Drawings by immigrant children

[_EAllusion]

When parents are put in jail, we do not seize their children and place them in concentration camps. We try to find them the safest, least restrictive home with a preference for other relative homes.

This system is far from perfect, but to equate it with Trumpian family separation is dishonest. The goal is to promote quality of life, not cage them in appalling circumstances. To the extent children do end up in appalling circumstances, which does happen, that is a failure of the system and should not be tolerated.

Further, to compare asylum seekers with hardened criminals is also dishonest.

[_Markk]

Markk, so you can't support your claim. Got it.

LOL...yeah sure, and Joseph Smith didn’t have sex with his wives. Your post here sounds like a TBM defending Joseph as being faithful to Emma only.

I gave you the process, I gave you the requirements, and I gave you coaching sources...you are embarrassing yourself now.

I also stand by opinion that you're indoctrinated, especially after this last response.

[_Markk]

Markk, maybe you can find something that supports your claim here:

https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/539/

Or maybe not. But feel free to try. I'd be interested in seeing you attempt to ground a claim with supported evidence rather than something you heard from a friend or just came to conclude based on some anecdote you heard.

LOL Where were these hearings held...here or in a foreign country? Focus...they were allowed to come here because they said the right things in the detention center...like I wrote. It takes years to get through the system, and after a person is deemed non criminal, they are generally released on OR.

If you read the government link I provided you would have read this.

[_Jersey Girl]

When parents are put in jail, we do not seize their children and place them in concentration camps. We try to find them the safest, least restrictive home with a preference for other relative homes.

This system is far from perfect, but to equate it with Trumpian family separation is dishonest. The goal is to promote quality of life, not cage them in appalling circumstances. To the extent children do end up in appalling circumstances, which does happen, that is a failure of the system and should not be tolerated.

Further, to compare asylum seekers with hardened criminals is also dishonest.

Oh there's that term 'least restrictive' again. No one knows why...

[_Jersey Girl]

Markk, maybe you can find something that supports your claim here:

https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/539/

Or maybe not. But feel free to try. I'd be interested in seeing you attempt to ground a claim with supported evidence rather than something you heard from a friend or just came to conclude based on some anecdote you heard.

LOL Where were these hearings held...here or in a foreign country? Focus...they were allowed to come here because they said the right things in the detention center...like I wrote. It takes years to get through the system, and after a person is deemed non criminal, they are generally released on OR.

If you read the government link I provided you would have read this.

LOL...you'd have a right to that smart ass if only you'd met honor's request. To date, you have not.

[_Jersey Girl]

I guess you won't answer any of my questions...

Start here ...

Markk Wrote...."A well coached immigrant, or a immigrant that actually needs asylum, can get into the US very easily based on our current laws"

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refu ... lum/asylum

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. ... ted-states

LOL...that's like saying I was coached to apply for my passport.

More dumbass.

[_Themis]

Not forcibly.

So you wouldn't define a parent being put in jail as forcible separation from his children? A father can be forcibly separated from his children in a divorce regardless of whether he is at fault or not.

You said all the time which is not true. The issue as you know is children being separated from parents who are either not
breaking the law or not breaking laws where is would be reasonable to separate them from their children.

[_Markk]

I guess you won't answer any of my questions...

Start here ...

Markk Wrote...."A well coached immigrant, or a immigrant that actually needs asylum, can get into the US very easily based on our current laws"

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refu ... lum/asylum

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. ... ted-states

LOL...that's like saying I was coached to apply for my passport.

More d__a__.

Yes, and if you understood the conversation, you would know that the hearings in question were in the US, in that all are in the US...and the folks there for the most part, unless on a hold were released on OR.

So you know, when a person claims asylum at a border check point, they go through a series of interviews, the first is to find out if they were persecuted or have a “credible fear” for their life, for certain reasons as stated in the link I provided.

So...if coached, by an attorney or any other person that knows the system, they have a good chance to get into the US. Then they are given a date to appear to the judicial side, where their case is heard...and that is what Honor linked me to. From there it is a different process.

Trump is actually trying to make this harder, at the border...again if you did some homework.

The difference between you and Honor, is that he is actually a smart person, who got sloppy in an argument, and is too proud to admit it due to his predetermined political leanings, while you are just ignorantly parroting his mistakes, so I guess that just makes you...well... an average person from New Jersey :)

Love you

Mark

[_honorentheos]

Markk -

Connect these two dots for me.

1) It's easy to get into the US with coaching.

2) On the best of days, a CBP staff member is able to process 8 people of the 10's of thousands seeking asylum.

I'm assuming those 8 are the number who made it past his first interview, so those are the ones who knew the minimum standard to get started. You know, were coached to claim they were fearful, etc., etc. So there were others who didn't. Either way. 8 a day = easy to get into the US.

Thanks.

[_subgenius]

Answer to 1) I think you mean something other than reality because you keep forgetting asylum can only be sought at the border or from inside the US. You seem to be asking how many asylum seekers first sought refugee status. But showing up at the border to request asylum doesn't make a person an illegal immigrant so there's a flaw in your question. Turns out a person can legally seek asylum at the border. Answer to 2) I assume you mean as determined by a court as there is this thing called due process. And that answer depends on which court hears the case and your nationality. We've been over this.

So, you seemingly understand the distinction in (1) but fail to provide the data, which you allegedly posses given your claim.

Let me make it less evasive for you:

How many illegal immigrants seeking asylum first sought asylum at a legal border crossing?

as for (2), the questions remains...but the answer remains unrevealed by the self-proclaimed knowledgeable poster....the admission has already been offerred for the "depends on" factor...but still....do you not have any percentage?

or maybe you just overstated your qualifications on this subject? you must just have a bunch of anecdotes.