the top 5%.  And the top 5% have duped the rubes into believing that their biggest economic threat comes from poor immigrants.

Same thing Hitler did to the Jews.

Before he began to gas them.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-26-2018, 04:28 PM)jj22 Wrote: Same thing Hitler did to the Jews.

Before he began to gas them.

Godwin's law strikes early.

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So how many have been allowed to do this?

I have zero idea. But it doesn't change the simple fact that you cannot enter this country illegally. From what I understand many have been authorized sanctuary in Mexico. Perhaps that is their best answer at this point.

[*bfine32*]

(11-26-2018, 04:25 PM)Dill Wrote: Of course you are. That is the best defense of a choice to shut down the border and deny asylum seekers the opportunity to present themselves legally to U.S. authorities.

The jury is still out though, on whether the order to shut down the border is protecting the law or breaking it. The courts may have to decide that.

You really don't need me in the conversation do you?

[Benton]

(11-26-2018, 04:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He actually tried to deter them when they were miles away from our border. Folks got mad because it was a political stunt.

With which group? The ones he separated or the caravan?

Personally, I think the answer is that both were political stunts. Trump has no problem with chain migration and hiring migrant workers ... except when he's on Twitter complaining about chain migration and migrant workers.