I didn’t vote for Trump but I’m cautiously optimistic

would love to see sources for these claims.
Would they be wide srpead or cherry picked isolated?
Please show math

https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2024-08/OIG-24-46-Aug24.pdf

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/i...00k-immigrant-children-dhs-report/ar-AA1ptdYQ

The fact you didn’t know this shows how bad your intake of info is or either you didn’t watch the debates

But it won’t change your mind one bit, which is why your side lost

You only intake information from HCR and Michael Ian Black and advertisements
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, I didnt know this because I haven't the time to follow the latest press releases/ reports involving immigration.

Thank you for your sources all the same.

Having said that, they really arent " missing" per se . They either didnt show up for a hearing or were never assigned a hearing to begin with !

from pages 5-8:

Despite its responsibilities for overseeing UCs through the immigration process, we found ICE

cannot always monitor the location and status of

UCs once they were released from DHS and HHS

custody. Even though OPLA issued new

guidance to verify the location of UCs who failed

to appear for their court hearings and improvecoordination with HHS, we found ICE often neither followed this guidance nor issued

corresponding guidance for its officers in the field.

9

We conducted site visits at four ICE locations

across the country after the OPLA guidance was issued, but observed no change in local

procedures based on the guidance. We met with ERO personnel at 10 field offices, including

some virtually. Officers at only one location stated they attempted to locate UCs who did not

appear in immigration court.

ICE did not always alert HHS when UCs did not appear for immigration hearings. According to an

ICE official, ICE is not required to share this information with HHS. HHS headquarters staff noted

they were not made aware when UCs failed to appear in court but that having the information

would be helpful. Although HHS has an electronic message inbox for ERO offices to inform HHS

when UCs do not appear, an ERO headquarters official we interviewed was unaware if local ERO

offices were using the inbox or how often ERO field staff sent information on court absences to

the inbox. An HHS official we interviewed said despite the new process for increased

coordination between ICE and HHS, ICE did not coordinate when UCs in the local area did not

appear for court hearings. HHS officials stated they would like to collaborate more with DHS

locally to help UCs.

Finally, ICE has not served all UCs with NTAs. The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims

Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 established requirements for UCs DHS seeks to remove to

be placed in removal proceedings under Section 240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8

U.S. Code Section 1229(a).10 Serving UCs with NTAs

that are properly filed with DOJ initiates this process.

As of May 2024, ICE had not served an NTA or

scheduled a court date for more than 291,000 UCs. In

each ICE location we visited, ERO could not serve

NTAs on all UCs. At one location we visited, 34,823 (84 percent) of 41,638 UCs in the local area

had not been served NTAs to initiate immigration proceedings.


Factors Contributing to ICE’s Inability to Monitor Unaccompanied Migrant

Children


ICE does not have an automated process for sharing information internally between OPLA and

ERO and externally with stakeholders, such as HHS and DOJ, regarding UCs who do not appear in

immigration court. Further, ICE ERO has limited oversight for monitoring UCs and has not

developed a formal policy or process to follow up on UCs who did not appear in court. As we

noted in a previous audit report,

11 ICE still lacks adequate staffing, which can limit officers’ time

and ability to check the location or immigration case status of migrants. Resource constraints

also impact ERO’s ability to issue NTAs to all UCs after their release from HHS’ custody
.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////

I have other things to do besides research this, but perhaps this was covered in the immigration bill voted down, a year ago (?)

and perhaps ypou have this information as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So if they weren’t assigned a trial, or never showed up , they don’t know where they are or if they are alive

That’s called missing.

From the dictionary :
(of a person) absent from a place, especially home, and of unknown whereabouts.

And the bill didn’t even have full democratic support and wouldn’t have gotten off the ground. It was an empty gesture- one to flood states with blue votes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does that information change your opinion on expense or virtue ?or nah
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Judeo-Christian values are an absolute cornerstone for the west until it’s time to uphold the ones you don’t care about.

Oh you think the values include endless hordes of people that make peoples lives worse?

The 'greater good' is destroyed if the US fails as a nation.
 
My favorite is when peiple who despise Christianity tries to cherry picks sections of Christianity to use against Christians

As if they actually give a **** about it.

Just disgusting people that at this point in our countries history have no say and will have a smaller voice as we move on and people wake up from the propaganda.
 
My favorite is when peiple who despise Christianity tries to cherry picks sections of Christianity to use against Christians

I personally dont despise Christianity. But find many
that espouse it quite hypocritical and deplorables.
But I don't despise them or the ethos

Having said that I find many if not most of it's tenets quite agreeable
and try to model myself on those lines as taught as a child.
What I do despise is the hypocracy of hiding behind the cross
as the issue fits. You either are or not !

Case in point proposed immigration policy,
cutting care / relief to children,elders and the vulnerable
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My favorite is when peiple who despise Christianity tries to cherry picks sections of Christianity to use against Christians

To be clear, I don’t despise Christianity. I don’t believe in what they believe, but I think it’s done a lot of good for a lot of people and serves a positive role in society. I feel the same about the other major religions. But I don’t understand how it’s cherry picking to bring up helping the less fortunate. In fact, I’m only in this conversation because I was defending a Christian bishop being pretty unfairly treated for just asking for mercy for others.
 
To be clear, I don’t despise Christianity. I don’t believe in what they believe, but I think it’s done a lot of good for a lot of people and serves a positive role in society. I feel the same about the other major religions. But I don’t understand how it’s cherry picking to bring up helping the less fortunate. In fact, I’m only in this conversation because I was defending a Christian bishop being pretty unfairly treated for just asking for mercy for others.

I could never make a Christian based argument to convince you that your worldview is wrong.
 
It was a long past week in the c2c household. I came down with the flu and by the time I started feeling better my two little c2c’s got sick. All this downtime ahead of the inauguration has had me reflecting a lot on the past four years… really last 8 years… and how I feel like the social fabric is decaying. Unfortunately, I don’t really see an antidote to that problem (technology really is a story of Prometheus’s fire), but I find myself cautiously optimistic nevertheless.

As someone who leans libertarian (in truth, I’m a little all over the political map), I found myself unable to cast my vote for Donald Trump in the last election. While I share some of his policy priorities and appreciate aspects of his leadership, there are critical concerns that ultimately swayed my decision.

One of the key reasons I couldn’t support Trump was his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly his support for lockdowns in the early months. While I understand the unprecedented nature of the crisis, the lockdowns imposed by state governments—often encouraged by the federal government—had devastating effects on small businesses, individual liberties, and the economy. As a libertarian, I believe strongly in personal responsibility and the right to make choices about one’s own health and livelihood. I felt that Trump’s willingness to endorse these sweeping measures ran counter to the principles of limited government and individual freedom.

Another significant concern was his refusal to accept the results of the 2020 election. A peaceful transfer of power is a cornerstone of American democracy, and Trump’s actions following his loss raised serious questions for me about his commitment to this principle. As someone who values limited government and the rule of law, his response undermined the institutional stability I believe is crucial for our nation.

I also felt that Ron DeSantis better embodied the balance of conservative principles and pragmatic leadership that I wanted in a candidate. DeSantis’ approach to governance in Florida resonated with me, especially his focus on individual liberties, fiscal responsibility, and local autonomy. Ruthless competence — his record gave me hope for a future that aligns more closely with my libertarian ideals.

That said, while I didn’t vote for Trump, I am rooting for his success as president. The Gaza ceasefire shows he is capable of resolving international conflicts in ways that avoid deeper U.S. involvement. As someone who supports a more restrained foreign policy, this is an encouraging step in the right direction. I hope we will soon see peace in Ukraine.

I’m also encouraged by some of his cabinet picks, which signal a willingness to surround himself with capable advisors. JD Vance seems like a positive embodiment of what “America first” could be when it isn’t represented by chaos incarnate. This could lead to sound policy decisions that benefit the country, even if I don’t always agree with his approach or rhetoric.

At the end of the day, Donald Trump is uniquely influential. He has shaken up the Republican Party, rooting out the establishment and bringing neglected issues to the forefront. However, his ability to inspire loyalty is a double-edged sword. He could use it to bring meaningful reform, but it also risks encouraging authoritarian tendencies. My hope is that he channels his influence toward strengthening our institutions and protecting individual freedoms, rather than undermining them.
eh
 
I don’t think this ends well for Trump. But I’m hopeful the “oligarchs” he’s surrounded himself with will serves as his better angels and dissuade him from doing something that will have disastrous effects.
just remember the toddler in this reality tv show gets to hire the babysitters
 
Back
Top