The Trump Presidency

nsacpi said:
The other difference is that there is a policy in place to deter migrants by separating the children and treating them this way. It is a not too surprising outcome when policy is driven by the demonization of entire groups. Demonize a group of people and it becomes easy to lose sight of the basic humanity that they share with the rest of us. I think that should be the primary concern in this situation. A secondary concern is that this is going to cost the taxpayer plenty when the awards from the class action lawsuits wind their way through the judicial system.
Click to expand...

Class action lawsuits for detainment of non us citizens?
 
nsacpi said:
The other difference is that there is a policy in place to deter migrants by separating the children and treating them this way. It is a not too surprising outcome when policy is driven by the demonization of entire groups. Demonize a group of people and it becomes easy to lose sight of the basic humanity that they share with the rest of us. I think that should be the primary concern in this situation. A secondary concern is that this is going to cost the taxpayer plenty when the awards from the class action lawsuits wind their way through the judicial system. The discovery process is going to be mighty interesting.
Click to expand...

Trump will just try to use the same no obstruction since no collusion logic.

They're illegal so they shouldn't be allowed to use our justice system to sue us and be awarded money!



Edit: NVM I see it was already in the back of thethe's mind.
 
Individual-1 said:
Trump will just try to use the same no obstruction since no collusion logic.

They're illegal so they shouldn't be allowed to use our justice system to sue us and be awarded money!



Edit: NVM I see it was already in the back of thethe's mind.
Click to expand...

It is an obvious point. But there are laws and legal arrangements that constrain what the government can do to people under detention, regardless of citizenship or legal residency status.
 
nsacpi said:
It is an obvious point. But there are laws and legal arrangements that constrain what the government can do to people under detention, regardless of citizenship or legal residency status.
Click to expand...

And what has been done that is deemed illegal?
 
thethe said:
What statute is that under?
Click to expand...

There is the Flores agreement. To cite one example. But there is much more than that. The federal government is not free to treat illegal immigrants as it wishes. There is a legal framework that applies.
 
nsacpi said:
There is the Flores agreement. To cite one example. But there is much more than that. The federal government is not free to treat illegal immigrants as it wishes. There is a legal framework that applies.
Click to expand...

And if the separation policy is justified by the lack of ability to verify familial relationships?
 
Worth noting that we’ve progressed from “there is no family separation policy,” which was untrue, to “Obama instituted the family separation policy,” which was also untrue, to “the separation policy is justified by the lack of ability to verify familial relationships.”

I mean, thethe likes and supports the policy. Why play games? Just accept it and own it for what it is.
 
Julio3000 said:
Worth noting that we’ve progressed from “there is no family separation policy,” which was untrue, to “Obama instituted the family separation policy,” which was also untrue, to “the separation policy is justified by the lack of ability to verify familial relationships.”

I mean, thethe likes and supports the policy. Why play games? Just accept it and own it for what it is.
Click to expand...

For starters, i do like the policy because it acts as a deterrent and protects children unless you dont believe the cartels are using kids to make it into the US.
 
thethe said:
For starters, i do like the policy because it acts as a deterrent and protects children unless you dont believe the cartels are using kids to make it into the US.
Click to expand...

And it is pretty clear the policy was crafted to act as a deterrent by making life unpleasant for these children and families. If a few of them died as a result, hey c'est las guerre. And I'm sure the discovery process will show that. Good luck in court. And yes the taxpayer will likely have to fork over a substantial settlement/judgment.
 
Julio3000 said:
Worth noting that we’ve progressed from “there is no family separation policy,” which was untrue, to “Obama instituted the family separation policy,” which was also untrue, to “the separation policy is justified by the lack of ability to verify familial relationships.”

I mean, thethe likes and supports the policy. Why play games? Just accept it and own it for what it is.
Click to expand...

All while trying to say all live is precious and if you are on the side of allowing abortion, you are a murderer

They always move the goal posts cause it’s easier to justify the horror they support if they get to the truth slowly instead of being honest from the start
 
I mean, it’s worth killing children to show how much you are pro life so you can get a ****ty ass tax cut
 
Children are being killed because there parents made an irresponsible decision to break a foreign countries laws and make a perilous journey with no guarantee.

No child is being killed by the US.
 
thethe said:
Children are being killed because there parents made an irresponsible decision to break a foreign countries laws and make a perilous journey with no guarantee.

No child is being killed by the US.
Click to expand...

wow, the fence you are trying to straddle to support children dying while trying to absolve yourself is amazing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top