Trump immigrant family separation policy

[Craig4]

One like Kavanaugh.

Give Kavanaugh a beer and tell the little girl to show some leg. He'll let her in.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Just more of the usual concentrated idiocy:

President Trump placed responsibility for recent stock market declines and this week’s General Motors plant closures and layoffs on the Federal Reserve during an interview Tuesday, shirking any personal blame for cracks in the economy and declaring that he is “not even a little bit happy” with his hand-selected central bank chairman.

In a wide-ranging and sometimes discordant 20-minute interview with The Washington Post, Trump complained at length about Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome H. “Jay” Powell, whom he nominated earlier this year. When asked about declines on Wall Street and GM’s announcement that it was laying off 15 percent of its workforce, Trump responded by criticizing higher interest rates and other Fed policies, though he insisted that he is not worried about a recession.

“I’m doing deals, and I’m not being accommodated by the Fed,” Trump said. “They’re making a mistake because I have a gut, and my gut tells me more sometimes than anybody else’s brain can ever tell me.”

He added: “So far, I’m not even a little bit happy with my selection of Jay. Not even a little bit. And I’m not blaming anybody, but I’m just telling you I think that the Fed is way off-base with what they’re doing.”

Trump also dismissed the federal government’s landmark report released last week finding that damages from global warming are intensifying around the country. The president said that “I don’t see” climate change as man-made and that he does not believe the scientific consensus.

“One of the problems that a lot of people like myself, we have very high levels of intelligence but we’re not necessarily such believers,” Trump said. “You look at our air and our water, and it’s right now at a record clean.”

The president added of climate change, “As to whether or not it’s man-made and whether or not the effects that you’re talking about are there, I don’t see it.”

...

Trump again questioned the CIA’s assessment that Saudi Arabia’s crown prince ordered the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a contributor to The Post, and said he has considered Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s repeated denials in his decision to maintain a close alliance with the oil-rich desert kingdom.

“Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t,” Trump said. “But he denies it. And people around him deny it. And the CIA did not say affirmatively he did it, either, by the way. I’m not saying that they’re saying he didn’t do it, but they didn’t say it affirmatively.”

Linky.

 

[jimbob]

From Badscience:

Trump loses insane cult leader Ammon Bundy

https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-...pushes-back-on-trumps-anti-immigrant-rhetoric

Every time I think the whole Trump thing can't get crazier, it does.

That's some of the most sensible commentary I've seen on the migrant caravan and it comes from Y'All Qaeda.

And here is the first paragraph:

Ammon Bundy, an anti-government militia leader, issued a surprise critique of President Trump’s rhetoric regarding immigrants. In a video posted on Facebook, Bundy pushed back on the president for his comments portraying members of the migrant caravan as “criminals” and “gang members.” “It seems that there’s been this group stereotype,” Bundy says in the 17-minute video. “But what about those who have come here for reasons of need? . . . What about the fathers, the mothers, the children, who have come here and are willing to go through the process to apply for asylum so they can come into this country?” The video now has over 5,000 views.

 

[fuelair]

I'm sure trumpf is only separating them so he can eat the kids before sending the parents to the incinerators...….

It just has to get something out of the Deal...…………..

 

[NWO Sentryman]

The problem with immigration politics is that many Democrats have an INCREDIBLY idealised view of Europe and think "If Germany and France can have open borders* why can't America and Mexico?"

*ignoring the caveats that go along with how the Schengen Zone actually works

 

[mgidm86]

The problem with immigration politics is that many Democrats have an INCREDIBLY idealised view of Europe and think "If Germany and France can have open borders* why can't America and Mexico?"

*ignoring the caveats that go along with how the Schengen Zone actually works

My friends wife last week discussing border security with me, and she's no dummy either:

"I dunno, it just feeeels like, I dunno we're just a small little planet in a huge galaxy in a gigantic universe...it seems like we shouldn't need walls and borders"

The problem is the word "feels". Just because these head-in-the-cloud types think everyone should love each other doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees. It isn't reality.

That was the answer I got when I asked for a rational reason to not work on securing our borders better. There is no rational answer.

 

[LSSBB]

My friends wife last week discussing border security with me, and she's no dummy either:

"I dunno, it just feeeels like, I dunno we're just a small little planet in a huge galaxy in a gigantic universe...it seems like we shouldn't need walls and borders"

The problem is the word "feels". Just because these head-in-the-cloud types think everyone should love each other doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees. It isn't reality.

That was the answer I got when I asked for a rational reason to not work on securing our borders better. There is no rational answer.

There is a rational answer. No one has shown that increased border security pays back significantly, from what I have seen.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

There is a rational answer. No one has shown that increased border security pays back significantly, from what I have seen.

Again, that is presuming that Schengen can be CTRL+c/v'd to anywhere and everywhere on the planet without going down in flames. Or as I like to call it, the "Appeal to Europe/Scandinavia fallacy"

 

[Aridas]

There is a rational answer. No one has shown that increased border security pays back significantly, from what I have seen.

Depending on the situation, it may even have a net negative effect. Especially if the money would have more of an effect even if it were diverted towards increasing living conditions in countries that the US made a mess of. Even so, I'm entirely fine with efficient uses of taxpayer dollars to secure borders. That can even include walls, potentially. As has been nigh unanimously attested to, though, a full border wall like Trump's pushing would be wildly inefficient in comparison to other options like increased drone surveillance, with agents available to deal with any illegals found. I quite suspect that the same money could be far more effectively used for numerous other and more beneficial projects to the US, though.

 

[Aridas]

...

Trump officials now claim it would be too 'traumatic' to reunite kids stolen from parents at border.

WTF.

 

[ponderingturtle]

...

Trump officials now claim it would be too 'traumatic' to reunite kids stolen from parents at border.

WTF.

At least separating these kids plays well with republicans. This makes them all happy.

 

[Border Reiver]

...

Trump officials now claim it would be too 'traumatic' to reunite kids stolen from parents at border.

WTF.

"Sorry, it really isn't convenient for us to stop committing Crimes Against Humanity at this time. We started doing it, and we really believe that we should see it through to the end."

 

[ponderingturtle]

"Sorry, it really isn't convenient for us to stop committing Crimes Against Humanity at this time. We started doing it, and we really believe that we should see it through to the end."

Like anyone in the US government would ever be held accountable for mere crimes against humanity or war crimes.

It is really kind of cute how the armed forces seem to believe despite all evidence that they would refuse an illegal order and be found in the right.

 

[Belz...]

...

Trump officials now claim it would be too 'traumatic' to reunite kids stolen from parents at border.

WTF.

I'm trying to find the right word to describe this policy, its implementation and the response of officials to it, but I'm struggling to find one that really expresses how disgusting it is.

I guess "inhuman" will do.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm trying to find the right word to describe this policy, its implementation and the response of officials to it, but I'm struggling to find one that really expresses how disgusting it is.

I guess "inhuman" will do.

I go with popular with their base.

It really does seem that crimes against humanity goes well with republican presidencies. At least since 92 anyway.

 

[Upchurch]

The problem is the word "feels". Just because these head-in-the-cloud types think everyone should love each other doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees. It isn't reality.

That was the answer I got when I asked for a rational reason to not work on securing our borders better. There is no rational answer.

See, I ask why we need a wall to secure our borders and the answer I get is "duh". There is no rational answer for that, either.

 

[Aridas]

Just as a heads up, just in case anyone doubted it... The Trump Administration is still separating families.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

My friends wife last week discussing border security with me, and she's no dummy either:



"I dunno, it just feeeels like, I dunno we're just a small little planet in a huge galaxy in a gigantic universe...it seems like we shouldn't need walls and borders"



The problem is the word "feels". Just because these head-in-the-cloud types think everyone should love each other doesn't mean the rest of the world agrees. It isn't reality.



That was the answer I got when I asked for a rational reason to not work on securing our borders better. There is no rational answer.

Asking loaded questions that contain embedded falsehoods isn't the behavior I'd expect if someone wanted a serious discussion.

 

[mgidm86]

See, I ask why we need a wall to secure our borders and the answer I get is "duh". There is no rational answer for that, either.

I don't care if it's a wall or not, but it seems like doing nothing at all is the way my state wants to go.

I live in Cali where our government seems to want illegals here. We have a sanctuary state, we give them drivers licenses, health care, SF city gives them the right to vote in certain elections - ya I'm asking that question because the actions of our government lead me to believe that illegals are wanted here.

So I ask citizens, not big business or politicians, do you want these policies? Do you want illegals to come in this country freely? Most people do not.

Wall - people are not arrested or held in facilities like the ones everybody is complaining about here, no more family separation because we don't apprehend them.

No wall choice #1 - we are stuck apprehending all these people. We simply let them go into our society hoping they will come to their court date. We are forced to deal with families. Nobody likes this solution but it is the default one. Huh.

No wall choice #2 - we apprehend them and drop them off on the other side of the border. Preferable solution, but we cannot or will not do it.

Too many people want these people here. All you need to do is look at how California is handling this. Open arms.

How about some solutions? Anyone else here have one?

 

[jimbob]

I don't care if it's a wall or not, but it seems like doing nothing at all is the way my state wants to go.

I live in Cali where our government seems to want illegals here. We have a sanctuary state, we give them drivers licenses, health care, SF city gives them the right to vote in certain elections - ya I'm asking that question because the actions of our government lead me to believe that illegals are wanted here.

So I ask citizens, not big business or politicians, do you want these policies? Do you want illegals to come in this country freely? Most people do not.

Wall - people are not arrested or held in facilities like the ones everybody is complaining about here, no more family separation because we don't apprehend them.

No wall choice #1 - we are stuck apprehending all these people. We simply let them go into our society hoping they will come to their court date. We are forced to deal with families. Nobody likes this solution but it is the default one. Huh.

No wall choice #2 - we apprehend them and drop them off on the other side of the border. Preferable solution, but we cannot or will not do it.

Too many people want these people here. All you need to do is look at how California is handling this. Open arms.

How about some solutions? Anyone else here have one?

Wouldn't the Californian agricultural industry suffer massively if illegal immigrants weren't employed?

Still sounds like a really bad idea from a consideration of the good of the people of the state.

Meanwhile, a Danish study found that as long as immigrants were allowed to work, even the lowest paid boosted the economy

https://nordic.businessinsider.com/...reaching-out-to-immigrants--heres-why-2017-4/