Could we stop with "these are asylum seekers" nonsense

Rodeo · 2024-04-20T16:11:10.534Z

mot1man:

They don’t care. Al, and those like him(progressives), do not give two ■■■■■ how much damage is caused by the invasion of our country.

I know….commom sense with credibility lacking libs is a waste of time.

People who voted for and continue to advocate for the Biden open borders invasion of this country still haven’t figured out how much damage their votes and advocacy have and are doing to this country.

Eagle-Keeper · 2024-04-20T16:37:41.703Z

Rodeo:

mot1man:

They don’t care. Al, and those like him(progressives), do not give two ■■■■■ how much damage is caused by the invasion of our country.

I know….commom sense with credibility lacking libs is a waste of time.

People who voted for and continue to advocate for the Biden open borders invasion of this country still haven’t figured out how much damage their votes and advocacy have and are doing to this country.

The bill negotiated by this ONE LONE Republican (Lankford) was utterly useless and would do more to facilitate the current situation than fix it:

Newsweek – 7 Feb 24

Sen. Rubio: Ignore the Media. Here's the Real Reason the Border Deal Tanked

Biden made an intentional decision to open the border. He broke the law to do it. Now he wants Republicans to take the blame for "blocking" his phony "deal."

New York Post – 5 Feb 24

Border bill is terrible, and a way for Biden to dodge blame for not enforcing...

The Biden administration goes one better: “Never create a crisis and let it go to waste.”

The Republicans supporting this bill have bought into to the idea that everyone in the developing world has a right to be let into to the United States to make an asylum claim.

It’s just that they prefer it happen in “a safe and orderly process” through the ports of entry, so as to avoid news footage of hundreds of people climbing through or around the fence and camping out waiting for their Border Patrol ride to show up.

That’s why, for instance, even when the border is “shut down” by the new emergency power the bill creates, it mandates the admission of “a minimum of 1,400 inadmissible aliens each calendar day” through the ports of entry.

It also effectively codifies an unlawful asylum process the Biden administration is already using, which reduces protections against fraud and incentivizes more bogus asylum claims.

Ironically, the Biden rule this bill would codify is being challenged in court by 20 states, including McConnell’s Kentucky and Lankford’s Oklahoma!

Along those same lines, the many blue cities burdened by illegal aliens let in by Biden have been demanding, not a change in policy, but a bailout from Washington.

Senator Rubio – 9 Feb 24

Rubio on Senate Floor: “No One in the Senate Can Lecture Me on Immigration”

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) delivered a speech on the Senate floor addressing the national security threat at the U.S. border. “Most Americans have nothing against Ukraine. Most Ameri

Est. reading time: 26 minutes

WuWei · 2024-04-20T17:03:41.098Z

They’re trying to pretend the bill hasn’t existed since May 23.

STODR · 2024-04-20T17:07:35.291Z

WHAT Allan was wrong again with his facts?

Rodeo · 2024-04-20T17:37:47.241Z

Great post…

Can we just bookmark that and go back to it every time someone tries to tell us how wonderful that terrible senate bill was?

Eagle-Keeper · 2024-04-20T18:19:12.011Z

Rodeo:

Great post…

Can we just bookmark that and go back to it every time someone tries to tell us how wonderful that terrible senate bill was?

Anyone who thinks this is some sort of strong bill on border security hasn’t looked at ALL the aspects of this lousy bill as it’s much more about immigration (really a means for millions and millions of phony asylum seekers to cut the line) that of border security. And regarding Lankford here’s this:

Even worse, McConnell selected James Lankford of Oklahoma as the lead negotiator for the border deal.

While Lankford’s voting record on immigration hasn’t been bad, he and his staff have little familiarity with the issue.

The result? Lankford got pantsed by the Democrats.

While there actually are a few provisions in the bill released Sunday that would be useful, the whole package is based on the Democrats’ priorities and goals.

The bill contains a raft of items from the Democratic wish-list that have nothing to do with securing the border, some of which would actually make things worse.

DougBH · 2024-04-21T08:08:22.406Z

There were some good things in the Senate bill. Remove the poison pill of preventing a future President from securing our border 365 days per year at any level of illegal entry, and go for it. It would pass. Or just pass HR2. Or just reinstate Trumps policies made under current law. The border will be secure.

Eagle-Keeper · 2024-04-21T14:05:14.818Z

DougBH:

There were some good things in the Senate bill.

There’s really nothing in this bill (regarding enforcement) that’s not already in current law. Here’s how Marco Rubio put it:

*Let’s be clear. There have never been zero illegal people getting into America. But how did this happen? Let’s start with our law, because when people talk about immigration around here, they pretend like immigration is completely unregulated. They say, “We need new laws to fix it, because the laws are all messed up, and we don’t regulate the law.” Immigration is a complex area of law, but at its core, quite simple. Here’s what immigration law in America is. It says: “These are the people that are allowed to be in the United States of America, and if someone who is not allowed to be in the United States of America enters illegally, you are to detain them through removal,” meaning you are to detain them until their case is resolved or they are removed from the country. *

That is the law of the United States, and that’s been the law of the United States for quite some time. Now, we’ve always had exceptions. They’re narrow exceptions. For example, if the Dalai Lama shows up at the border of the United States and says, “I’m here because the Chinese are trying to kill me,” you can grant him an exception. These are supposed to be narrow exceptions, and they’re supposed to apply to individuals, case by case. But for the first time in American history, the president of the United States has decided to make the exception into the rule. It became the rule that if you arrived here, we would not detain you. I just gave you the numbers of the people who were released. The exceptions ate up the rule, and that’s how this happens.

He goes on:

They don’t know what the immigration law is. Here’s what they know. They know people that have come here, turned themselves in, said, “I’m here blah blah blah,” and were released. They know people who did it, and those people tell other people, and the traffickers advertise it. Human beings are incentive-based creatures. That’s why we pass laws to punish crime. That’s why we raise taxes on cigarettes. When people know that if you can make it inside of the United States and turn yourself in, your chances of being released are 85%, 90%, more people are going to come. The numbers don’t lie.

But the worst part of this utterly ■■■■ bill is that it effectively changes asylum to pretty much fit ANYONE showing up at the border!

The law says they can do it under the convention against torture, which is an international treaty. But let me tell you how that’s been applied. How it’s been applied is that the convention against torture isn’t just used against, “We’re going to send you back somewhere where they’re going to waterboard you.” How the convention against torture has been applied is, most of the activist groups argue that we cannot remove people from this country if we’re going to send them back to a place where they might be kidnapped or where they might be assaulted, not by just the government, but by non-government criminal gangs. Basically, if you come from a country where gangs kidnap people, kill people, extort people, threaten people, and assault people, we cannot send you back there, under the convention of torture. That’s their interpretation of it. My friends, that’s like 100 countries on Earth. That’s almost every country represented in the number of people that arrive at the border.

Striker840 · 2024-04-21T20:21:46.257Z

STODR:

WHAT Allan was wrong again with his facts?

Wait, he told me he was NEVER wrong and ONLY used facts…

biggestal99 · 2024-04-22T10:09:04.965Z

mot1man:

They don’t care. Al, and those like him(progressives), do not give two ■■■■■ how much damage is caused by the invasion of our country.

not a prog.

Allan

Chris_Monti · 2024-04-22T10:47:54.508Z

The concept of asylum indeed has a complex and multifaceted history, deeply intertwined with global conflicts, human rights, and international law. While it’s true that the modern legal framework for asylum primarily emerged in response to wartime situations, its application has evolved to encompass a broader range of circumstances, including persecution on account of various social factors beyond just war-related issues.

biggestal99 · 2024-04-22T12:36:06.586Z

Chris_Monti:

The concept of asylum indeed has a complex and multifaceted history, deeply intertwined with global conflicts, human rights, and international law. While it’s true that the modern legal framework for asylum primarily emerged in response to wartime situations, its application has evolved to encompass a broader range of circumstances, including persecution on account of various social factors beyond just war-related issues.

exactly. asylum has evolved into what it is now.

asylum laws were enacted into United states law in 1952 and modified 10 times (last time in 2008) needs some more tweaking.

Allan

Rodeo · 2024-04-22T13:30:36.577Z

biggestal99:

exactly. asylum has evolved into what it is now.

asylum laws were enacted into United states law in 1952 and modified 10 times (last time in 2008) needs some more tweaking.

Allan

No we just need to actually focus on stopping the flow of people coming illegally into the country swamping the system in the process.

There is no good reason, none, for more than 10 million, probably 11 or 12 now…to have entered this country illegally in record setting fashion over the last three years.

It is not our responsibility to just take everyone who wants to bee bop into this country. We have a right and a responsibility to vet immigrants, to determine who and how many will be allowed and fit what purpose.

Seriously are you insane because the results of the ideas you keep defending are pure insanity.

biggestal99 · 2024-04-22T16:07:55.673Z

Rodeo:

No we just need to actually focus on stopping the flow of people coming illegally into the country swamping the system in the process.

but they arent illegal! they are legit asylum seekers. they fill out the paperwork and everything.

Allan

Guvnah · 2024-04-22T22:36:02.050Z

biggestal99:

but they arent illegal! they are legit asylum seekers.

This whole thread tells you that you need to stow it.

Rodeo · 2024-04-22T22:46:19.482Z

biggestal99:

but they arent illegal! they are legit asylum seekers.

The overwhelming majority are not.

biggestal99 · 2024-04-23T08:49:49.013Z

Guvnah:

This whole thread tells you that you need to stow it.

and as long as immigrants continue to follow US law, i wont.

Allan

biggestal99 · 2024-04-23T08:51:27.968Z

Rodeo:

The overwhelming majority are not

and thats why we have immigration judges.

to separate the wheat from the chaff.

its a really easy concept.

change the asylum law if you can.

Allan

DougBH · 2024-04-23T09:35:59.740Z

So, when selling asylum, let’s not falsely fall back on something like Jewish refuges in WWII Germany. As you say, that is not what we are talking about. And let’s agree that no law or tradition accepts economic necessity (and certainly not just want) as asylum.
Rather than say the definition of asylum has changed, I would say some are selling as asylum that which is not asylum.

biggestal99 · 2024-04-23T09:41:34.088Z

DougBH:

So, when selling asylum, let’s not falsely fall back on something like Jewish refuges in WWII Germany. As you say, that is not what we are talking about. And let’s agree that no law or tradition accepts economic necessity (and certainly not just want) as asylum.
Rather than say the definition of asylum has changed, I would say some are selling as asylum that which is not asylum.

well i will agree that too many people are claiming asylum noted by the asylum grants v deportations after the immigration courts have have their say. of course the most difficult thing is determining a true asylum seeker from a phony one.

Allan