Used Children Abandoned In The Desert

[iceberg]

Coyote - sorry but i am lost in the quotes now. you're making good points and i agree on a lot of them. my "in a nutshell" is we can't call them something else to get around a shitty process.

we need to fix the process. we seem to be an instant gratification society and standing in line isn't ok anymore when we can simply say "sure i'm this" and we're through.

going around the law simply leads to MORE going around laws and it won't be long before you don't like WHY the other person went around them and suddenly law is meaningless and it's how SOCIALLY AWARE are you that makes you "right".

i'd rather have the laws and fix them than try to debate why one side is justified going around laws but the other side isn't. that is tearing us up right now across the board.

if you want a better life or job, immigration. if your gov will kill you if you go home, asylum.

Well said. And I'm with you in that the entire system needs an overhaul...

what are the chances?

none of we keep arguing people not problems.

 

[Coyote]

hope this quote shit works.

what i am seeing is you can't "define" the actual difference as yes, there are many types. but seeking asylum is a specific target. a political opponent in china may ask for asylum because if he goes back to china, he dies. that is what it is for and no that should not be stopped.

Agree.

but it shouldn't be abused either. if you are coming over here because you want a better job or life - great. get in the much longer line. i'm sorry it's a long one and i'm sorry your country sucks and you wish to leave but that is your situation and the US as a country is horrible at how to handle this.

so far i agree.

True, but again - isn't that abuse sorted out in the courts? Most asylum requests get denied.

but what happened is they simply started saying "asylum" because the line was shorter. the democrats encouraged it because they found a way around what they view as an obstacle. i agree it's an obstacle but i disagree going around it with redefining things is a valid move to be allowed.

Maybe or maybe in some cases they genuinely are in fear for their lives. There is no question that some of those nations suffer from corrupt or weak central governments, rampant gang and cartel violence and violence towards women who have few legal rights or recourses to end it. So if they're trying for asylum it might not just be because "the line is shorter" - can you blame them? I don't see it as being "redefined" because the courts determine the outcome. It's like I can go and ask for food stamps and claim to be poor - but I'm not redefining poverty, and they will refuse me.

to me this is where we are. you seem to be leaning to "who cares what we call them, let them in" - but i'm not sure so i'll wait for you to say.

I think that's where maybe you're missing what I'm saying. I'm saying they have a right to apply for asylum - but that doesn't mean they have a right to GET asylum. That is determined by a judge who is familiar with immigration law. And I'm fine with that. That's not "let the in" - that's "let's follow the laws and procedures set up for granting asylum".

requesting asylum is a specific term for a specific process. not a magic word to make the long line of immigration disappear.

We actually AGREE on that - I think we just come at it from different angles

The quote system sucks. I had to make multiple attempts to fix mine.

except most who request it never show. but to the main point, why have the 2 lines if with one word they come on in?

we can't make it that easy.

appreciate stickng to topic. Thank you

Except...most who request it DO show up for their hearings.

Most Released Families Attend Immigration Court Hearings

trac.syr.edu

Nearly all asylum-seekers show up for court, data shows

More than a decade of data show that asylum-seekers and other migrants facing immigration hearings appear in court at least 83% of the time, with some rates as high as 96%. A new report challenges what one expert called a "pernicious myth."

www.tucsonsentinel.com

Just because there are multiple lines doesn't mean some won't try to get in through the wrong line. That's human nature. But it's easily fixed when they get their hearing and the merits of their case are examined.

How would you propose altering it in such a way that would not create hardship for genuine (or those who believe they are genuine) asylum seekers?

 

[Coyote]

Coyote - sorry but i am lost in the quotes now. you're making good points and i agree on a lot of them. my "in a nutshell" is we can't call them something else to get around a shitty process.

we need to fix the process. we seem to be an instant gratification society and standing in line isn't ok anymore when we can simply say "sure i'm this" and we're through.

going around the law simply leads to MORE going around laws and it won't be long before you don't like WHY the other person went around them and suddenly law is meaningless and it's how SOCIALLY AWARE are you that makes you "right".

i'd rather have the laws and fix them than try to debate why one side is justified going around laws but the other side isn't. that is tearing us up right now across the board.

if you want a better life or job, immigration. if your gov will kill you if you go home, asylum.

Well said. And I'm with you in that the entire system needs an overhaul...

what are the chances?

none of we keep arguing people not problems.

I think it's deeper than that. Congress has for decades kicked the immigration can down the road leaving it to presidents to attempt partial fixes through executive action.

Why isn't Congress doing it's job?

 

[iceberg]

Coyote - sorry but i am lost in the quotes now. you're making good points and i agree on a lot of them. my "in a nutshell" is we can't call them something else to get around a shitty process.

we need to fix the process. we seem to be an instant gratification society and standing in line isn't ok anymore when we can simply say "sure i'm this" and we're through.

going around the law simply leads to MORE going around laws and it won't be long before you don't like WHY the other person went around them and suddenly law is meaningless and it's how SOCIALLY AWARE are you that makes you "right".

i'd rather have the laws and fix them than try to debate why one side is justified going around laws but the other side isn't. that is tearing us up right now across the board.

if you want a better life or job, immigration. if your gov will kill you if you go home, asylum.

Well said. And I'm with you in that the entire system needs an overhaul...

what are the chances?

none of we keep arguing people not problems.

I think it's deeper than that. Congress has for decades kicked the immigration can down the road leaving it to presidents to attempt partial fixes through executive action.

Why isn't Congress doing it's job?

cause they're fuckers.

as for asking asylum, good question. how can we ensure people won't simply say that because no one is checking it?

 

[skye]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Think about it, these are just the ones that have been found.

Yes. When people start digging....well....it's not going to be pretty.

 

[bendog]

can you please cite the changes he made that altered the baseline issue that still exists today? this comes across as excusing your side/boy because you don't like where it could go.

I'll give any new president (yes, even Trump) a break at the beginning - do you?

Policies that altered the baseline issue - I would say the "the remain in Mexico" policy that created a huge number of people bottlenecked at the border waiting for a scarce number of daily appointments. When you add the new surge to that, you have crisis.

Why is it that Presidents will take credit for what are perceived as successes and blame the previous guy for failures? It seems each of them do this silly ploy.

Well, the nature of politics, but its irrefutable that Trump refused to grant Biden's tranistion team access to information about what was happening at the border.

Since Reagan's time we've let the border become a partisan issue. People can blame the dems, and it's true that new and first generation immigrant-americans trend D, but that's unchanged from even before 1900. And I was in DC when W tried rationality, and it wasn't the Dems who opposed it.

 

[BlueGin]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Lefties don’t care about the kids.

 

[iceberg]

hope this quote shit works.

what i am seeing is you can't "define" the actual difference as yes, there are many types. but seeking asylum is a specific target. a political opponent in china may ask for asylum because if he goes back to china, he dies. that is what it is for and no that should not be stopped.

Agree.

but it shouldn't be abused either. if you are coming over here because you want a better job or life - great. get in the much longer line. i'm sorry it's a long one and i'm sorry your country sucks and you wish to leave but that is your situation and the US as a country is horrible at how to handle this.

so far i agree.

True, but again - isn't that abuse sorted out in the courts? Most asylum requests get denied.

but what happened is they simply started saying "asylum" because the line was shorter. the democrats encouraged it because they found a way around what they view as an obstacle. i agree it's an obstacle but i disagree going around it with redefining things is a valid move to be allowed.

Maybe or maybe in some cases they genuinely are in fear for their lives. There is no question that some of those nations suffer from corrupt or weak central governments, rampant gang and cartel violence and violence towards women who have few legal rights or recourses to end it. So if they're trying for asylum it might not just be because "the line is shorter" - can you blame them? I don't see it as being "redefined" because the courts determine the outcome. It's like I can go and ask for food stamps and claim to be poor - but I'm not redefining poverty, and they will refuse me.

to me this is where we are. you seem to be leaning to "who cares what we call them, let them in" - but i'm not sure so i'll wait for you to say.

I think that's where maybe you're missing what I'm saying. I'm saying they have a right to apply for asylum - but that doesn't mean they have a right to GET asylum. That is determined by a judge who is familiar with immigration law. And I'm fine with that. That's not "let the in" - that's "let's follow the laws and procedures set up for granting asylum".

requesting asylum is a specific term for a specific process. not a magic word to make the long line of immigration disappear.

We actually AGREE on that - I think we just come at it from different angles

The quote system sucks. I had to make multiple attempts to fix mine.

except most who request it never show. but to the main point, why have the 2 lines if with one word they come on in?

we can't make it that easy.

appreciate stickng to topic. Thank you

Except...most who request it DO show up for their hearings.

Most Released Families Attend Immigration Court Hearings

trac.syr.edu

Nearly all asylum-seekers show up for court, data shows

More than a decade of data show that asylum-seekers and other migrants facing immigration hearings appear in court at least 83% of the time, with some rates as high as 96%. A new report challenges what one expert called a "pernicious myth."

www.tucsonsentinel.com

Just because there are multiple lines doesn't mean some won't try to get in through the wrong line. That's human nature. But it's easily fixed when they get their hearing and the merits of their case are examined.

How would you propose altering it in such a way that would not create hardship for genuine (or those who believe they are genuine) asylum seekers?

i have more time to get back to this one and wanted to.

first - i believe we agree on who can ask for asylum. simply living in a dangerous country isn't enough. it is spelled out here.
Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Protection under the Convention Against Torture (Form I589): Asylum is for individuals who fear they will be harmed if they return to their home country. You
must show that the harm you face is because of your race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or
membership in a particular social group. Normally you must apply for asylum within one year of
coming to the United States. If you have an aggravated felony, you will not be eligible for asylum.
Usually being afraid of returning to your home country because of general violence is not sufficient to
win asylum. Withholding of removal is for people who cannot qualify for asylum because of their
immigration history or criminal record. You have to show that there is more than a 50% chance that
you will be seriously harmed if sent back to your country. Finally, protection under the Convention
Against Torture is for people who do not qualify for asylum or withholding and who can show that they
will be tortured or killed if deported to their home country, by their home government or with their
government’s permission or knowledge.
------
so to properly ask for it - you must meet these conditions.

in 2010 - 940 people from s. america were granted asylum. while i don't know how many requested, a total of ~42k applied in 2010.

Facts and Statistics | US Asylum

www.shautsova.com

today, more than 1 million are requesting it.

More than 1 Million Migrants Are in the U.S. Seeking Asylum

A federal report reveals that 1.15 million asylum-seeking people are already living in the U.S., as Biden promises to welcome more migrants.

www.breitbart.com

There were 1,148,416 pending asylum cases in the United States — at a minimum. If those applicants were a state, they would be the 43rd largest in the United States, ahead of Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, the Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming.
-----
now these are "pending" and not all requested in 2020 - but you can see we're in a backlog from hell that will never get caught up. why?

cause in 2019 and 2020 - approximately 400k requested it. this is about a 50% increase over 2010 and growing. asylum requests doubled in 2017 and didn't drop at all til 2020.

now to even apply for asylum they must go through the immigration process anyway. as of july 2018, 733k cases backlogged. 721 days at the time to even get a hearing. reference

now - to fact check the article in reference that up to 96% do in fact show up. i look at immigration reform.

It appears that both of these claims come from the same source: a 2018 study by the American Immigration Council (AIC). The AIC is a radical open-borders organization that aggressively campaigns for eliminating essentially all measures that combat illegal immigration. Therefore, any figures from this organization should be examined with skepticism, and for good reason – these two figures are wrong.

so - no. they do not outside of this one study that appears heavily biased. so - to be fair, do we have any other study to validate this study? if a high number do in fact show, more than 1 study should illustrate that. the article itself breaks down the issues in the calculation of the number.

what i hope *is* clear is we have a backlog from hell, waiting time for even a trial at all is a year and a half, and people requesting to get into this process is at an all time high over the last 3 years and rising.

while i agree some valid people looking for asylum may be caught in this net - it's a trap of our own creation by allowing it to happen and our courts are backlogged due to the inaction of our congress on the matter. we've created our own firestorm and don't know how to put it out. but it would also appear a group of thousands of immigrants looking for a better life simply don't quality for requesting asylum. even if they do - they must go through the immigration process anyway.

so. how do we stop the abuse of a process that is tearing up our court system and still remain fair to said process and immigration strategies for our country?

changes would have to come. period. they should come from congress, but they are not doing it. so presidents write EO's like michael jordon handing out autographs at a basketball convention and we tear up a country trying to do something because our congress won't.

we need to stop bitching at the president for this, agree to short term moves many simply won't like to stop the bleeding, then fix the problem in congress where it should be fixed.

 

[bendog]

hope this quote shit works.

what i am seeing is you can't "define" the actual difference as yes, there are many types. but seeking asylum is a specific target. a political opponent in china may ask for asylum because if he goes back to china, he dies. that is what it is for and no that should not be stopped.

Agree.

but it shouldn't be abused either. if you are coming over here because you want a better job or life - great. get in the much longer line. i'm sorry it's a long one and i'm sorry your country sucks and you wish to leave but that is your situation and the US as a country is horrible at how to handle this.

so far i agree.

True, but again - isn't that abuse sorted out in the courts? Most asylum requests get denied.

but what happened is they simply started saying "asylum" because the line was shorter. the democrats encouraged it because they found a way around what they view as an obstacle. i agree it's an obstacle but i disagree going around it with redefining things is a valid move to be allowed.

Maybe or maybe in some cases they genuinely are in fear for their lives. There is no question that some of those nations suffer from corrupt or weak central governments, rampant gang and cartel violence and violence towards women who have few legal rights or recourses to end it. So if they're trying for asylum it might not just be because "the line is shorter" - can you blame them? I don't see it as being "redefined" because the courts determine the outcome. It's like I can go and ask for food stamps and claim to be poor - but I'm not redefining poverty, and they will refuse me.

to me this is where we are. you seem to be leaning to "who cares what we call them, let them in" - but i'm not sure so i'll wait for you to say.

I think that's where maybe you're missing what I'm saying. I'm saying they have a right to apply for asylum - but that doesn't mean they have a right to GET asylum. That is determined by a judge who is familiar with immigration law. And I'm fine with that. That's not "let the in" - that's "let's follow the laws and procedures set up for granting asylum".

requesting asylum is a specific term for a specific process. not a magic word to make the long line of immigration disappear.

We actually AGREE on that - I think we just come at it from different angles

The quote system sucks. I had to make multiple attempts to fix mine.

except most who request it never show. but to the main point, why have the 2 lines if with one word they come on in?

we can't make it that easy.

appreciate stickng to topic. Thank you

Except...most who request it DO show up for their hearings.

Most Released Families Attend Immigration Court Hearings

trac.syr.edu

Nearly all asylum-seekers show up for court, data shows

More than a decade of data show that asylum-seekers and other migrants facing immigration hearings appear in court at least 83% of the time, with some rates as high as 96%. A new report challenges what one expert called a "pernicious myth."

www.tucsonsentinel.com

Just because there are multiple lines doesn't mean some won't try to get in through the wrong line. That's human nature. But it's easily fixed when they get their hearing and the merits of their case are examined.

How would you propose altering it in such a way that would not create hardship for genuine (or those who believe they are genuine) asylum seekers?

i have more time to get back to this one and wanted to.

first - i believe we agree on who can ask for asylum. simply living in a dangerous country isn't enough. it is spelled out here.
Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Protection under the Convention Against Torture (Form I589): Asylum is for individuals who fear they will be harmed if they return to their home country. You
must show that the harm you face is because of your race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or
membership in a particular social group. Normally you must apply for asylum within one year of
coming to the United States. If you have an aggravated felony, you will not be eligible for asylum.
Usually being afraid of returning to your home country because of general violence is not sufficient to
win asylum. Withholding of removal is for people who cannot qualify for asylum because of their
immigration history or criminal record. You have to show that there is more than a 50% chance that
you will be seriously harmed if sent back to your country. Finally, protection under the Convention
Against Torture is for people who do not qualify for asylum or withholding and who can show that they
will be tortured or killed if deported to their home country, by their home government or with their
government’s permission or knowledge.
------
so to properly ask for it - you must meet these conditions.

in 2010 - 940 people from s. america were granted asylum. while i don't know how many requested, a total of ~42k applied in 2010.

Facts and Statistics | US Asylum

www.shautsova.com

today, more than 1 million are requesting it.

More than 1 Million Migrants Are in the U.S. Seeking Asylum

A federal report reveals that 1.15 million asylum-seeking people are already living in the U.S., as Biden promises to welcome more migrants.

www.breitbart.com

There were 1,148,416 pending asylum cases in the United States — at a minimum. If those applicants were a state, they would be the 43rd largest in the United States, ahead of Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, the Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming.
-----
now these are "pending" and not all requested in 2020 - but you can see we're in a backlog from hell that will never get caught up. why?

cause in 2019 and 2020 - approximately 400k requested it. this is about a 50% increase over 2010 and growing. asylum requests doubled in 2017 and didn't drop at all til 2020.

now to even apply for asylum they must go through the immigration process anyway. as of july 2018, 733k cases backlogged. 721 days at the time to even get a hearing. reference

now - to fact check the article in reference that up to 96% do in fact show up. i look at immigration reform.

It appears that both of these claims come from the same source: a 2018 study by the American Immigration Council (AIC). The AIC is a radical open-borders organization that aggressively campaigns for eliminating essentially all measures that combat illegal immigration. Therefore, any figures from this organization should be examined with skepticism, and for good reason – these two figures are wrong.

so - no. they do not outside of this one study that appears heavily biased. so - to be fair, do we have any other study to validate this study? if a high number do in fact show, more than 1 study should illustrate that. the article itself breaks down the issues in the calculation of the number.

what i hope *is* clear is we have a backlog from hell, waiting time for even a trial at all is a year and a half, and people requesting to get into this process is at an all time high over the last 3 years and rising.

while i agree some valid people looking for asylum may be caught in this net - it's a trap of our own creation by allowing it to happen and our courts are backlogged due to the inaction of our congress on the matter. we've created our own firestorm and don't know how to put it out. but it would also appear a group of thousands of immigrants looking for a better life simply don't quality for requesting asylum. even if they do - they must go through the immigration process anyway.

so. how do we stop the abuse of a process that is tearing up our court system and still remain fair to said process and immigration strategies for our country?

changes would have to come. period. they should come from congress, but they are not doing it. so presidents write EO's like michael jordon handing out autographs at a basketball convention and we tear up a country trying to do something because our congress won't.

we need to stop bitching at the president for this, agree to short term moves many simply won't like to stop the bleeding, then fix the problem in congress where it should be fixed.

Well if I lived somewhere like Guatemala where there's a really good chance I'd be murdered simply because I was living where an anarchist gang was moving through, I'd try for refugee status.

The "rules," such as they are, say I should illegally walk into the US, and surrender myself to authority. I thereby show I am submitting to the authority of the US govt. That legally entitles me under the Constitution to due process. A court must determine if I am a refugee worthy of asylum. I will then be released into the USA after promising to show up on my court date .... over a year away.

Not to bag on him because the options are limited, but Trump's solution was I must apply for asylum in my home country. Now assume I am actually fitting the definition of asylum and my "home country" wants to attach electrodes powered by car battery to my nether regions, or something, and eventually kill me .... Trump's solution is pretty "awkward."

Trump's "Plan B" may be the only solution. Just not let the folks in. If they make it into Mexico ... ok. But they have to stop at our border. And we can make it pretty hard to get in undetected. So unless I make it to "immigration intake office X" I will be just kicked back over the border (after being printed, photographed and "DNA"ed) and told I will NEVER be let in now. I can apply in Mexico and get in the years long line to even present my case. I may be robbed raped and beaten by anarchist gangs, but at least I'm no worse off than I was in Guatemala. And if I came from a country where my govt was really planning to systematically torture and kill me ... i'd be at least somewhat better off changing the anarchist gangs.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

 

[Cecilie1200]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

 

[TNHarley]

Guess the biden cultists forgot his admin has already admitted its BIDENS fault all this is so bad.
You can stop defending him now you fuckin idiots

 

[Coyote]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

Keep spinning. No one believes your crap, otherwise you would have been angered over the abuses that occured under Trump. You even defended it. Your concern was limited to keeping them out so take your self rightious lies someplace else.

 

[Cecilie1200]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

Keep spinning. No one believes your crap, otherwise you would have been angered over the abuses that occured under Trump. You even defended it. Your concern was limited to keeping them out so take your self rightious lies someplace else.

Man, that delusion of importance and relevance you have is one stubborn sumbitch, isn't it? There's literally no amount of not giving a shit what you think that will ever get you to stop believing that THIS time, your disapproval is going to matter.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

Keep spinning. No one believes your crap, otherwise you would have been angered over the abuses that occured under Trump. You even defended it. Your concern was limited to keeping them out so take your self rightious lies someplace else.

Nobody buys yours either.

Fckn left loons suddenly care about children? Oh me achin ribs. You pawn them, I know it and you know it.

 

[Orangecat]

Used Children Abandoned In The Desert​

Maybe we should put a deposit on them. Then bums would pick them up like empty aluminum cans. Problem solved.

Crap. I'm probably going to hell for that one...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

Keep spinning. No one believes your crap, otherwise you would have been angered over the abuses that occured under Trump. You even defended it. Your concern was limited to keeping them out so take your self rightious lies someplace else.

There were NO abuses under Trump. Just a sensible way to deal with a crimina.invasion.

 

[Coyote]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

Did you care when it was going on under Trump?

No.

You didn't.

Really? Your only response to children abandoned in the desert is, "Well . . . TRUMP! So there!"?

That definitely establishes that you don't care about illegal immigrant children now, then, or ever . . . unless you can use them for politics. That moral high horse you just tried to climb onto dumped your ass into the dirt.

Sorry. When I read about your newly found outrage, it comes off as hypocritical.

But please, keep insisting you care what happens with these kids. I've made my statement in other threads - this is on Biden now. He owns it now and he has to fix it.

And you? You've just face planted in the dirt. As usual. You didn't care before, you were fine with kids being raped and trafficked in the Mexican camps while they waited for a hearing. Your outrage is hollow.

There just weren't as many children raped and trafficked. Now there are tens of thousands. They are lured by Biden. It's a waste of time being outraged over Hispanic children raped and trafficked. They are meat on hoof. Commodities like cattle or pork bellies. The only thing possible for us to do is keep them out of here as much as possible.

I like this new narrative they're trying to deflect to, that the right "didn't care about illegals when Trump was President." Our concerns about illegal immigrants were a big reason WHY Trump was President.

Keep spinning. No one believes your crap, otherwise you would have been angered over the abuses that occured under Trump. You even defended it. Your concern was limited to keeping them out so take your self rightious lies someplace else.

Man, that delusion of importance and relevance you have is one stubborn sumbitch, isn't it? There's literally no amount of not giving a shit what you think that will ever get you to stop believing that THIS time, your disapproval is going to matter.

Oh, getting a bit touchy are you? For someone who doesn't give a shit. you sure keep responding, like the energizer bunny.

In the meantime it is good to note that unlike you fraudelent pro child and pro family values folks, the Dems are are actually putting pressure on Biden instead circling the wagons and pretending child abuse is a good thing because it will discourage illegal immigratiin.

Have a good day

 

[Coyote]

hope this quote shit works.

what i am seeing is you can't "define" the actual difference as yes, there are many types. but seeking asylum is a specific target. a political opponent in china may ask for asylum because if he goes back to china, he dies. that is what it is for and no that should not be stopped.

Agree.

but it shouldn't be abused either. if you are coming over here because you want a better job or life - great. get in the much longer line. i'm sorry it's a long one and i'm sorry your country sucks and you wish to leave but that is your situation and the US as a country is horrible at how to handle this.

so far i agree.

True, but again - isn't that abuse sorted out in the courts? Most asylum requests get denied.

but what happened is they simply started saying "asylum" because the line was shorter. the democrats encouraged it because they found a way around what they view as an obstacle. i agree it's an obstacle but i disagree going around it with redefining things is a valid move to be allowed.

Maybe or maybe in some cases they genuinely are in fear for their lives. There is no question that some of those nations suffer from corrupt or weak central governments, rampant gang and cartel violence and violence towards women who have few legal rights or recourses to end it. So if they're trying for asylum it might not just be because "the line is shorter" - can you blame them? I don't see it as being "redefined" because the courts determine the outcome. It's like I can go and ask for food stamps and claim to be poor - but I'm not redefining poverty, and they will refuse me.

to me this is where we are. you seem to be leaning to "who cares what we call them, let them in" - but i'm not sure so i'll wait for you to say.

I think that's where maybe you're missing what I'm saying. I'm saying they have a right to apply for asylum - but that doesn't mean they have a right to GET asylum. That is determined by a judge who is familiar with immigration law. And I'm fine with that. That's not "let the in" - that's "let's follow the laws and procedures set up for granting asylum".

requesting asylum is a specific term for a specific process. not a magic word to make the long line of immigration disappear.

We actually AGREE on that - I think we just come at it from different angles

The quote system sucks. I had to make multiple attempts to fix mine.

except most who request it never show. but to the main point, why have the 2 lines if with one word they come on in?

we can't make it that easy.

appreciate stickng to topic. Thank you

Except...most who request it DO show up for their hearings.

Most Released Families Attend Immigration Court Hearings

trac.syr.edu

Nearly all asylum-seekers show up for court, data shows

More than a decade of data show that asylum-seekers and other migrants facing immigration hearings appear in court at least 83% of the time, with some rates as high as 96%. A new report challenges what one expert called a "pernicious myth."

www.tucsonsentinel.com

Just because there are multiple lines doesn't mean some won't try to get in through the wrong line. That's human nature. But it's easily fixed when they get their hearing and the merits of their case are examined.

How would you propose altering it in such a way that would not create hardship for genuine (or those who believe they are genuine) asylum seekers?

i have more time to get back to this one and wanted to.

first - i believe we agree on who can ask for asylum. simply living in a dangerous country isn't enough. it is spelled out here.
Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and Protection under the Convention Against Torture (Form I589): Asylum is for individuals who fear they will be harmed if they return to their home country. You
must show that the harm you face is because of your race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or
membership in a particular social group. Normally you must apply for asylum within one year of
coming to the United States. If you have an aggravated felony, you will not be eligible for asylum.
Usually being afraid of returning to your home country because of general violence is not sufficient to
win asylum. Withholding of removal is for people who cannot qualify for asylum because of their
immigration history or criminal record. You have to show that there is more than a 50% chance that
you will be seriously harmed if sent back to your country. Finally, protection under the Convention
Against Torture is for people who do not qualify for asylum or withholding and who can show that they
will be tortured or killed if deported to their home country, by their home government or with their
government’s permission or knowledge.
------
so to properly ask for it - you must meet these conditions.

in 2010 - 940 people from s. america were granted asylum. while i don't know how many requested, a total of ~42k applied in 2010.

Facts and Statistics | US Asylum

www.shautsova.com

today, more than 1 million are requesting it.

More than 1 Million Migrants Are in the U.S. Seeking Asylum

A federal report reveals that 1.15 million asylum-seeking people are already living in the U.S., as Biden promises to welcome more migrants.

www.breitbart.com

There were 1,148,416 pending asylum cases in the United States — at a minimum. If those applicants were a state, they would be the 43rd largest in the United States, ahead of Montana, Rhode Island, Delaware, the Dakotas, Alaska, Vermont, and Wyoming.
-----
now these are "pending" and not all requested in 2020 - but you can see we're in a backlog from hell that will never get caught up. why?

cause in 2019 and 2020 - approximately 400k requested it. this is about a 50% increase over 2010 and growing. asylum requests doubled in 2017 and didn't drop at all til 2020.

now to even apply for asylum they must go through the immigration process anyway. as of july 2018, 733k cases backlogged. 721 days at the time to even get a hearing. reference

now - to fact check the article in reference that up to 96% do in fact show up. i look at immigration reform.

It appears that both of these claims come from the same source: a 2018 study by the American Immigration Council (AIC). The AIC is a radical open-borders organization that aggressively campaigns for eliminating essentially all measures that combat illegal immigration. Therefore, any figures from this organization should be examined with skepticism, and for good reason – these two figures are wrong.

so - no. they do not outside of this one study that appears heavily biased. so - to be fair, do we have any other study to validate this study? if a high number do in fact show, more than 1 study should illustrate that. the article itself breaks down the issues in the calculation of the number.

what i hope *is* clear is we have a backlog from hell, waiting time for even a trial at all is a year and a half, and people requesting to get into this process is at an all time high over the last 3 years and rising.

while i agree some valid people looking for asylum may be caught in this net - it's a trap of our own creation by allowing it to happen and our courts are backlogged due to the inaction of our congress on the matter. we've created our own firestorm and don't know how to put it out. but it would also appear a group of thousands of immigrants looking for a better life simply don't quality for requesting asylum. even if they do - they must go through the immigration process anyway.

so. how do we stop the abuse of a process that is tearing up our court system and still remain fair to said process and immigration strategies for our country?

changes would have to come. period. they should come from congress, but they are not doing it. so presidents write EO's like michael jordon handing out autographs at a basketball convention and we tear up a country trying to do something because our congress won't.

we need to stop bitching at the president for this, agree to short term moves many simply won't like to stop the bleeding, then fix the problem in congress where it should be fixed.

I am short of time and using my phone, but will respond later as this deserves a good response

 

[22lcidw]

These poor children are being used and abused by smugglers and cartels as a direct result of Biden's border policies. I hope the liberals that support this crap have nightmares about what they've done to these kids.

Border crisis: 5 unaccompanied migrant girls found abandoned in Texas

Five abandoned migrant girls, all under the age of 7, were discovered Sunday by a Texas farmer on his land in Quemado, near the Rio Grande River.

www.foxnews.com

from what i understand, coyotes (not coyote) used children under trump too. people have been abandoning children for a long time. to put this on biden and biden alone is just as strange to me as when the left tied every whack-a-mole extremist to trump.

you do it to try to discredit the other but it doesn't help the situation itself.

Trump at least made efforts to stop people from thinking the children would be their golden ticket. Biden has encouraged this.

that i won't deny. but this is a congress problem, not a presidential one. the drive by BLAME BIDEN FOR THIS EMO ISSUE TODAY is old. its always old. but it's as far as most people ever seem to know how to get to.

Yes, while this is also a congress problem ( reminder that Biden has been in federal government for 47 years ) it was greatly exacerbated by Biden immediately rescinding the Trump border policies which had at least stabilized the situation. Even the president of Mexico has said that Biden has encouraged this. Mexico alarmed as ‘migrant president’ Biden empowers TRAFFICKERS by encouraging illegal immigration – media

if you wish to lay entire courses of action and blame for what other people do on 1 person fine. we'll stay with that approach and then trumps policies caused all the trafficking at the time.

i'd rather we look more deeply into a problem to resolve it than how we can use a problem to blame someone else for it happening.

That one person currently has the power to stop this and chooses not to.

ok - if 1 person has the power to stop it - why didn't trump?

i'll wait.

You can stop many things. Its the knowledge that the decision made would be towards the extreme end of human patience. We all know what will eventually happen. We just do not spout it. A nation in decline that is having soul searching guilt pushed on it by elites who even use some of those children for their personal enjoyment. Foreign children are easier to abduct then domestic ones. But it is done here also.

OK now that's just RW nut crazyiness. We had people crossing the border for over a hundred years to seek work, and then return to families. What happened was people here started having families and staying. The kids grew up, got jobs and are citizens today. Late in the 20th century we ceased needing as many laborers.

ANd your fixation of pedophelia and democrats is creepy

Before the immigration act of 1965 or so the United States opened and closed its borders as needed. The men and women who came here then were absorbed into the culture. Making it more unique. But it took time. And it helped the economy to grow. It has been left open since the 1960's. With most from Central and South America. Legal and illegal. A lot have not assimilated. That does not mean in the neighborhoods that the old country can not be celebrated. It should be. But the official business and interactions are of the American culture. And English was that. We are now becoming bi lingual. In a high tax society with taxes getting higher.