US Politics Mega-thread - Page 399

The Trump administration’s “zero-tolerance” policy of criminally charging people who cross the border illegally led to thousands of children being separated from their parents.

But the practice of separating families appears to have begun accelerating last year, long before zero tolerance was announced in the spring. Among these cases, according to records and interviews, are many that happened at ports of entry.

Administration officials have said repeatedly that asylum seekers who don’t want to be separated from their children should present themselves at a port of entry. Doing so is the legal way to ask for asylum, they said.

But court filings describe numerous cases in recent months in which families were separated after presenting themselves at a port of entry to ask for asylum.

This happened even when asylum seekers carried records, such as birth certificates or hospital documents, listing them as the parents of their children, according to interviews and court records.

While border officials have long had a policy of separating children when their safety might be in question, lawyers and advocates say they began seeing a significant increase last year in officials separating children from their parents who asked for asylum at ports of entry, without clear reasons.

In a ruling Tuesday ordering the reunification of families in a case brought by the ACLU, San Diego federal court Judge Dana M. Sabraw wrote that there had been a “casual, if not deliberate, separation of families that lawfully present at the port of entry, not just those who cross into the country illegally.”

Nicole Ramos, an attorney who provides legal help to asylum seekers in Tijuana, said she started to see an increase in family separations at ports of entry in May 2017.

Ramos has filed eight complaints related to this issue in recent months with the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, which investigates civil rights violations.

On July 02 2018 14:29 Sermokala wrote:
Trump doesn't have a conservative track record when he hasn't gotten anything lasting done in his entire presidency. If he and pence die tomorrow everything goes back to the way things were before he was elected.

I say this again. Trump has done nothing that will outlive him other then be a huge dick to people. If anything hes been helping liberals ever sense he got into office. Reagon did things Trump hasn't. It doesn't get clearer then that.

I get how you want Trump to be a thing xdaunt but it isn't going to be a thing. When hes gone the GOP will go back to the way it was and might have a chance at actually advancing conservatism in this country.

I mean even the worst people say about W they have to admit that he did things in his presidency that outlived him and advanced the conservative cause. He had history hyjack his presidency like few leaders have but he managed to get legislative efforts done even in the later years of his presidency when the democrats were out for blood.

Trump on the other hand has bungled everything from day one refuses to meet basic competency standards like staffing his administration. Hes angered the world and is now sliding into a trade war he can't win. You can bash the intellectuals all you want but at least they know basic things like how to govern and get what you want.

On July 03 2018 00:26 Plansix wrote:
Pretty sure Trump has zero plan for that trade war he is starting. And the theory that the US is to valuable of an trade partners for to lose one built on hubris. The US does not have the political will to engage with a trade war with China or our two closes neighbors.

On July 03 2018 00:58 GreenHorizons wrote:


He doesn't have a plan to comply with the court ordered reuniting of families, of course he's got no plan for an actual trade war.

Well that's not entirely true. His plan is to act recklessly selfish, potentially self-sabotagingly, then hope the fear he might do literally anything leverages the opposition to a more favorable position as to avoid Trump doing something destructive to everyone involved out of spite, stupidity, selfishness, hubris, any of the many reasons he does the things he does.

Catch is he doesn't even know what a better deal looks like and doesn't care because literally anything that comes out will be deemed (by himself) the most amazing deal ever. Through sheer repetition and denial he'll die believing it, no matter what the outcome.

On July 03 2018 00:59 xDaunt wrote:
It's not about protecting certain industries so much as it is about leveling the playing field. The critical thing to understand is that what exists now is not free trade. I'm not against free trade. I'm very much for it. However, I'm not in favor of the current system in which the US is effectively subsidizing many foreign industries through de facto toleration of foreign protectionism.

So if we were to look at what successful outcome for an American trade war might look like, it would be a combination of 1) reduced trade imbalances, and 2) more equal trade agreements with foreign countries.

On July 03 2018 01:10 Plansix wrote:

The end result is going to be less free trade with the countries we have good agreements with. The EU and China have the ability to cut their own trade deals without our involvement and hedge us out of favorable trade. And Trump’s openly aggressive tactics are only galvanizing these nations against the US, since their populations are not in favor of caving to a bully. This entire plan is hedged on the idea that the US is to big to fail, and the EU/China are happy to call that bluff.