Trump's War on Children

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ah, so you're going to go with the ole "All sources on the internet are equal" thing? And places are credible so long as they claim to be?

The fact that the only source you can provide to agree with you is one that has been roundly debunked by those on the Left and Right, pretty much reinforces my previous point about outliers. Except I wouldn't even call this an outlier. We're basically talking about the National Enquirer of Immigration studies. And it is interesting you have no problem with the fact that it was started by a man whose sole purpose was to produce literature that supported his racist views.

I love how you, and EA in particular, love to tell people what they're doing even though they literally did no thing. I'm not going to run down every potential source for you because 1) past experience has shown me that it's just not worth the effort, 2) sources that don't agree with a hard Left position are always assumed to be racist because “F” it and 3) it doesn't really matter what we gripe about on this forum until election day rolls around.

We'll see come November. Maybe you can sneak a few more illegals in the door and get them voting Democrat so we can just end the charade of a southern border in a few years? It's good for business, after all.

eta:



- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

Refugees are people that have fled their country of origin for one of a number of enumerated reasons. A refugee can seek admission to the US by one of two methods: (1) apply for admission as a refugee, which can be done at an embassy, or through the UNHCR or an NGO; (2) Enter the US anywhere (not just at a port of entry) and file an application for asylum within one year of entry.

Yeah, well, asylum seekers aren't exactly synonymous with refugees. And applying for refugee status at consulates isn't a viable option for tens of thousands of asylum seekers because it only pertains to a certain kind of refugees who are in "imminent danger." From the link I provided above, it explains how you can apply for refugee status at a consulate and who qualifies:

Temporary refuge is a form of short-term protection from physical danger when the danger is both immediate (for example, a person is being pursued by a mob) and exceptionally grave (most often when there is a risk of possible death or serious bodily injury). It is also available to people who are in immediate danger of persecution based on the traditional grounds for asylum (described above).



In practice, this option tends to apply to high-profile figures, but it may be open to a few others as well. It provides temporary shelter by allowing people who need protection to enter and stay in the embassy or consulate after closing hours, at least until the danger ceases or the person chooses to leave. This option does not involve getting any help leaving the host country.

If you believe you might need temporary refuge, keep in mind that (depending on your home country’s relations with the United States) staying at a U.S. embassy or consulate could actually attract very negative attention to both you and embassy personnel, and put you at greater risk in the near future.

By definition, a person seeking asylum must meet the definition of “refugee.”

Also, you are confusing applying for admission to the US as a refugee (like folks from Syria) with temporary refugee status where a person takes refuge on the embassy grounds (think Julian Assange). The former can be done at an embassy or consulate, as well as through the UNHCR or an NGO.

[_Res Ipsa]

"Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November," he tweeted. "Democrats are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solve this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave!"

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/politics/Tr ... 73761.html

Interesting, given that House Republicans don’t need a single Democrat to pass a bill, but can’t manage to pass one. There is a compromise bill that would pass the House, but Ryan won’t bring it to the floor for a vote.

[_honorentheos]

Why not just go to a US embassy in Mexico if, say, you're from a neighboring country and apply for refugee status? Or ____, just ____ ing cross the border illegally and apply within the year?

Why Don't They Just Get In Line?

Each year the United States sets a numerical limit on how many refugees will be admitted for humanitarian reasons. To be admitted as refugees, individuals must be screened by multiple international and U.S. agencies and prove that they have a “well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, membership in a particular social group, political opinion, or national origin.” Asylum seekers are individuals already in the United States who fear returning to their home countries, and they must prove they meet the definition of a refugee.

...

The demand from both family members and workers who want to immigrate to the United States is typically higher than the number of slots available each year. In addition, there is a maximum number of employment-based and family-sponsored preference visas that can be issued to citizens of any one country in a single fiscal year. No country can receive more than seven percent of the visas available for the year. This results in significant backlogs for most family members and some workers hoping to enter the United States legally, with some immigrants from certain countries waiting decades.

As of May 2016, for most countries, unmarried children of U.S. citizens must wait more than five years and siblings of U.S. citizens must wait more than 10 years. People from countries with high levels of immigration to the United States—Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines—generally have longer waiting times. For example, married children of U.S. citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years for a visa to become available, and Filipino siblings of U.S. citizens currently wait about 25 years.


As I said, if you want legal immigration to work as a solution, it's going to take improving it and allocating resources to make it viable. Otherwise, it's all just talk.

[_Hawkeye]

By definition, a person seeking asylum must meet the definition of “refugee.”

Yep.

Also, you are confusing applying for admission to the US as a refugee (like folks from Syria) with temporary refugee status where a person takes refuge on the embassy grounds (think Julian Assange). The former can be done at an embassy or consulate, as well as through the UNHCR or an NGO.

I'm not confusing anything, just stating the facts about the temporary refugee status offered by consulates. In the context of this discussion we're clearly referring to the tens of thousands of Nicaraguan and Honduran asylum seekers crossing our borders, correct? "In practice" giving refugee status by consulates is done only for people who are in an immediate life and death situation, and typically it is for high profile individuals (like Julian Assange). Consulates are not designed to handle tens of thousands of requests for refugee status, and even if they were, we shouldn't be surprised that the folks fleeing their plight aren't aware of them.

[_honorentheos]

By definition, a person seeking asylum must meet the definition of “refugee.”

Yep.

Also, you are confusing applying for admission to the US as a refugee (like folks from Syria) with temporary refugee status where a person takes refuge on the embassy grounds (think Julian Assange). The former can be done at an embassy or consulate, as well as through the UNHCR or an NGO.

I'm not confusing anything, just stating the facts about the temporary refugee status offered by consulates. In the context of this discussion we're clearly referring to the tens of thousands of Nicaraguan and Honduran asylum seekers crossing our borders, correct? "In practice" giving refugee status by consulates is done only for people who are in an immediate life and death situation, and typically it is for high profile individuals (like Julian Assange). Consulates are not designed to handle tens of thousands of requests for refugee status, and even if they were, we shouldn't be surprised that the folks fleeing their plight aren't aware of them.

And in the case of asylum seekers from Central America there is concern with members of the police being affiliated with the gangs behind the violence they are fleeing. As noted in a couple of the reported on recent cases, women who took their children and fled were being threatened by gangs and felt they had no where to go as others who are gone to the police ended up dead. A person who is fearful of being killed by a gang when it's known they went to the police probably lacks protection from the same retaliation for going to the US consulate to apply for refugee status which they may be granted after a long vetting process.

[_Hawkeye]

I love how you, and EAllusion in particular, love to tell people what they're doing even though they literally did no thing.

Posting a blurb from a racist organization and pretending it is credible isn't "literally did no thing."

I'm not going to run down every potential source for you because

Who do you think you're kidding? If there were credible sources outside CIS you'd have provided them. The fact is Trump's immigration policies, which you apparently oppose, are driven mostly by "studies" produced by CIS. Jeff Sessions has quoted them many times when pontificating on the threat immigrants pose. So you've been played.

1) past experience has shown me that it's just not worth the effort,

Sure.

2) sources that don't agree with a hard Left position are always assumed to be racist because ____ it and

No, sources you post from well known racist sources doesn't assume you're racist, just ignorant. But I know the only reason you like CIS is that it claims to be neither Left nor Right. That probably gave you a hard on. But they're still a bunch of racists.

3) it doesn't really matter what we gripe about on this forum until election day rolls around.

I doubt it would matter even then.

Maybe you can sneak a few more illegals in the door and get them voting Democrat so we can just end the charade of a southern border in a few years? It's good for business, after all.

You're not stupid enough to believe that, you're just trolling.

[_Res Ipsa]

Yes, you are. A Guatemalan citizen can apply to be admitted to the US as s refugee through a US embassy or consulate in Mexico. That’s not the same as seeking emergency refuge on the embassy or consulate grounds. In the context of this discussion, seeking emergency refuge is a red herring.

ETA: https://www.state.gov/j/prm/ra/admissions/index.htm

[_Res Ipsa]

Why not just go to a US embassy in Mexico if, say, you're from a neighboring country and apply for refugee status? Or ____, just ____ ing cross the border illegally and apply within the year?

https://cis.org/Report/Fraud-Credible-Fear-Process

Unlike refugees, who are screened before coming to the United States and can be denied refugee status before they enter this country, aliens who enter illegally and claim a "credible fear" of persecution have not been screened before physically entering the United States; as explained below, the process for screening those individuals after they enter the United States is vulnerable to fraud and abuse.

This report examines the incidence of fraud in the asylum application process generally, and the credible fear process specifically, and identifies some of the factors that facilitate that fraud. Asylum is an immigration benefit that allows those who receive it to remain in the United States, work, receive public benefits, and become legal permanent residents and eventually citizens.

It's being abused and everyone knows it.

- Doc

This is a little misleading. Refugees who are vetted overseas and then admitted to the US under the refugee program have the same path to citizenship as asylees. The main difference is whether the vetting occurs before or after entry to the US.

[_subgenius]

Why not just go to a US embassy in Mexico if, say, you're from a neighboring country and apply for refugee status? Or ____, just ____ ing cross the border illegally and apply within the year?

Well I already explained this once. Refugee status from a consulate is typically reserved for high profile individuals who are under imminent danger, such as being an assassin's target of the Cartel, etc.

Oh my! how terribly movie watcher racist you are....while you are obviously busy throwing stereotypes around, care to point out which part of the 1980 Refugee Act specifies this "special reserved status" from consulates?...i mean, wouldn't it be refreshing for you to back up just one of your claims with actual facts instead the usual long-winded cut-n-pastes from Maddow's queef-du-jour ?
jus sayin, most of us use the legal definition of refugee from the US Code (gimme a sec to re-read it for the "cartel assasination" clause":
The term “refugee” means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or (B) in such special circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 1157(e) of this title) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term “refugee” does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this chapter, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refu ... m/refugees
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101#a_42

according to "consulates":
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refu ... priorities

The priorities currently in use are:

Priority 1: Cases that are identified and referred to the program by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), a United States Embassy, or a designated non-governmental organization (NGO).
Priority 2: Groups of special humanitarian concern identified by the U.S. refugee program.
Priority 3: Family reunification cases (spouses, unmarried children under 21, and parents of persons lawfully admitted to the United States as refugees or asylees or permanent residents (green card holders) or U.S. citizens who previously had refugee or asylum status). For information on the current nationalities eligible for Priority 3 processing, see the “U.S. Department of State” (PDF) page.
Refugees must generally be outside their country of origin, but we can process some individuals in their home countries if authorized by the President.

good lawd u dumb.