Separating Immigrant Children From Their Parents

[Oblique]

Document reveals Trump administration planned on separating migrant families soon after inauguration
http://www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/watc...-1258507843548



Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoncXfYBAVI



Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53ObMpGWm18

There have been so many lies about this policy being told to us by this administration. We have people actually ok with this, people who claim to be "pro-life" and talk about how wrong abortion is yet locking kids in cages and taking them from their parents is just fine because they crossed a line made in dirt. Our drug policies, farm subsidies, gene patenting, and prison systems have greatly contributed to the problems these southern countries have which causes them to flee here in the first place. We do nothing to help with those root causes and we blame the people escaping those problems we helped cause by calling them criminals and use that as an excuse to dehumanize them and take their children away as hostages. Then use those children as leverage to get Trump his wall by acting like this is really all the Democrats fault and they're just following the law. This is pure psychopathic logic. If it was simply a matter of it being law and they all agree that the law is so awful, why are they defending it so much? Why are they making so many excuses for it? It's either awful or it isn't. You can't have it both ways. And if it was so awful, you wouldn't put ANY conditions on how it could be changed. You would make sure it got changed immediately because you actually give a shit about how children are being treated in the name of your country. Trump is once again exposing people for who they are. The more people support him, the more we all get to see true evil show its face.

[Oblique]

http://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html

"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter.

"You will understand me when I say that my Middle High German was my life. It was all I cared about. I was a scholar, a specialist. Then, suddenly, I was plunged into all the new activity, as the university was drawn into the new situation; meetings, conferences, interviews, ceremonies, and, above all, papers to be filled out, reports, bibliographies, lists, questionnaires. And on top of that were the demands in the community, the things in which one had to, was ‘expected to’ participate that had not been there or had not been important before. It was all rigmarole, of course, but it consumed all one’s energies, coming on top of the work one really wanted to do. You can see how easy it was, then, not to think about fundamental things. One had no time."

"Those," I said, "are the words of my friend the baker. ‘One had no time to think. There was so much going on.’"

"Your friend the baker was right," said my colleague. "The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your ‘little men,’ your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think?

"To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it—please try to believe me—unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.

"How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.

"Your ‘little men,’ your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late."

"Yes," I said.

"You see," my colleague went on, "one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty.

"Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, ‘everyone’ is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there would be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’

"And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have.

"But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to—to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait.

"But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.

"And one day, too late, your principles, if you were ever sensible of them, all rush in upon you. The burden of self-deception has grown too heavy, and some minor incident, in my case my little boy, hardly more than a baby, saying ‘Jewish swine,’ collapses it all at once, and you see that everything, everything, has changed and changed completely under your nose. The world you live in—your nation, your people—is not the world you were born in at all. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves; when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. Now you live in a system which rules without responsibility even to God. The system itself could not have intended this in the beginning, but in order to sustain itself it was compelled to go all the way.

"You have gone almost all the way yourself. Life is a continuing process, a flow, not a succession of acts and events at all. It has flowed to a new level, carrying you with it, without any effort on your part. On this new level you live, you have been living more comfortably every day, with new morals, new principles. You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things that your father, even in Germany, could not have imagined.

"Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). You remember those early meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.

"What then? You must then shoot yourself. A few did. Or ‘adjust’ your principles. Many tried, and some, I suppose, succeeded; not I, however. Or learn to live the rest of your life with your shame. This last is the nearest there is, under the circumstances, to heroism: shame. Many Germans became this poor kind of hero, many more, I think, than the world knows or cares to know."

I said nothing. I thought of nothing to say.

"I can tell you," my colleague went on, "of a man in Leipzig, a judge. He was not a Nazi, except nominally, but he certainly wasn’t an anti-Nazi. He was just—a judge. In ’42 or ’43, early ’43, I think it was, a Jew was tried before him in a case involving, but only incidentally, relations with an ‘Aryan’ woman. This was ‘race injury,’ something the Party was especially anxious to punish. In the case at bar, however, the judge had the power to convict the man of a ‘nonracial’ offense and send him to an ordinary prison for a very long term, thus saving him from Party ‘processing’ which would have meant concentration camp or, more probably, deportation and death. But the man was innocent of the ‘nonracial’ charge, in the judge’s opinion, and so, as an honorable judge, he acquitted him. Of course, the Party seized the Jew as soon as he left the courtroom."

"And the judge?"

"Yes, the judge. He could not get the case off his conscience—a case, mind you, in which he had acquitted an innocent man. He thought that he should have convicted him and saved him from the Party, but how could he have convicted an innocent man? The thing preyed on him more and more, and he had to talk about it, first to his family, then to his friends, and then to acquaintances. (That’s how I heard about it.) After the ’44 Putsch they arrested him. After that, I don’t know."

I said nothing.

"Once the war began," my colleague continued, "resistance, protest, criticism, complaint, all carried with them a multiplied likelihood of the greatest punishment. Mere lack of enthusiasm, or failure to show it in public, was ‘defeatism.’ You assumed that there were lists of those who would be ‘dealt with’ later, after the victory. Goebbels was very clever here, too. He continually promised a ‘victory orgy’ to ‘take care of’ those who thought that their ‘treasonable attitude’ had escaped notice. And he meant it; that was not just propaganda. And that was enough to put an end to all uncertainty.

"Once the war began, the government could do anything ‘necessary’ to win it; so it was with the ‘final solution of the Jewish problem,’ which the Nazis always talked about but never dared undertake, not even the Nazis, until war and its ‘necessities’ gave them the knowledge that they could get away with it. The people abroad who thought that war against Hitler would help the Jews were wrong. And the people in Germany who, once the war had begun, still thought of complaining, protesting, resisting, were betting on Germany’s losing the war. It was a long bet. Not many made it."

This is all happening right in front of us. Welcome to the Fourth Reich.

Pastor Niemöller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something—but then it was too late."

[Oblique]

So in todays Press meeting, we were told this was NOT being used as a deterrent and we were told this is all the Democrats fault. Yet in this article from March of last year, we have John Kelly saying they are considering separating children from their parents as a deterrent. Hmm...

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/06/polit...ration-border/

Kelly: DHS is considering separating undocumented children from their parents at the border

Washington (CNN)Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly confirmed that the department is considering separating children from their parents at the border.

"We have tremendous experience of dealing with unaccompanied minors," he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "We turn them over to (Health and Human Services) and they do a very, very good job of putting them in foster care or linking them up with parents or family members in the United States."
He continued: "Yes I'm considering (that), in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network. I am considering exactly that. They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents. ... It's more important to me, Wolf, to try to keep people off of this awful network."
A senior DHS official had previously told CNN that the department was considering a proposal to separate children from adults when they are trying to enter the country illegally at the southern border.
The official told CNN the proposal is meant to deter the exploitation of children.
Currently, when adults enter the country accompanied by children, they are generally released into the US and able to stay in the country, pending disposition of their cases, the official said.
The proposal would allow US immigration officials to separate children from the adults they came here with. The adults could be kept in detention, and the children could be moved elsewhere under protected status, possibly with family members already in the country or to state protective custody such as child protective services.
In a statement to CNN last week, DHS spokesman David Lapan said the agency "continually explores options that may discourage those from even beginning the journey."
"The journey north is a dangerous one, with too many situations where children -- brought by parents, relatives or smugglers -- are often exploited, abused or may even lose their lives," Lapan said at the time.
Leon Fresco, a former DOJ official in President Barack Obama's administration, said the previous administration considered, but ultimately rejected, the move.
"It was never implemented because the idea was that it was too detrimental to the safety of the children to separate them from their parents, and the thinking was it was always preferable to detain the family as a unit or release the family as the unit," Fresco said.

[Oblique]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump...der-are-981126

DONALD TRUMP JR. LIKES TWEET SUGGESTING CHILDREN SEPARATED FROM PARENTS AT BORDER ARE CRISIS ACTORS

President Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., liked a tweet suggesting that children who had been separated from their parents at the U.S. southern border had been “coached” by liberals, comparing them to crisis actors.

Trump Jr. liked the tweet from right-wing website Breitbart, which quoted conservative pundit Ann Coulter’s warning not to fall for “actor children,” amid criticism of the Trump administration’s policy of separating parents from their children at the border.

Will the real Alex Jones, please stand up.

[Oblique]

Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2NFp24hv04

1. Get called a Nazi
2. Use Nazi logic to defend against Nazi accusation
3. ????
4. Heil Hitler



Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4Ax_f3Wg7g

1. Keep illegal immigrants in holding
2. Claim not a Nazi because not trying to keep them from leaving
3. ????
4. Heil Hitler

[DIYAutoRepair]

Originally Posted by phreakdna

it should be in every thread. that policy and how they're enforcing it are fucking monstrous. its so morally repugnant that Kevin Yoder felt like he had to say something and I think it might actually pain him to disagree with Trump on even the little shit.

So, what should they do with the 10,000 children who come here without any parents?

Or the children who arrive with an adult who is not their parent?

What should they do with the 1yo who arrived with her father who is an MS13 gang member?

Yoder is a swamp dweller, and political hack. He will say whatever sounds good to the media.

[Oblique]

Originally Posted by DIYAutoRepair

So, what should they do with the 10,000 children who come here without any parents?

Or the children who arrive with an adult who is not their parent?

What should they do with the 1yo who arrived with her father who is an MS13 gang member?

Yoder is a swamp dweller, and political hack. He will say whatever sounds good to the media.

What they were doing before. Not holding them hostage and trying to use them as leverage to get a psychopath a worthless expensive monument to his ego built.

[TWEETY]

What is that famous KCSR response?







STOP BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLE!!!

[Oblique]

Originally Posted by TWEETY

What is that famous KCSR response?







STOP BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLE!!!

Does breaking the law give carte blanche to do anything you want to the law breaker? Even Trump and his administration repeatedly say this "law" (that doesn't actually exist) is unjust and awful, yet people still defend it. Then they say this law could be changed if only the Democrats would come to the table on immigration reform. So they are putting stipulations on whether or not they will change this "horrible" law based on if they get what they want or not. They are using the lives of children as leverage. They aren't even doing a decent half way job of trying to hide this either. Think about that.

[DIYAutoRepair]

Originally Posted by Oblique

What they were doing before. Not holding them hostage and trying to use them as leverage to get a psychopath a worthless expensive monument to his ego built.

They are doing what they were doing before.

Obama aides were warned of brewing border crisis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.3edafc954b68

The number of minors arriving illegally from Central America shot from 3,933 in 2011 to 20,805 in 2013. HHS had secured 5,000 beds across the country — twice as many as the previous year — but that wasn’t enough. Immigration courts were backlogged. Border Patrol stations were overrun. Federal officials estimated that the total number of minors would soar to 60,000 in 2014.

And no one knew what to do with them all.

[DIYAutoRepair]

Originally Posted by Oblique

Even Trump and his administration repeatedly say this "law" (that doesn't actually exist) is unjust and awful, yet people still defend it. Then they say this law could be changed if only the Democrats would come to the table on immigration reform.

Best way to get a bad law changed is to enforce it.

[TWEETY]

Originally Posted by Oblique

Does breaking the law give carte blanche to do anything you want to the law breaker? Even Trump and his administration repeatedly say this "law" (that doesn't actually exist) is unjust and awful, yet people still defend it. Then they say this law could be changed if only the Democrats would come to the table on immigration reform. So they are putting stipulations on whether or not they will change this "horrible" law based on if they get what they want or not. They are using the lives of children as leverage. They aren't even doing a decent half way job of trying to hide this either. Think about that.

The current administration is following the immigration laws set forth years ago. Obama, Bush, and Clinton, are all on video saying illegal immigration is bad for our country and must be stopped. So now, it is being brought out into the spotlight, and talked about. And the talking points have all been exaggerated, just for the sake of sensationalizing the topic. The Morning Show" or whatever is on channel 5 at 7am CST, had one of the hosts interviewing the HISPANIC person (do not remember his name) in charge of a particular part of the border on yesterday morning. A very problematic portion of the border, mind you. His side, as someone who has lived and worked there for years is quite substantially different from what has been the talking points or headlines. There are legal ways and illegal ways of entering the country and asking for asylum. All those that are arrested, are entering illegally. The children are taken care of in the same manner as any US children are when parents are facing legal actions.

[Oblique]

Originally Posted by TWEETY

The current administration is following the immigration laws set forth years ago. Obama, Bush, and Clinton, are all on video saying illegal immigration is bad for our country and must be stopped. So now, it is being brought out into the spotlight, and talked about. And the talking points have all been exaggerated, just for the sake of sensationalizing the topic. The Morning Show" or whatever is on channel 5 at 7am CST, had one of the hosts interviewing the HISPANIC person (do not remember his name) in charge of a particular part of the border on yesterday morning. A very problematic portion of the border, mind you. His side, as someone who has lived and worked there for years is quite substantially different from what has been the talking points or headlines. There are legal ways and illegal ways of entering the country and asking for asylum. All those that are arrested, are entering illegally. The children are taken care of in the same manner as any US children are when parents are facing legal actions.

Then why didn't any of them follow this supposed law if they set it forth? I'm suppose to trust one guy who is a part of this whole thing simply because he's Hispanic? I'm sure he has no reason to lie or under report the situation.

Sessions narrowed the scope for asylum seekers and gang violence is no longer within that scope which is a huge reason they make the trip up here in the first place. Plus, it's not as simple as you're making it sound.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...asy/710796002/

To say this is the same manner in which US children are taken care of when their parents are facing legal action is pretty dishonest. This is only the stuff they put out themselves. Do you really think this the best representation of what's going on?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/trum...-pictures.html

[Oblique]

Originally Posted by DIYAutoRepair

They are doing what they were doing before.

Obama aides were warned of brewing border crisis

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.3edafc954b68

If they're just doing what previous administrations were doing, why did John Kelly say they were considering separating children from their parents as a deterrent in March last year? And why did Sessions make a big announcement about the no tolerance policy and specifically state that they would separate kids from their parents if this was just the same old policy? Stop with the bullshit Trump talking points. They're lies.

[DIYAutoRepair]

OK, ignore the facts and believe what you want. Typical Liberal thinking.

Just because the liberal media highlights the issue now doesn't mean it wasn't going on during all previous admins.

[Oblique]

Originally Posted by DIYAutoRepair

OK, ignore the facts and believe what you want. Typical Liberal thinking.

Just because the liberal media highlights the issue now doesn't mean it wasn't going on during all previous admins.

I'm ignoring the facts??? Do you not understand this situation at all? There you go back to your comforting dismissive word, liberal. The insult you use when your mind knows you're wrong and can't come up with any arguments so you throw out this blanket label that allows your mind to discredit me.

Here, do some reading.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...m_politics_pop

The Daily 202: Trump team cannot get its story straight on separating migrant families

THE BIG IDEA: “We do not have a policy of separating families at the border,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen tweeted last night. “Period.”

This formulation is striking because President Trump’s top domestic policy adviser, Stephen Miller, was quoted in Sunday’s New York Times touting the crackdown. “It was a simple decision by the administration to have a zero tolerance policy for illegal entry,” he said. “Period.”

DHS announced last week that around 2,000 children have been taken from their families during the six weeks since the policy went into effect, and officials acknowledge the number may be even higher.

More than a month after Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Trump’s new “zero tolerance” policy to great fanfare, members of the administration continue to struggle with how to talk about it – alternating between defending the initiative as a necessary deterrent, distancing themselves, blaming Democrats, trying to use it as leverage for negotiations with Congress or denying that it exists at all.

On Sunday alone, which happened to be Father’s Day, here’s a taste of what current and former members of Trump’s team had to say about taking kids away from their undocumented parents:

“The policy is incredibly complicated, and it is one we need to do a better job of communicating,” said Marc Short, the president’s liaison to Capitol Hill, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. “We've not talked about the history of how we got to this point.”

“Nobody likes seeing babies ripped from their mothers’ arms,” said Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience... I will tell you that nobody likes this policy.” Then she blamed the legislative branch. “Congress passed a law that it is a crime,” Conway said. “This is a congressional law from many years ago. It is a crime to enter this country illegally. So if they don’t like that law, they should change it.”

Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that Sessions is “not giving the president the best advice” on how to handle this situation. “I know President Trump doesn't like the children taken away from their parents,” he said. “Jeff is not giving the president the best advice!”

In a very rare statement, first lady Melania Trump (an immigrant herself) called for the government to show “heart” when enforcing the law. “Mrs. Trump hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform,” her spokeswoman, Stephanie Grisham, told CNN. “She believes we need to be a country that follows all laws, but also a country that governs with heart.”

“The first lady’s decision to step into the debate makes the silence of another Trump family member all the more telling,” notes columnist Karen Tumulty. “Where is Ivanka Trump, who is actually an official adviser to her father — and the one who claims that family issues are her portfolio?”

“I don’t think you have to justify it,” countered former chief White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon on ABC’s “This Week.” “We have a crisis on the southern border. … They are criminals when they come here illegally. … He has a zero-tolerance situation. He has drawn a line in the sand. I don't think he's going to back off from it.”

On Twitter, the president has continued to falsely blame Democrats for the separations. “I hate the children being taken away," Trump insisted Friday on the White House lawn. “The Democrats have to change their law. That's their law.”

But nonpartisan fact checkers agree that the recent surge in separations is the result of Trump’s order. He signed off on prosecuting all migrants who cross the border, including those with young children. Once they’re locked up, the administration declares the kids to be unaccompanied minors and turns them over to a division of the Department of Health and Human Services to care for. The White House has also begun interpreting a 1997 legal agreement and a 2008 bipartisan human trafficking bill as requiring the separation of families. Neither George W. Bush or Barack Obama took this posture.

Sessions, who continues to vigorously defend the policy he pushed for internally, freely acknowledges that Bush and Obama did not interpret the law the same way that Trump is doing now. “The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute illegal aliens who entered the country with children,” he said last Thursday in Fort Wayne, Ind. “I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes.” (Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended using religion to justify the policy. “I can say that it is very biblical to enforce the law,” the White House press secretary told reporters that afternoon.)

“Senior Trump strategists” told my colleagues who cover the White House on Friday that Trump believes he can use these kids as bargaining chips to force Democrats to negotiate a broader deal, which might include money for the border wall he desperately wants and reductions in the number of legal immigrants who are allowed into the United States. “The thinking in the building is to force people to the table,” a White House official said. “If they aren’t going to cooperate, we are going to look to utilize the laws as hard as we can,” said a second White House official.

Remember that Trump also sought to use the “dreamers” as bargaining chips earlier this year. After ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that protected undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children, Trump blamed Democrats and dangled a DACA fix as he demanded massive concessions. Miller subsequently torpedoed a bipartisan compromise.

-- What’s undeniable at this point is that the separations have created both escalating humanitarian and political problems for the president. Period.

-- Former first lady Laura Bush compares what’s happening to Japanese internment in an op-ed for today’s Washington Post: “I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our international boundaries, but this zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart. Our government should not be in the business of warehousing children in converted box stores or making plans to place them in tent cities in the desert outside of El Paso. These images are eerily reminiscent of the Japanese American internment camps of World War II, now considered to have been one of the most shameful episodes in U.S. history. We also know that this treatment inflicts trauma; interned Japanese have been two times as likely to suffer cardiovascular disease or die prematurely than those who were not interned.

“Americans pride ourselves on being a moral nation … If we are truly that country, then it is our obligation to reunite these detained children with their parents — and to stop separating parents and children in the first place. … Recently, Colleen Kraft, who heads the American Academy of Pediatrics, visited a shelter run by the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement. She reported that while there were beds, toys, crayons, a playground and diaper changes, the people working at the shelter had been instructed not to pick up or touch the children to comfort them. Imagine not being able to pick up a child who is not yet out of diapers.

“People on all sides agree that our immigration system isn’t working, but the injustice of zero tolerance is not the answer. I moved away from Washington almost a decade ago, but I know there are good people at all levels of government who can do better to fix this.”

It’s hard to overstate how rare it is for Mrs. Bush to weigh in on a policy matter this way. What’s especially striking is how clear she is on the cause. There’s none of the obfuscation or ambiguity about Congress needing to fix the problem that we’re hearing from others.

If that's too hard to comprehend, here's a nice easily digestible video for you. Starts at 5:25.



Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRF4KUk1smA&t

[DIYAutoRepair]

Did you not listen to this yesterday?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OgV8zHLbrw



Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OgV8zHLbrw

[Oblique]

This bitch is a spin doctor. I'm not sure how this has anything to do with the things I have said and how that means I'm ignoring facts. They're holding children as hostages and using them leverage, period. They are saying it in plain English.

How about we change our drug policies that give the Cartels all their money? And I'm sure the detaining of all these illegals isn't going to cause great resentment towards our country and end up in the creation of more gang members. You know, how MS13 started and spread in the first place.

This woman wants to talk about the opioid crisis and yet Trump's own lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, worked to get the biggest opioid dealer in the country off with a fine and allow them to continue their business. What a fucking joke. Death penalty for heroin dealers, fines for Oxycontin dealers.

[DIYAutoRepair]

The basic issue is not our enforcement of current law, it is the parents knowingly putting their children in this situation.

If parents don't want to be separated from their children, don't enter the country illegally.

This has been going on for decades and many previous administrations. The media is just highlighting this for political reasons to help the Dems during the mid-terms and to encourage catch and release.

[TAILWAG]

There are many laws that are f'd up currently. You can't fix them by putting a band-aid - you have to do something completely different, and most times, it will get worse before it gets better.

This is one of those situations. ILLEGAL immigration has been a huge problem for decades and it is not getting any better - why? Because the punishment/consequences were not enough to deter the offenders.

Read up on Singapore and how they fixed a lot of problems. People thought the worst of them, but look at that country now.

[TWEETY]

Originally Posted by DIYAutoRepair

The basic issue is not our enforcement of current law, it is the parents knowingly putting their children in this situation.

If parents don't want to be separated from their children, don't enter the country illegally.

It cannot be put in any simpler terms.

If you don't want a speeding ticket, don't speed.
If you don't want a murder charge, don't murder someone.
If you don't want your child to get hurt, don't put them in situations where they can be.
If you don't want to lose your child for doing something stupid/illegal, then don't do it. Doesn't matter how much easier it is to say "come to our country legally". If you do it illegally, it is still illegal no matter what the circumstances are.

So back to that infamous KCSR motto......Stop breaking the law, asshole!!

[Oblique]

This is really bad logic to state a punishment and then say if you don't want that punishment don't do X. How far are you willing to take that? You could use that logic to justify practically anything. Again I say, if this is such an important thing to do, separating kids from their parents, then why are they talking about getting rid of the law if only the Democrats would negotiate? This is a strategy, nothing more, nothing less. These kids are pawns in Trump's game.

By the way, I'm actually completely against illegal immigration. That was the one thing I actually agreed with Trump on except I absolutely did not agree with his rhetoric, his methods and I do not agree with this either. You know what attracted these people here in the first place? Jobs. You know who used to love hiring illegal immigrants for his modeling agency? Trump. How about we go after people who hire illegals, dry up that incentive and see where that leads us.

[phreakdna]

and yet there are already a number of reports of asylum seekers either being denied entry at official ports of entry and of others being separated from their children by DHS at official ports of entry...

so no this, isn't just a case of stop breaking the law assholes. this is a systematic and vicious attack on all immigration and asylum seekers intentionally designed to fuck with people who want to make a better lives for themselves and their kids.

we are effectively at full employment and have hundreds of thousands of jobs that need filled and rather than continue to be the compassionate "city on the hill" we're now the petty, moronic assholes digging our own graves.

this isn't about liberal or conservative. its about informed and uninformed. its just another example of this administration fucking with "the other" to make their supporters feel better... the fact that its mostly fucking with brown people may not be a feature but it certainly isn't a bug to them either.

[DIYAutoRepair]

Originally Posted by Oblique

This is really bad logic to state a punishment and then say if you don't want that punishment don't do X.

That is exactly what laws are. If you speed you get a ticket. I you kill someone you go to jail.

I know, how about I enter your house illegally and just live there? Will you have me arrested and separated from my children?

[DIYAutoRepair]

Originally Posted by phreakdna

we are effectively at full employment and have hundreds of thousands of jobs that need filled

MAGA Thanks Trump!!!!!!