Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because in many cases, ICE is acting without warrants or valid removal orders signed by Judges. And I care about due process. For everyone.

The raids that were announced target people with deportation orders who have been through the process and have been found deportable.

Anonymous wrote:Because they are not targeting immigrants with criminal convictions, or the most dangerous, or the ones who can be removed the most efficiently. They are specifically targeting newly arrived and mixed status family units. Some of whom never had a hearing, because the government failed to provide proper notice. So they will be locked up... where?... while they wait for a hearing. And will they “lose” the parents when they are separated from the kids?

If you show the government failed to provide proper notice, there's a way to deal with this. Raids are targeting people with final removal orders.

Anonymous wrote:Because many of the families targeted are mixed status. So mom and/or dad will be deported, but the legal parent (if there is one) and American citizen kids will stay. And mom or dad with a legal status who lost a breadwinner goes on public assistance. The kids lose a parent or parents. If there is no parent, HHS or the foster care system get the kids— and they are full. This all costs a lot of money. Foster care. HHS shelters. It makes no financial sense to prioritize self supporting families.

Nonsense. If only the kid is a US citizen, everyone can leave together. If one parent has legal status, he or she can sponsor another parent through existing legal avenues.

Anonymous wrote:It is cheaper to have parents care for their own kids. And better for American citizen kids, who will grow up and be too traumatized to function. It is better for kids to have two earner families in lower income brackets. illegal citizen Mom working under the table as a house cleaner who never committed a crime with a green card spouse and American citizen kids isn’t a threat.

Kids can have two parents anywhere in the world, it doesn't have to be the U.S. Illegal migrants with a green card spouse have a legal avenue through LPR spouse sponsorship.

Anonymous wrote:The Trump Admin is intentionally hurting families and kids kids— including American citizens— to prove a point or serve as deterrence. But, it’s creating a humanitarian crisis and the short term and long term costs are high.

Since ICE can’t deport everyone here illegally, I’d prefer they start with people who are dangerous, have criminal records, and/or have removal orders signed by Judges. I’d prefer they keep families together and give American citizen kids the best possible shot at life. I’d prefer not to pay to House families where the parents have jobs and are self supporting when not in custody. I’d prefer children not be isolated and sexually abuse. Or overcrowded to the point diseases are spreading rapidly.

Everyone targeted by this raid has a removal order signed by the judge. American citizen kids have already received their best shot in life by being born here and can enter legally at any time.

Anonymous wrote:The only reason to target a newly arrived family who has not gone through the process or a mixed status family with jobs and no criminal records is to be cruel. And being cruel has not proven to be effective as a deterrent. But it seems to be a feature, AP not a bug, in this Admin.

This raid is targeting people with final removal orders. Mixed status families have legal avenues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Announcing there is a raid coming sort of defeats the point though, doesn’t it?

No, because a percentage of people here illegally will self deport before being arrested.

doubtful

They'll slip under the radar, continue to work for cash, and live with others who will cover for them. This is how it's been for a long time - only now, it's "acceptable." And yes, the free healthcare incentive in CA (as noted by another poster) will keep them here.

+1
As will Gavin Newsom’s instructions to illegal immigrants on “knowing their rights.”

Anonymous wrote:Because in many cases, ICE is acting without warrants or valid removal orders signed by Judges. And I care about due process. For everyone.

Anonymous wrote:Because they are not targeting immigrants with criminal convictions, or the most dangerous, or the ones who can be removed the most efficiently. They are specifically targeting newly arrived and mixed status family units. Some of whom never had a hearing, because the government failed to provide proper notice. So they will be locked up... where?... while they wait for a hearing. And will they “lose” the parents when they are separated from the kids?

Anonymous wrote:Because many of the families targeted are mixed status. So mom and/or dad will be deported, but the legal parent (if there is one) and American citizen kids will stay. And mom or dad with a legal status who lost a breadwinner goes on public assistance. The kids lose a parent or parents. If there is no parent, HHS or the foster care system get the kids— and they are full. This all costs a lot of money. Foster care. HHS shelters. It makes no financial sense to prioritize self supporting families.

Anonymous wrote:It is cheaper to have parents care for their own kids. And better for American citizen kids, who will grow up and be too traumatized to function. It is better for kids to have two earner families in lower income brackets. illegal citizen Mom working under the table as a house cleaner who never committed a crime with a green card spouse and American citizen kids isn’t a threat.

Anonymous wrote:The Trump Admin is intentionally hurting families and kids kids— including American citizens— to prove a point or serve as deterrence. But, it’s creating a humanitarian crisis and the short term and long term costs are high.

Since ICE can’t deport everyone here illegally, I’d prefer they start with people who are dangerous, have criminal records, and/or have removal orders signed by Judges. I’d prefer they keep families together and give American citizen kids the best possible shot at life. I’d prefer not to pay to House families where the parents have jobs and are self supporting when not in custody. I’d prefer children not be isolated and sexually abuse. Or overcrowded to the point diseases are spreading rapidly.

Anonymous wrote:The only reason to target a newly arrived family who has not gone through the process or a mixed status family with jobs and no criminal records is to be cruel. And being cruel has not proven to be effective as a deterrent. But it seems to be a feature, AP not a bug, in this Admin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Do you understand how incredibly expensive this is? We need financial support to allow them to do this correctly."

Follow the money.

What exacting are you alluding too? Please, enlighten me.

I am waiting for your answer. You threw this out here now support it or be considered a sh#t slinger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has NOTHING to do with Anne Frank.

+1,000
And the detention centers are NOT concentration camps. It’s truly abhorrent that Democrats are actually comparing any of this to the Holocaust.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still haven't heard what the answer is.

They keep saying that asylum seekers have a right to request it--and that they should be allowed to go through the system. So, they go through the system and the judge says they are not entitled to asylum. But, they don't leave.

We have hundreds of thousands coming across the border seeking asylum--what is the answer? If we must let them in and they are not entitled to asylum, what are we supposed to do? Unlock the doors and turn off the lights?

What about the U.S. citizens and other legal permanent residents that will undoubtedly get caught up in the raids because of their skin color? ICE is known to make mistakes. Guilty until proven innocent? You’re okay with legal immigrants potentially getting detained in chaotic raids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still haven't heard what the answer is.

They keep saying that asylum seekers have a right to request it--and that they should be allowed to go through the system. So, they go through the system and the judge says they are not entitled to asylum. But, they don't leave.

We have hundreds of thousands coming across the border seeking asylum--what is the answer? If we must let them in and they are not entitled to asylum, what are we supposed to do? Unlock the doors and turn off the lights?

Ask Anne Frank her opinion. Oh wait you can't. The US denied her visa request.

You really are misguided.

DP. How is that misguided? Because it doesn't fit your narrative?

I agree with pp. You are misguided and drawing a pretty poor analogy.

When these migrants are facing possible extermination by a country due to who they are, then we can draw a comparison.
That is not what is happening now.

The analogy is fine.

Here is another analogy that works. It's in the poem "Home", by Warren Shire:

no one leaves home unless
home is the mouth of a shark
you only run for the border
when you see the whole city running as well
your neighbors running faster than you
breath bloody in their throats
the boy you went to school with
who kissed you dizzy behind the old tin factory
is holding a gun bigger than his body
you only leave home
when home won’t let you stay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1. The Holocaust center has been advocating on behalf of refugees worldwide, not just Europeans with white faces.

They have also said to quit comparing this to the Holocaust. Which is what you are doing.

If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to follow Orange Hitler. But, we all make choices. It just so happens that you made bad ones.

Enforcing our borders is never a bad choice.
Sorry you don't approve of rule of law.

Anne Frank, and the people who sheltered her, didn't approve of the rule of law, either.

+1. Sometimes laws conflict with basic morals. At one time, the laws said whites people could own black people, and that I was not entitled to vote. And the old who broke the law to shelter Jewish refugees are now thought of as heroes while those who ignored their plight are considered stupid and callous.

Today’s immigration issue is not the same as slavery-when people were brought here against their will to be treated like chattel—or the Holocaust.

No one is yanking immigrants out of their homes and forcing them here. They can actually avoid all of this by remaining in their countries and putting in the work to fix them-like developed countries had to do.

They’re walking and flying through several countries to get to the USA-land of opportunity and free assistance programs instead of creating them in their own country.

If I was fleeing gang violence in say Chicago, I’d move to another state! I wouldn’t go through 40 other states to try to force my way into another country-along with thousands of others who ironically happen to also be fleeing the same gangs (sarcasm). There are 54 countries on the continent of Africa but they come all the way to the US??

These people are out for handouts and an easier way of life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Do you understand how incredibly expensive this is? We need financial support to allow them to do this correctly."

Follow the money.

What exacting are you alluding too? Please, enlighten me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1. The Holocaust center has been advocating on behalf of refugees worldwide, not just Europeans with white faces.

They have also said to quit comparing this to the Holocaust. Which is what you are doing.

If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to follow Orange Hitler. But, we all make choices. It just so happens that you made bad ones.

Enforcing our borders is never a bad choice.
Sorry you don't approve of rule of law.

Anne Frank, and the people who sheltered her, didn't approve of the rule of law, either.

+1. Sometimes laws conflict with basic morals. At one time, the laws said whites people could own black people, and that I was not entitled to vote. And the old who broke the law to shelter Jewish refugees are now thought of as heroes while those who ignored their plight are considered stupid and callous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has NOTHING to do with Anne Frank.

+1,000
And the detention centers are NOT concentration camps. It’s truly abhorrent that Democrats are actually comparing any of this to the Holocaust.

Liberals have no merit to stand on. The conjure up images of concentration camps when it’s them who refuse to fix the issue for political gain. They’re in power in the house. Give the proper budget to do the job. They won’t, they like to see suffering for their gain.

Libra story short, the comparison is tasteless, horrible and liberals should be ashamed. Problem is when you’re dealing wii the truly shameless they have no morals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1. The Holocaust center has been advocating on behalf of refugees worldwide, not just Europeans with white faces.

They have also said to quit comparing this to the Holocaust. Which is what you are doing.

If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to follow Orange Hitler. But, we all make choices. It just so happens that you made bad ones.

Enforcing our borders is never a bad choice.
Sorry you don't approve of rule of law.

Anne Frank, and the people who sheltered her, didn't approve of the rule of law, either.

I believe Anne Frank's parents were German citizens.

They had their citizenship stripped.

+1. She was German gown but had her citizenship stripped. Anne Frank was stateless, and the US denied her visa.

+2. Also, she wasn’t gassed. She died of typhus in a dirty, crowded, disease-ridden camp.

+3 And, she and her sister were separated from their parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has NOTHING to do with Anne Frank.

+1,000
And the detention centers are NOT concentration camps. It’s truly abhorrent that Democrats are actually comparing any of this to the Holocaust.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1. The Holocaust center has been advocating on behalf of refugees worldwide, not just Europeans with white faces.

They have also said to quit comparing this to the Holocaust. Which is what you are doing.

If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to follow Orange Hitler. But, we all make choices. It just so happens that you made bad ones.

Enforcing our borders is never a bad choice.
Sorry you don't approve of rule of law.

Anne Frank, and the people who sheltered her, didn't approve of the rule of law, either.

+1. Sometimes laws conflict with basic morals. At one time, the laws said whites people could own black people, and that I was not entitled to vote. And the old who broke the law to shelter Jewish refugees are now thought of as heroes while those who ignored their plight are considered stupid and callous.

Once again, this is not the Holocaust, as much as the sickening idea seems to thrill you, and no one is hunting down immigrants, trying to kill them. Try saying it with me: every single immigrant, at the border or here in the country, is here voluntarily. You are not a hero if you’re hiding people who are here illegally. Sorry to burst your fantasy.

Anonymous wrote:I watched Ben Ray Lujan, the Dem assistant speaker of the House, being asked on Fox News Sunday why people with final deportation orders shouldn't be deported. He just rambles about how only criminals should be deported. Democrats want open borders. Period.