Trump's comments on SC and DACA

[GMDino]

(11-12-2019, 06:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Suggesting we ignore the above and next post is about.....

You can't make this stuff up people.

Weird.  

I said ignore it to point out that the Tweet was completely unnecessary and inflammatory and then in a separate post I pointed out the racist speak that Trump routinely uses when "asked" about it.

Almost like there were two different points in two different posts.  Neither of which were addressed in your response.

"You can't make this stuff up people."

[fredtoast]

(11-12-2019, 04:00 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  Stepping back into my own shoes I don't, for a second, believe that racism is the primary motivation of the vast majority of people opposed to DACA. 

The DACA debate is just an extension of the general "immigration" debates for 95% of the population.  They will line up on the same side of both.

And the strongest opponents of immigration always seem to play the racism angle when motivating their base.  Listen to Tucker Carlson and pay attention to how often he uses the phrase "preserving western culture".  Trump and FoxNews tried hard to sell the "lazy/criminal/dirty/diseased/drugged" stereotype of Mexican immigrants.  So why play so hard on racism if that is not the key issue to move their base?

To some people it sounds good to say "I am not racist at all.  I just want to preserve western culture in the United States."

[*bfine32*]

(11-12-2019, 07:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The DACA debate is just an extension of the general "immigration" debates for 95% of the population.  They will line up on the same side of both.

And the strongest opponents of immigration always seem to play the racism angle when motivating their base.  Listen to Tucker Carlson and pay attention to how often he uses the phrase "preserving western culture".  Trump and FoxNews tried hard to sell the "lazy/criminal/dirty/diseased/drugged" stereotype of Mexican immigrants.  So why play so hard on racism if that is not the key issue to move their base?

To some people it sounds good to say "I am not racist at all.  I just want to preserve western culture in the United States."

Does the Left dabble in hyperbole to support their view or just Right? 

As to the OP: Any immigrant who was brought here illegally by an adult should be granted a pathway to citizenship, but the adult should be sent south on the first thing smoking.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-12-2019, 01:02 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: When DACA was first announced, one of the pre-requisites to qualify for deferred action and/or a work permit is that you do not have any felonies or serious misdemeanors on your record.


https://www.dhs.gov/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca

So did the system fail and let felons in? Or is Trump lying?

(11-12-2019, 01:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: If that's the question there is no need for an answer. 

Or you could actually research the answer instead of falling back on "orange man bad".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50397928

"The Daca programme bars anyone with a criminal record from enrolling.

But according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services, almost 8% of Daca applicants had arrest records."

[BmorePat87]

It's a mistake to end DACA and the reasons for doing so are based in lies, but I'm pretty sure there's nothing stopping Trump from doing it besides his own personal reasons of using it as a bargaining chip.

[GMDino]

(11-12-2019, 08:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or you could actually research the answer instead of falling back on "orange man bad".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50397928

"The Daca programme bars anyone with a criminal record from enrolling.

But according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services, almost 8% of Daca applicants had arrest records."

http://myattorneyusa.com/immigration-blog/statistics-on-criminal-histories-of-daca-requestors

Quote:By far the two most common reasons for arrest among approved DACA requestors were driving related offenses excluding driving under the influence (38.90-percent of all arrests) and immigration-related offenses (22.05-percent). Only two other arrest types made up more than 5-percent of the total arrests for approved DACA requestors: theft, larceny, and similar offenses (12.32-percent) and drug-related excluding driving under the influence (8.57-percent). The USCIS news release notes that some individuals were approved with arrests for other offenses, including serious ones, such as battery (4.65-percent), driving under the influence (4.42-percent), assault (3.73-percent), rape (0.06-percent), and murder (0.02-percent).

From 2012 to 2018, 66,863 DACA requestors were denied DACA. Of these, 20,993, or 31.40-percent, had at least one arrest. Unfortunately, the USCIS's data does not include statistics on the nature of the arrests for those who were denied DACA benefits.


DACA requestors with no arrests were approved in 89.2-percent of all cases, and denied in 5.8% of cases. DACA requestors with exactly one arrest were approved in 70.8-percent of cases and denied in 17.5-percent of cases. Those DACA requestors with more than one arrest were approved in 54.8% of cases, while 33.5-percent of such cases were denied.
It is worth noting, however, that the vast majority of DACA requestors (797,297 in total) had no arrest record when the system was queried.

Quote:The term “arrests” includes civil apprehensions and does not reflect that the arrests resulted in convictions.

I'd think that "innocent until proven guilty" would be something known around these parts?

All seriousness aside someone defending Trump by saying he's not lying (did you see the "    "?) is hilarious. 

Gotta defend Trump though. Just gotta!

Edit to add: "Orange man" is bad. He's a liar and probably racist (or at least he appeals to them) along with many other faults. But that's just funny that people just that little quip to defend him and his words and actions. The adults in the room choose to address what he says and does without the cleverness of "orange man bad" I guess.

[GMDino]

(11-12-2019, 09:09 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It's a mistake to end DACA and the reasons for doing so are based in lies, but I'm pretty sure there's nothing stopping Trump from doing it besides his own personal reasons of using it as a bargaining chip.

Did a little listening today and one interesting (to me) point was that DJT could end it anytime he wanted...but then he would have to take the heat for doing that.  Instead he wants the courts to do it so he can say he had nothing to do with it on hand and claim victory for people who hate "them" being here on the other.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-12-2019, 09:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: http://myattorneyusa.com/immigration-blog/statistics-on-criminal-histories-of-daca-requestors






I'd think that "innocent until proven guilty" would be something known around these parts?

Of course.  An arrest is not the same as a conviction.  I do find your minimizing the seriousness of DUI's to be curious, seeing as they account for about as many deaths per years as firearms.  However, DACA applicants have to have a "clean criminal record".  Having an arrest on your record makes it no longer "clean".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41128905

"They must go through an FBI background check and have a clean criminal background, and either be in school, recently graduated or have been honourably discharged from the military."

Quote:All seriousness aside someone defending Trump by saying he's not lying (did you see the "    "?) is hilarious. 

Not defending him, merely pointing out that your kneejerk response to discount any possible alternative to his lying was completely wrong. 

Quote:Gotta defend Trump though. Just gotta!

Much more like gotta point out when your talking from your hindquarters.  Just gotta.

Quote:Edit to add:  "Orange man" is bad.  He's a liar and probably racist (or at least he appeals to them) along with many other faults.  But that's just funny that people just that little quip to defend him and his words and actions. The adults in the room choose to address what he says and does without the cleverness of "orange man bad" I guess.

Your arguments against Trump would be much more persuasive if they weren't mired in your clearly emotional response to just about everything he does.  It would also help if you didn't see every instance of someone pointing out an alternative to your viewpoint, or how you are demonstrably wrong, as "defending Trump".  You've become a complete broken record on this subject.  Maybe try a different tact and you'll actually convert a person or two.  Maybe.

[GMDino]

The WH press secretary has two DUI’s https://t.co/mHC19xzRxO

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 13, 2019

 

That's about 6.52% of all DACA recipients.

By FBI standards, 73.5 million people in the United States have a criminal record, or about 29.5 percent of adults.

Stop stoking fears. DACA recipients make us safer.

— Nick Jack Pappas (@Pappiness) November 13, 2019

[GMDino]

(11-12-2019, 10:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course.  An arrest is not the same as a conviction.  


Not defending him, merely pointing out that your kneejerk response to discount any possible alternative to his lying was completely wrong. 



Much more like gotta point out when your talking from your hindquarters.  Just gotta.



Your arguments against Trump would be much more persuasive if they weren't mired in your clearly emotional response to just about everything he does.  It would also help if you didn't see every instance of someone pointing out an alternative to your viewpoint, or how you are demonstrably wrong, as "defending Trump".  You've become a complete broken record on this subject.  Maybe try a different tact and you'll actually convert a person or two.  Maybe.

I don't think any Trump defender can be "converted" they have dug in and anything said about him is seen as, well, the bold above.



"different tact"

That's what I get for responding at all.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-12-2019, 10:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't think any Trump defender can be "converted" they have dug in and anything said about him is seen as, well, the bold above.

This is why I find anyone who actually defends your behavior on this board less than credible.  You persist in labeling anyone who disagrees with you a "Trump supporter".  You refuse to engage in a substantive debate on a subject beyond posting dad tier gifs and jpegs.  Yet, you have the hutzpah to accuse others of these very same type tactics.

Quote:"different tact"

That's what I get for responding at all.  

Then don't.  I know engaging in an actual facts based argument is difficult, but you might just learn something.

[CJD]

(11-12-2019, 08:53 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or you could actually research the answer instead of falling back on "orange man bad".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50397928

"The Daca programme bars anyone with a criminal record from enrolling.

But according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services, almost 8% of Daca applicants had arrest records."

It's interesting. Colloquially, the term "arrest record" is equivalent to "did a crime" as in convictions. But this website appears to only consider being arrested as having an arrest record (but it doesn't mention convictions).

I wonder how many of that 8% were convicted for the things they were arrested for or if the website is using the colloquial terminology and all 8% had been convicted of said crime.

Initially, I was inclined to believe the latter. But they ended with this line that made me wonder if convictions were considered.
"Numbers of arrests alone do not necessarily disqualify a person from receiving DACA as a matter of discretion."

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-12-2019, 11:41 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: It's interesting. Colloquially, the term "arrest record" is equivalent to "did a crime" as in convictions. But this website appears to only consider being arrested as having an arrest record (but it doesn't mention convictions).

I wonder how many of that 8% were convicted for the things they were arrested for or if the website is using the colloquial terminology and all 8% had been convicted of said crime.

I agree, it is interesting.  For example, would a person arrested for crime for which they were offered, and successfully completed, a diversion program be exempt?  What constitutes a "significant misdemeanor"?

Quote:Initially, I was inclined to believe the latter. But they ended with this line that made me wonder if convictions were considered.
"Numbers of arrests alone do not necessarily disqualify a person from receiving DACA as a matter of discretion."

If I'm being a cynical government employee I'm thinking that line is solely there to provide cover for being seen as punishing people for something they haven't been convicted of.  It doesn't say arrests only mean you qualify for a reason.  I'm sure the requirements are slightly nebulous so as to allow for wiggle room when deciding on borderline cases, in either direction.

[CJD]

(11-13-2019, 01:10 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree, it is interesting.  For example, would a person arrested for crime for which they were offered, and successfully completed, a diversion program be exempt?  What constitutes a "significant misdemeanor"?


If I'm being a cynical government employee I'm thinking that line is solely there to provide cover for being seen as punishing people for something they haven't been convicted of.  It doesn't say arrests only mean you qualify for a reason.  I'm sure the requirements are slightly nebulous so as to allow for wiggle room when deciding on borderline cases, in either direction.

Yea, it definitely seems like they kept the language vague so that they could allow for a subjective determination in edge cases.

As far as if DACA should be kept or not...As the husband of an immigrant who came here when she was 11 months old, I am obviously biased towards helping the DACA recipients. My wife wasn't illegal and wasn't a part of DACA (Her parents came on student visas, had a third child who is an American citizen, applied for permanent residency through that child and won, but my wife was over the age of 18 by that time, so the judge ruled she not get permanent residency. He did eventually approve her ability to stay in the country and get work authorizations as long as she didn't commit any crimes though, after initially ordering for her deportation), but the immigration system in this country is so brutal (and expensive), I definitely empathize with them.

I think they could very easily strip the DACA felons of their status and maintain the status for the non-criminals, if that is truly the issue. But I think the real problem many conservatives have with DACA is it sets a precedent to "reward" people who break the law. If they keep DACA, they fear more people will bring their children illegally and hope for DACA Round 2 to sweep them up.

Is this a realistic fear? I'm not certain...the reason DACA was created in the first place was because these children did not break the law, their parents did. So ruling against DACA has real world consequences for people who did nothing wrong. 

When my wife was ordered to be deported from the only country she had ever known to an unfamiliar country that she has no memory of, away from her parents and sister and with no real support structure outside of a few aunts she had never met before...it was genuinely traumatic for her (and me and her family and friends). I don't know why conservatives are so eager to condemn over 700,000 people, and their loved ones, to that fate simply out of principal.