Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

So the judge is engaging in the importation of illegal aliens and conspiring to falsely legalize them, AND is colluding in breaking the laws?

No one said a judge is importing illegal aliens, but nice try.

If the person in front of them is breaking federal law, and they facilitate it instead of punishing it, then yeah, they are part of the problem. In fact, that judge would be engaging in an illegal act by aiding and abetting it. Is that what you want to claim?

Judges aren’t ICE. And I’m not claiming anything about your hypothetical.

If a person has a court date to have their status assessed and the legal process followed, then there is no way ICE has a better understanding of that person's legal status and protections than an immigration court judge. Are you high?

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Only if the same criteria is applied to everyone and if the examples being set start at the top - eg, Melania and Elon.
Once they get deported we can address your question with seriousness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

They are not legal immigrants. There is no specific definition of 'illegal immigrant' but they are included in nearly every count.
When they entered the country, they did not have a visa, but the government let them in anyway. This did not give them legal status, and they were always in limbo subject to government withdrawing its protection.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

If they are attending hearings and working through the process as the US has asked them to do, why detain them?

For one thing, that is what is called for in the law. It has been ignored for decades.
Doing so makes it much easier to deport people who lose their cases.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

It is true that people who have active immigration cases don't get to stop the clock on deportation or whatever, but going after the people who are complying with the requirements of those cases is a poor use of resources if the idea is to prioritize those who present a threat to public safety or national security. 94% of the people currently in detention are coded as presenting 0 threat, but we're paying for-profit corporations millions of dollars to keep them there, while adding to the national debt.

Oh please, poor use of resources ? If they didn’t waste it on this, it would be something else. Biden let in millions and just cut them loose. The pendulum went too far “left.” And now you’re seeing the opposite reaction, which some may see as too far “right”, but it is what people voted for. It was the main issue in the election. I’m sure the next Dem president will reverse and we can repeat the whole process.

Did people really vote for warzones in American cities, and the building of huge for-profit detention centers with people sleeping on the floor next to overflowing toilets and in bright lights 24/7, all funded by our tax dollars and cuts in health care spending? Why do you think they don't want to let Congress visit these facilities without a 7 day (!!) advance notice?

The warzones are created by the protesters, who should be arrested for obstruction of justice. But sanctuary city laws prevent local police from getting involved to control them. Ergo, your “warzones”. So no, I don’t think voters voted for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

So the judge is engaging in the importation of illegal aliens and conspiring to falsely legalize them, AND is colluding in breaking the laws?

No one said a judge is importing illegal aliens, but nice try.

If the person in front of them is breaking federal law, and they facilitate it instead of punishing it, then yeah, they are part of the problem. In fact, that judge would be engaging in an illegal act by aiding and abetting it. Is that what you want to claim?

Judges aren’t ICE. And I’m not claiming anything about your hypothetical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

You know what? Nowhere in the US Code is there any reference to "illegal" when referring to people living in the US without lawful status. So if you're all bent out of shape about the LAW, maybe you should make your case using terms recognized by the law.

Whatever, apparently been going on for a while. Just following Obama example, often cited as “Deporter-in-Chief” in these forums.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

What do you mean “the majority of immigrants are here illegally”? Where do you get that statistic? There are a number of different statuses that migrants can have and most are not illegal.

A lot of them come here to claim "asylum" falsely. If you're lying about why you need to be here, that's not valid.

On what your you basing your claim that the asylum claims are false?

Fox News and talk radio. Trump has made the decision that they are all lying and here illegally even though they are following the rules. That’s why ICE are allowed to be abusive and even maim and kill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

So the judge is engaging in the importation of illegal aliens and conspiring to falsely legalize them, AND is colluding in breaking the laws?

No one said a judge is importing illegal aliens, but nice try.

If the person in front of them is breaking federal law, and they facilitate it instead of punishing it, then yeah, they are part of the problem. In fact, that judge would be engaging in an illegal act by aiding and abetting it. Is that what you want to claim?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

Well, this would highly fact specific. But if they entered illegally (so already broke immigration law), and are working the process to extend their stay, then they can be detained, courthouse or wherever. The original infraction is the problem.

It is true that people who have active immigration cases don't get to stop the clock on deportation or whatever, but going after the people who are complying with the requirements of those cases is a poor use of resources if the idea is to prioritize those who present a threat to public safety or national security. 94% of the people currently in detention are coded as presenting 0 threat, but we're paying for-profit corporations millions of dollars to keep them there, while adding to the national debt.

Oh please, poor use of resources ? If they didn’t waste it on this, it would be something else. Biden let in millions and just cut them loose. The pendulum went too far “left.” And now you’re seeing the opposite reaction, which some may see as too far “right”, but it is what people voted for. It was the main issue in the election. I’m sure the next Dem president will reverse and we can repeat the whole process.

Did people really vote for warzones in American cities, and the building of huge for-profit detention centers with people sleeping on the floor next to overflowing toilets and in bright lights 24/7, all funded by our tax dollars and cuts in health care spending? Why do you think they don't want to let Congress visit these facilities without a 7 day (!!) advance notice?

Anonymous wrote:People don’t realize that the “legal” immigration system used to be extremely loosey-goosey. My mother came during the Reagan administration, overstayed her visa, got a lawyer for her hearing, and was a legal immigrant after that.

Before that, it was even easier. I don’t think it’s been possible to attain legal status that way for 20 years at least. But she was a “legal” immigrant. Now desperate people (whose countries are in terrible situations because of American interference) are coming in whatever way they can. We need to recognize that “legal” has meant different things every decade.

Regan gave amnesty to illegal immigrants that is why your mom got legal status.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

You know what? Nowhere in the US Code is there any reference to "illegal" when referring to people living in the US without lawful status. So if you're all bent out of shape about the LAW, maybe you should make your case using terms recognized by the law.

The term illegal alien is used all over US Code. I mean, you have to know that if you claim to know US Code.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

"ThEY ShoULd fOLLoW ThE ProCEss!"

They try, and ICE arrests and deports them anyhow.

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

You know what? Nowhere in the US Code is there any reference to "illegal" when referring to people living in the US without lawful status. So if you're all bent out of shape about the LAW, maybe you should make your case using terms recognized by the law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

What do you mean “the majority of immigrants are here illegally”? Where do you get that statistic? There are a number of different statuses that migrants can have and most are not illegal.

A lot of them come here to claim "asylum" falsely. If you're lying about why you need to be here, that's not valid.

On what your you basing your claim that the asylum claims are false?

Its obvious that 99%+ of all asylum claims are fake. None of these people are in imminent danger from their own government or are being persecuted for their faith. "There are gangs in my neighborhood" should never be considered a reason to flee your country.

But, but--Trump says these gangs are terrorists who are colluding with the government.
What you are forgetting is what people go through to make it to the US to ask for asylum. Nobody in their right mind would even attempt it if they were safe where they were. Besides which, you don't just get to show up and claim you are in danger, you have to present a case and go through a long process.

5 year old in Mpls taken with his father (see the thread about taking preschoolers)
Marc Prokosch, an attorney representing the family, said the family has an active asylum case and shared paperwork showing the father and son had arrived to the US at a port of entry, meaning an official crossing point.
“The family did everything they were supposed to in accordance with how the rules have been set out,” he said. “They did not come here illegally. They are not criminals.” He said there was no order of deportation against them and he believes the father and son have remained together in detention.