I Was Told That Democrats Were Not for Open Borders
- Thread starter wvkeeper(HN)
- Start date
Not firing squads, maybe a mine field.
You can't seek asylum because your country is poor economically.
He lives in lily white wayne county there arent any mexicans black people asians or any other minority group, unless you count backwoods baptists with 2 religions
Not firing squads, maybe a mine field.
You can't seek asylum because your country is poor economically.
It's already been explained to you that it can't be determined whether you qualify for asylum if you're prevented from applying.
False
False
False^^^
So you've finally recognized Scientology as a religion. You woke??
so we end up with thousands of people in holding facilities and they end up here permanently while they are trying to prove they are worthy of asylum when we know for the most part the vast majority of them are not seeking valid asylum. Oh, and they just skip it all together and run at will across our borders into the country. Gotcha.
No. See, you're completely clueless about this stuff. You have no idea about the arguments of why people are pushing for the decriminalization. On top of that, your own statement makes no sense. If they are in holding facilities like you said, how do they end up here permanently if they are not worthy of asylum? Just stop. I like you, but you're forcing me to call out your rampant stupidity on this.
Tell us, how do you know who is/isn't a legit asylum seeker when they are turned away before reaching the border? You simply can't.
You cons always claim you're for law and order, until it's inconvenient for you. This nation has actual LAWS regarding asylum seekers....
but hey there's always the firing squads.
Oh my bad in a county of approximately 40000 there are almost 500 people of color. Congrats you may see one at a stop light if you are lucky. And no scientology is STILL not a religion. Maybe one of these days you will tell your christian congregation that you practice a second religion.
Nobody ignored the laws, moron. There are laws and procedures in place to do things the right way and alleviate these unnecessary deaths. cheeto has skirted those rules and procedures by ordering border patrol not to follow them. Even you can understand what cheeto has done and how it has resulted in unnecessary deaths.
Scientology is no less of a religion than Christianity. They are both full of bizarre, illogical, and absurd bullshit created to keep humanity in line and control them.
You need to have a conversation with yourself ( I realize how scary that is ) and figure out which, if any, of the voices in your head are correct.
The latest news media of deaths were from people that drowned in a river crossing. What does that have to do with any law or anything whatsoever? What law or changing of the immigration policy would stop that from happening?
How many deaths have resulted in these people and giving them three hots and a cot or place to sleep? How many?
They might die on the way or here or out in the desert or something. But, we are not killing them.
Let me continue to educate you since you appear to be clueless on how to learn on your own.
1) For decades, U.S. law has required that in order to claim asylum, one must be on U.S. soil. The legal way to do that is to make that claim at a border crossing.
2) Not wanting to allow more immigrants into the country, asylum seekers or not, cheeto instructed border patrol to prohibit potential asylum seekers from getting anywhere close to U.S. soil at border crossings. The border agents stop crossers on the bridge before they can get close to U.S. soil, thus prohibiting them from legally claiming asylum. This isn't something new or that is debatable. This administration has been doing this for 1.5 years and doesn't even deny it is happening since it is so in the open.
3) To further make it nearly impossible to legally come to the U.S., cheeto has introduced a strategy that his administrations calls "metering." Metering is a way that allows only a handful of asylum seekers at a crossing each day and/or that are allowed to claim asylum. If you aren't one of those handful, you are stopped before reaching U.S. soil and told to come back in a few weeks.
3) The 25 year old guy, his wife, and their daughter went to a U.S. consulate to arrange a date that they could claim asylum. However, due to this administration's metering strategy, the consulate only does about 40 interviews for asylum per WEEK. There are 1700 names on the waiting list to interview. That means this family - the 25 year old husband, 21 year old wife, and little baby - would have to wait 43 WEEKS just to INTERVIEW. Actually having their case go through the courts could take months or even years after that 43 day wait.You realize that isn't always an option for people seeking asylum, right?
4) After that legal attempt meant they'd have to return to what they were escaping from, they tried the other legal way - claiming asylum at a border crossing. However, they were turned away from that crossing before being able to reach U.S. soil (which is something this administration created as a way to greatly reduce asylum seekers).
5) After trying both legal ways and failing (not because they didn't qualify, but rather, because this administration has skirted U.S. laws and protocol), the family walked .5 miles away from the border crossing to cross the river. That is where the father and baby were killed (the baby actually reached safely, but as the father crossed back to assist his wife, the baby got scared and went after her father, at which point, he went back towards her and they got swept away together).
6) If not for this administration's skirting of U.S. law and protocol, this family wouldn't have been desperate to cross. They would have been able to get an interview much faster to seek asylum and they would have been able to reach the border crossing and claim asylum.
This administration is entirely responsible for these types of deaths which has forced asylum seekers to be prohibited from doing it the legal way, thus forcing them into dangerous situations.
are you saying US border patrol and other enforcement agencies are working inside of Mexico?
so, we are not working on immigrants time table nor fast enough for them or you? So, the guy takes a child and crosses a river but, the USA(Trump or whoever is at fault)? Really? Why didn't the guy stay in Mexico? Use another border crossing somewhere? Camp out? Who is going to handle all these processing?
1700 people with legitimate asylum claims? Really? Legitimate and you think we are under some obligation to process those immediately? And, then when an immigrant swims a river because he can't or won't it is our fault?
That's emotional and ludicrous.
President Donald J. Trump touted the House for approving a $4.6 billion border funding bill on Thursday, tweeting "A great job done by all!" The legislation passed 305-102 after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backed down from a push to include restrictions on immigration enforcement that could have scuttled the measure. https://fxn.ws/2xhiEL2
Jeh Johnson, Obama’s former head of Homeland Security, apparently hasn’t talked to rifle about decriminalization and open borders
“That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders,” said Jeh Johnson, who ran the Department of Homeland Security during President Barack Obama’s second term. “That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immi...e9-9ed4-c9089972ad5a_story.html?noredirect=on
“That is tantamount to declaring publicly that we have open borders,” said Jeh Johnson, who ran the Department of Homeland Security during President Barack Obama’s second term. “That is unworkable, unwise and does not have the support of a majority of American people or the Congress, and if we had such a policy, instead of 100,000 apprehensions a month, it will be multiples of that.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immi...e9-9ed4-c9089972ad5a_story.html?noredirect=on
You need to work on your reading comprehension. Johnson's comment is that by decriminalizing crossers, it would be interpreted in the minds of illegals that there are open borders, meaning more would attempt to come across with no threat of incarceration. He isn't saying that decriminalizing is the same thing as open borders. He said the result would be similar in that more illegals would take the risk of coming.
There aren't truly open borders. Open borders refers to the free movement of people across borders with no border patrol, no fences/walls, no laws. Decriminalizing crossing does not result in those things.
