Immigrants sent to sanction cities

[Anonymous]

No we didn't. We did a lot of other crazy shit under the guise of "helping" but it was usually stupid "war on drugs" crap or CIA funded coups with massive black budgets

that had absolutely nothing do do with stabilizing our neighbors to the south. But it did make a lot of American contractors and other connected people very rich.

"CIA funded coups with massive black budgets"? LOL!!! Sources? Anything you can connect to CIA massive black budgets? Is your tin hat on correctly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, the truth is that nobody wants them really.
Some are just afraid to say it and then they get busloads dumped on them. Their electorate wants them to welcome immigrants (just not on their street).
Too many people are abusing the legal Avenue of asking for asylum since they have a bogus claim but they can wait for years to get their hearing. I heard there’s no last in first to trial (and hopefully out) policy but not sure.
They have to wait for a few months or a year for their work permit so before that they work under the table (and sometimes after but they have the option to pay taxes and work legally).
There needs to be a law change. It’s like birthright citizenship that is legal but has become a loophole.

We do actually want them. Have you peeked into a restaurant kitchen, construction site, et cetera? We gainfully employ them by the millions. As such the better answer would be to fix the visa program so they can come here legally and work. And at the same time, fix the system for dealing with asylees. Republicans have refused to provide much needed funding and resources to speed up hearings and deportations so that there isn't a massive backlog forcing us to just turn them loose and ask them to show up for a hearing date 2 years out. Why can't we do any of that?

Yes, maybe you are right and “we” want them. But definitely not their multiple kids who need to be educated. I agree that a 1 yr visa program where you can’t bring family would be ideal, with a cool off period like some of the J1 visas have where you have to stay home for a couple years before reapplying. There also needs to be enforcement of visa overstay prevention. Actual enforcement where visas can ge checked and people detained and deported.
As for Republicans refusing to provide funding, I don’t know much, but was their main issue that some or all of those who got here illegally would be given avenue towards legal status? If yes, I absolutely agree that it shouldn’t be the case. No legal status to anyone who got here illegally. Zero tolerance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, the truth is that nobody wants them really.
Some are just afraid to say it and then they get busloads dumped on them. Their electorate wants them to welcome immigrants (just not on their street).
Too many people are abusing the legal Avenue of asking for asylum since they have a bogus claim but they can wait for years to get their hearing. I heard there’s no last in first to trial (and hopefully out) policy but not sure.
They have to wait for a few months or a year for their work permit so before that they work under the table (and sometimes after but they have the option to pay taxes and work legally).
There needs to be a law change. It’s like birthright citizenship that is legal but has become a loophole.

We do actually want them. Have you peeked into a restaurant kitchen, construction site, et cetera? We gainfully employ them by the millions. As such the better answer would be to fix the visa program so they can come here legally and work. And at the same time, fix the system for dealing with asylees. Republicans have refused to provide much needed funding and resources to speed up hearings and deportations so that there isn't a massive backlog forcing us to just turn them loose and ask them to show up for a hearing date 2 years out. Why can't we do any of that?

Yes, maybe you are right and “we” want them. But definitely not their multiple kids who need to be educated. I agree that a 1 yr visa program where you can’t bring family would be ideal, with a cool off period like some of the J1 visas have where you have to stay home for a couple years before reapplying. There also needs to be enforcement of visa overstay prevention. Actual enforcement where visas can ge checked and people detained and deported.
As for Republicans refusing to provide funding, I don’t know much, but was their main issue that some or all of those who got here illegally would be given avenue towards legal status? If yes, I absolutely agree that it shouldn’t be the case. No legal status to anyone who got here illegally. Zero tolerance.

And one more thing. I understand a hearing is owed to anyone to who turns up at the border and asks for asylum.
Reinstall remain in Mexico or creat a new policy where they would be prevented from showing up. Maybe give a bunch of money to Mexico so that they turn them away at their southern border. Better yet change the law so that random asks for asylum don’t guarantee you stay for a couple years. How is that for a root cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, the truth is that nobody wants them really.
Some are just afraid to say it and then they get busloads dumped on them. Their electorate wants them to welcome immigrants (just not on their street).
Too many people are abusing the legal Avenue of asking for asylum since they have a bogus claim but they can wait for years to get their hearing. I heard there’s no last in first to trial (and hopefully out) policy but not sure.
They have to wait for a few months or a year for their work permit so before that they work under the table (and sometimes after but they have the option to pay taxes and work legally).
There needs to be a law change. It’s like birthright citizenship that is legal but has become a loophole.

The truth is we don't want human beings treated as props for Republicans to use to make a point. DeSantis is actively trying to scoop up people who aren't even in Florida! So dehumanizing.

Yes we liberals will take care of them because they are people. And we'll take the refugees you were too scared to take. This is America, it's what we do.

One doesn’t contradict the other. You don’t want them but since they are dumped on you you will do what you can.
This is the problem. They show up knowing they will be taken care of, ultimately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It just sickens me the way the GOP treat undocumented immigrants. These people are human beings, yet they are treated like trash, transported across the country and dumped.
The United States is a nation of immigrants. Except for Native Americans, we are all descended from immigrants. We need immigrants to fill jobs and pay taxes and maintain and grow our economy.
The GOP are beyond callous towards undocumented immigrants, most of whom are brown-skinned. They are not animals or property, they are human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect for their humanity.

A lot of these people have documents. Just because the US is a nation of immigrants doesn't mean they should continue letting in more, or letting people come in illegally.

Biden and Obama also transport illegal immigrants across the country and dump them. Secret flights in the middle of the night to small airports so people won't know about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Can we please ban the use of the word "illegals" to refer to undocumented immigrants?
It's like using the n-word, just as offensive.
Human beings are not "illegal." Certain immigrants may not have the right to live legally in the U.S., but they are people and they must be called people, not a demeaning term that reduces these desperate humans to a bastardization of their immigration status.

A lot of these people have documents. You are just making up language because you want to avoid the reality that illegal immigration is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Sorry my math was bad, it was $13,000 each. Same point though.

Honestly it’s not much worse than dumping money on endless homeless services where we all know that involuntary commitment is about the only effective measure with most of them.
Not saying I support it; what I want to say is that so much of govt spending is money down the drain anyway

THIS ^^. I guess the PP would prefer we continue to flush money away on "root cause" BS.

Not dealing with root causes is like trying to deal with a deep gushing arterial wound that can only be fixed with surgery by just putting a bandaid over it.

You realize we've thrown money at "root causes" for decades and decades. How'd that work out for us?

No we didn't. We did a lot of other crazy shit under the guise of "helping" but it was usually stupid "war on drugs" crap or CIA funded coups with massive black budgets that had absolutely nothing do do with stabilizing our neighbors to the south. But it did make a lot of American contractors and other connected people very rich.

See, I'm not talking about that stuff, I'm talking about actual change, which we haven't actually tried.

I see you've got your conspiracy theorist talking points at the ready. What you will never acknowledge are the trillions of dollars we've sent to Central American countries - only to have their corrupt governments enrich themselves, rather than use our money to help their own people. So spare me your "actual change" BS. We've tried that and these governments have shown themselves incapable of being responsible stewards of our aid money. As far as I'm concerned, we don't owe them one more dime. Enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Sorry my math was bad, it was $13,000 each. Same point though.

Honestly it’s not much worse than dumping money on endless homeless services where we all know that involuntary commitment is about the only effective measure with most of them.
Not saying I support it; what I want to say is that so much of govt spending is money down the drain anyway

THIS ^^. I guess the PP would prefer we continue to flush money away on "root cause" BS.

Not dealing with root causes is like trying to deal with a deep gushing arterial wound that can only be fixed with surgery by just putting a bandaid over it.

You realize we've thrown money at "root causes" for decades and decades. How'd that work out for us?

No we didn't. We did a lot of other crazy shit under the guise of "helping" but it was usually stupid "war on drugs" crap or CIA funded coups with massive black budgets that had absolutely nothing do do with stabilizing our neighbors to the south. But it did make a lot of American contractors and other connected people very rich.

See, I'm not talking about that stuff, I'm talking about actual change, which we haven't actually tried.

Wow, are you clueless. This is just the tip of the iceberg:

"Key U.S. government agencies, consisting of the Departments of State (State), Agriculture, and Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) allocated a total of about $3.7 billion in assistance for Central America from fiscal years 2013 through 2018."
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-163r#:~:text=Key%20U.S.%20government%20agencies%2C%20consisting%20of%20the%20Departments,Central%20America%20from%20fiscal%20years%202013%20through%202018.

"Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled an additional $310 million in U.S. aid to Central America after a virtual meeting with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei on Monday, as the two countries agreed to work together to control migration."
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-unveils-310-mln-central-america-aid-guatemala-agrees-work-together-migration-2021-04-27/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It just sickens me the way the GOP treat undocumented immigrants. These people are human beings, yet they are treated like trash, transported across the country and dumped.
The United States is a nation of immigrants. Except for Native Americans, we are all descended from immigrants. We need immigrants to fill jobs and pay taxes and maintain and grow our economy.
The GOP are beyond callous towards undocumented immigrants, most of whom are brown-skinned. They are not animals or property, they are human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect for their humanity.

A lot of these people have documents. Just because the US is a nation of immigrants doesn't mean they should continue letting in more, or letting people come in illegally.

Biden and Obama also transport illegal immigrants across the country and dump them. Secret flights in the middle of the night to small airports so people won't know about it.

"But but but, that's diffffffffffferrrrrrrrrrrenttttt!!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Sorry my math was bad, it was $13,000 each. Same point though.

Honestly it’s not much worse than dumping money on endless homeless services where we all know that involuntary commitment is about the only effective measure with most of them.
Not saying I support it; what I want to say is that so much of govt spending is money down the drain anyway

THIS ^^. I guess the PP would prefer we continue to flush money away on "root cause" BS.

Not dealing with root causes is like trying to deal with a deep gushing arterial wound that can only be fixed with surgery by just putting a bandaid over it.

You realize we've thrown money at "root causes" for decades and decades. How'd that work out for us?

No we didn't. We did a lot of other crazy shit under the guise of "helping" but it was usually stupid "war on drugs" crap or CIA funded coups with massive black budgets that had absolutely nothing do do with stabilizing our neighbors to the south. But it did make a lot of American contractors and other connected people very rich.

See, I'm not talking about that stuff, I'm talking about actual change, which we haven't actually tried.

Wow, are you clueless. This is just the tip of the iceberg:

"Key U.S. government agencies, consisting of the Departments of State (State), Agriculture, and Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) allocated a total of about $3.7 billion in assistance for Central America from fiscal years 2013 through 2018."
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-163r#:~:text=Key%20U.S.%20government%20agencies%2C%20consisting%20of%20the%20Departments,Central%20America%20from%20fiscal%20years%202013%20through%202018.

"Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled an additional $310 million in U.S. aid to Central America after a virtual meeting with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei on Monday, as the two countries agreed to work together to control migration."
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-unveils-310-mln-central-america-aid-guatemala-agrees-work-together-migration-2021-04-27/

Thank you for proving the idiot who claimed we gave "trillions of dollars" to Central America. For the record, typically Central America only got around 1% of the US foreign aid budget and it was not even remotely "trillions."

What did Trump do to work with Guatemala to control migration? Nothing, other than calling Guatemala a "shythole country."

[Anonymous]

I used to work in foreign aid and ultimately it doesn’t help much, unfortunately. I mean it does but only until an idiot/tyrant leader decides he wants to invade or crush opposition or so something else that throws the country out of favor, the aid stops, life goes to pieces and people flee to the US.
Show me a single case of building a stable democracy with the help of State Department et al

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
(I think you mean "sanctuary." It's a totally different term, right?)

Why should local law enforcement be forced to be the enforcement arm of federal policy? Isn't that supposed to be the job of federal law enforcement?

What you are proposing is against state and local freedom. It's un-American.

So all the rhetoric about migrants being welcome is just rhetoric? The border states want actual border security. Politicians who opposed policies like stay in Mexico should have no problem housing the migrants they argued should be allowed in

Dp- rhetoric? All it means is that local law enforcement isn’t doing the fed’s job for them. It also allows illegal immigrants to report crimes without fear.

NP.... and you are exactly right. Nobody in "sanctuary cities" is saying those cities will pay for room and board and everything else. Not even the mayor of San Francisco says that. That narrative is a fiction, a gross embellishment that's purely made-up by the right wing. it's their rhetoric, not ours.

Sanctuary city means the city will not enforce immigration law. And they shouldn't, either - because it's not the city's job to do it. Immigration enforcement is strictly a matter of federal jurisdiction.

Hope that sets you straight, OP - because that is the fact, and anyone who's suggested otherwise to you is wrong.

Someone has to house these people and feed them, whether they are saying that loud or not. You cannot deny these people basic care, it is inhumane. If cities don't want to enforce immigration laws, then it is logical that they should be in charge of housing and feeding these people and providing medical care to them. It either deports them or takes care of them. Taxes said we are enforcing immigration laws and deporting them to California. California can decide if they want to enforce immigration law and deport them, or feed them. They cannot just allow these people to remain homeless like their own citizens.

What “Texas” immigration laws are there? Texas isn’t enforcing immigration laws because it doesn’t have any. It isn’t “deporting” people to California. Texas isn’t its own country.

[Anonymous]

It's what Democrats voted for because they said they wanted it. So what's the problem? They should be shipping immigrants to areas where they roll out the red carpet for them. That's what the voters said they wanted so.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It just sickens me the way the GOP treat undocumented immigrants. These people are human beings, yet they are treated like trash, transported across the country and dumped.
The United States is a nation of immigrants. Except for Native Americans, we are all descended from immigrants. We need immigrants to fill jobs and pay taxes and maintain and grow our economy.
The GOP are beyond callous towards undocumented immigrants, most of whom are brown-skinned. They are not animals or property, they are human beings who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect for their humanity.

A lot of these people have documents. Just because the US is a nation of immigrants doesn't mean they should continue letting in more, or letting people come in illegally.

Biden and Obama also transport illegal immigrants across the country and dump them. Secret flights in the middle of the night to small airports so people won't know about it.

"But but but, that's diffffffffffferrrrrrrrrrrenttttt!!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Sorry my math was bad, it was $13,000 each. Same point though.

Honestly it’s not much worse than dumping money on endless homeless services where we all know that involuntary commitment is about the only effective measure with most of them.
Not saying I support it; what I want to say is that so much of govt spending is money down the drain anyway

THIS ^^. I guess the PP would prefer we continue to flush money away on "root cause" BS.

Not dealing with root causes is like trying to deal with a deep gushing arterial wound that can only be fixed with surgery by just putting a bandaid over it.

You realize we've thrown money at "root causes" for decades and decades. How'd that work out for us?

No we didn't. We did a lot of other crazy shit under the guise of "helping" but it was usually stupid "war on drugs" crap or CIA funded coups with massive black budgets that had absolutely nothing do do with stabilizing our neighbors to the south. But it did make a lot of American contractors and other connected people very rich.

See, I'm not talking about that stuff, I'm talking about actual change, which we haven't actually tried.

Wow, are you clueless. This is just the tip of the iceberg:

"Key U.S. government agencies, consisting of the Departments of State (State), Agriculture, and Defense, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) allocated a total of about $3.7 billion in assistance for Central America from fiscal years 2013 through 2018."
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-163r#:~:text=Key%20U.S.%20government%20agencies%2C%20consisting%20of%20the%20Departments,Central%20America%20from%20fiscal%20years%202013%20through%202018.

"Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled an additional $310 million in U.S. aid to Central America after a virtual meeting with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei on Monday, as the two countries agreed to work together to control migration."
https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-unveils-310-mln-central-america-aid-guatemala-agrees-work-together-migration-2021-04-27/

Thank you for proving the idiot who claimed we gave "trillions of dollars" to Central America. For the record, typically Central America only got around 1% of the US foreign aid budget and it was not even remotely "trillions."

What did Trump do to work with Guatemala to control migration? Nothing, other than calling Guatemala a "shythole country."

Key words here: “typically” “budget” “trillions”. Even billions or millions is too much. If you knew your neighbor had a charity where he claimed to help underprivileged kids but fulled the cash to themselves and relatives, would you even give a dollar? No, you would not.

You probably believe that if the government has a projected budget for X, and then decides to only give X half of what they had projected they’d give, that it was a ‘budget cut’.