In not reporting the crimes, the criminals are left to abuse without consequence, to walk and drive the same streets that I live on, that I am raising my kids on.

I don't give a flying fig if someone is here legally or not, UNTIL they break the law.

For instance: a friend was driving home from work in his new truck. He was rear ended by a car with 4 illegal immigrants, carrying no identification, no insurance and didn't want the cops called.

What would you do?

What did he do? He took them up on their offer of $500 cash to pay for the insurance deductible he would have to pay if they reported it with the cops.

Now, not only did he cover for the fact that they were illegal but now he would be setting himself up for insurance fraud.

One more thing, see illegal immigrants can work in the USA as long as the employers don't check the E-Verify system and the immigrant presents a Social Security card. People can work for decades before a sting takes a company down that they find out that half the immigrants are using Social Security numbers of dead people or multiple people using the same number.

Cool eh?

You've given a few arguments for your position but mostly you've danced around it with distractions. That suggests to me you're not really comfortable with it. My suggestion is try to abstract out the fact that these people are immigrants and imagine them as just people. Then ask yourself what kind of extreme circumstances would be necessary to treat anyone like that and if those circumstances really apply here. That's all I'd ask of you. — Baden

Thank you Baden for considering me as a whole and not just the words on the screen. Your words and solid position do make me uncomfortable but I am okay with being made to feel uncomfortable, it makes me consider my position and take stock in what I think and what I feel. If I remove the label of illegal immigrants, I see citizens who need help or non citizens who need help and I am ready to help. What I cannot condone is abusing the offer of political asylum to the point where we lose sight of our own self preservation.

In not reporting the crimes, the criminals are left to abuse without consequence, to walk and drive the same streets that I live on, that I am raising my kids on — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Then your issue is not with the immigration status of the perpetrator, but the victim. Illegal immigrants, in this scenario, would also fail to report crimes committed against them by native-born citizens and legal immigrants. Is that what you intended to argue?

I don't give a flying fig if someone is here legally or not, UNTIL they break the law. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

See above.

I believe there are a number of studies that claim to show immigrants, including illegal immigrants, commit crimes at a lower rate than the native-born. You can Google as well as I can. I agree that if there is an underreporting issue, which is plausible, it might be difficult, but not impossible, to correct for that.

Also, I believe the Attorney General would take exception to your suggestion that entering the United States illegally is not in itself a crime.

the immigrant presents a Social Security card. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Another social program illegal immigrants would pay into and receive no benefit from, as I understand it.

You are correct in that the Trump administration "implemented" this policy but it was considered an option back in July of 2016 when we had tens of thousands of children being sent across the border without guardians. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

During this time, regarding the prior policy, families were held together for "no more than 21 days", after which both parents and child(ren) were released together. The new zero-tolerance policy was implemented because we have a xenophobic, racist, white supremacist administration that has continually demonstrated utter indifference to Latinos.

Just bear in mind that the parents entering illegally are aware of this policy. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Tiff, you need to provide a citation for this claim. Personally, I'm unfamiliar with the publication you provided, and am skeptical at some of it's broader claim of greatly increased immigration when Latin American immigration has been steadily decreasing since the recession. It is perfectly feasible, that there have been an increase in asylum seekers and an increase in border arrests without an overall increase in immigration. Given that this is a new policy, I find it difficult to believe that immigrants who may have been traveling for thousands of miles were well-informed about it prior to reaching the border. In fact, in some instances, border agents lied to the parents and the children in order to separate them without incident. In one case, a father killed himself while in a detention cell after learning his child was taken away. There have also been cases in which immigrants, following US law, have announced themselves for asylum, and yet were separated from their child for several months. This policy has been implemented with subterfuge and callous lies and reeks of a prelude to genocide.

The fucking idea I am "on about" is that the average wait time is up to 20 days. Have you ever gotten a really bad sunburn from a day at the beach? It would be not just traumatic to the children to leave them out in the elements but it would be down right deadly for anyone. That is what I am "fucking" going on about. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Tiff , what is the connection between the forced and indefinite separation of families and not "leaving children out in the sun"? I'm certainly not advocating that families be left in the blistering heat while a slow churning bureaucracy screens them, but separating families indefinitely in no way solves this.

Ultimately, immigration policy in this country has been shoddy, and I am not a proponent of Bill Clinton's, Bush's, Obama's approaches. But Trump's policy takes a defective system and dials up the inhumanity, and the forced separation, the deceit, and the rabid language and inhumane treatment is inexcusable.

There is no correlation Maw. One is an act of Mother Nature and the other is the choice of free will. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Oh Lord. No. The Trump administration's blithe indifference to Puerto Rico greatly impacted the high number of fatalities, despite the Government's original 64 death toll estimate. According to a study from the New England Journal of Medicine, "one third of the deaths were attributed to delayed or interrupted health care."

Tiff, I'm not talking a position in support of illegal immigration, so this is irrelevant to me. My only point in this whole debate is about the deliberate and unnecessary* cruelty against children and their parents Trump is inflicting. And then disgustingly trying not to take responsibility for.

*It's absolutely irrational to think you have to be this inhumane in order to protect your border just as it's absolutely irrational to think you have to legalize torture to protect your national security. You need to separate things out otherwise it just sounds like a bunch of spurious excuses to try to justify the unjustifiable.

The crimes within the illegal immigrant communities would blow your mind if they were only reported. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

So would the crimes committed within the regular citizenry.

Anytime visibility barriers are erected, we give the occasion to crime to flourish. It has nothing to do with the status of the immigrants. I used to live in a quarter of the city populated mostly with Hassidic Jews. There were legitimate concerns about how such a closed community cared for their handicapped folks, and I saw more than once what would have constituted gross abuse.

I do have to ask. Do you guys and gals, think all these vergining on the insane comments about immigrants and the like, are intentional? It smacks of the same idea of making Dubya seem incompetent and stupid, just that that has taken unseen levels in regards to Trump as of late.

It seems you folks in the USA are learning too much from the way Australians treat refugees.

Do you even have any clue why Manafort is in trouble? Go on, I'll wait while you Google it. — Jeremiah

Yes. And why is reading info on a case somehow a negative?

Are any of us on the ground at the scene of these events?

Fact is, the Right does their fair share of protesting speakers they don't like, to the point of disruption. Should these right winger protesters also be subjected to theoretical suspension or expulsion because they protest speakers who are likely relatively wealthy, and have alternative platforms with which to present their opinions? — Maw

Yes, of course they should be subject to those same standards. This was my point.

Did you simply do a five second google search? This is not an Obama or Democratic policy. The no-tolerance policy of separating children is a new policy put in place by the Trump administration. The "holding cells" from 2014, which I am certainly not defending, were for minors, generally teenagers, who crossed the borders themselves in order to escape cartel violence, poverty, abuse, or to unite with family in the States. Obama, in many respects, created perverse authoritarian immigration policies, providing him the epithet, "Deporter in Chief". While this is a legacy that liberals (and everyone) need to grapple with, it is nevertheless distinct from the Trump policy of separating families who cross the border, often times without a structured plan of reuniting them — Maw

In April, the New York Times reported:

>>>Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.

According to azcentral.com, it is “common to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.”<<<

If someone is determined to come here illegally, the decent and safest thing would be to leave the child at home with a relative and send money back home. Because we favor family units over single adults, we are creating an incentive to do the opposite and use children to cut deals with smugglers.

National Review above

It just seems like you don't understand why that slimy jerk Manafort is in jail. You don't seem to understand the actual purpose of the Russian investigation.

Mueller has already got 5 guilty pleas and 17 criminal indictments.You are so worried about that giant cry baby snowflake Donald Trump, that the reasons for the Russian investigation flies right over your head. If Trump is innocent he has nothing to worry about.

Then your issue is not with the immigration status of the perpetrator, but the victim. Illegal immigrants, in this scenario, would also fail to report crimes committed against them by native-born citizens and legal immigrants. Is that what you intended to argue? — Srap Tasmaner

That is not what I intended to argue but yes I agree that any legal citizen could just as easily abuse an illegal immigrant as another illegal immigrant could, with the same lack of consequences.

I don't give a flying fig if someone is here legally or not, UNTIL they break the law. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
See above.

I believe there are a number of studies that claim to show immigrants, including illegal immigrants, commit crimes at a lower rate than the native-born. You can Google as well as I can. I agree that if there is an underreporting issue, which is plausible, it might be difficult, but not impossible, to correct for that. — Srap Tasmaner

Thank you for having faith in me to use Google but as you rightly point out the numbers will never be even close to accurate until the unreported are able to be reported. Additionally, as far as "reporting" goes, our census numbers are totally irrelevant as most illegal residents did not participate in the census no matter how 'anonymous' it was guaranteed to be.

Also, I believe the Attorney General would take exception to your suggestion that entering the United States illegally is not in itself a crime. — Srap Tasmaner

I am not sure where I said that entering the states illegally is not a crime, if I did, I was wrong.

Entering the United States illegally is a crime but simply being an unlawful presence is not a crime.

Another social program illegal immigrants would pay into and receive no benefit from, as I understand it. — Srap Tasmaner

Possibly. I know that illegal immigrants that are using Social Security numbers that belong to deceased citizens pay into the system but I don't know what happens if they try to take it out or what happens when a raid exposes the paying into the system and what is done with that money. I imagine that the IRS is part of what tips the Feds off to what plants and farms to raid but the impact on a raid is huge, even on the legal immigrants. Fear is a big part of their lives because even if they are here legally, they often have family and friends that are here illegally.

Maw Baden @Srap Tasmaner
Please take 5 minutes to watch this video and try to understand the impact on our nation.
And I ask you, at what point does the necessity of self preservation come in? — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Did anyone actually watch the link I provided?

Yes, of course they should be subject to those same standards. This was my point. — raza

Punishing protesters to own the libs. Got it.

So fucking what? What does any of that have to with the child separation policy?

You are correct in that the Trump administration "implemented" this policy but it was considered an option back in July of 2016 when we had tens of thousands of children being sent across the border without guardians. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

During this time, regarding the prior policy, families were held together for "no more than 21 days", after which both parents and child(ren) were released together. The new zero-tolerance policy was implemented because we have a xenophobic, racist, white supremacist administration that has continually demonstrated utter indifference to Latinos. — Maw

The reason they were able to hold for 21 days was because at day 21, they were released, regardless if they have had their time in front of the judge or not. That was why the "catch and release" program was so popular. After being caught, held for 21 days, we legally had to release the illegal immigrant and they knew it. Our only way to abide by the law was to issue a court date, release those being held and contact them when their date came up in maybe 12 months, sometimes 2 years. As you can imagine the rate of appearing before the judge after being released was 30% at the highest. Where did the other 70% go?

Maw, logic this thru with me. Between the detention centers along Arizona's border with Mexico, we have the capacity to hold somewhere around 4k people within three detention centers. When we can handle the flow of those surrendering themselves to an entry point, asking for political asylum their stays were about 5 days. Now? We cannot even physically accommodate the asylum seekers AND follow the law we operate under in that we cannot hold anyone indefinitely. In other words, if a LARGE group of people present themselves at one time, it overwhelms our ability to process anyone as we normally would.

Just bear in mind that the parents entering illegally are aware of this policy. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Tiff, you need to provide a citation for this claim. Personally, I'm unfamiliar with the publication you provided, and am skeptical at some of it's broader claim of greatly increased immigration when Latin American immigration has been steadily decreasing since the recession. It is perfectly feasible, that there have been an increase in asylum seekers and an increase in border arrests without an overall increase in immigration. Given that this is a new policy, I find it difficult to believe that immigrants who may have been traveling for thousands of miles were well-informed about it prior to reaching the border. In fact, in some instances, border agents lied to the parents and the children in order to separate them without incident. In one case, a father killed himself while in a detention cell after learning his child was taken away. There have also been cases in which immigrants, following US law, have announced themselves for asylum, and yet were separated from their child for several months. This policy has been implemented with subterfuge and callous lies and reeks of a prelude to genocide. — Maw

Maw, please try not to go overboard in the idea that this is some form of genocide for it lessens the respect for those who were actually lost to genocide. Here is your citation: here and here and here

The fucking idea I am "on about" is that the average wait time is up to 20 days. Have you ever gotten a really bad sunburn from a day at the beach? It would be not just traumatic to the children to leave them out in the elements but it would be down right deadly for anyone. That is what I am "fucking" going on about. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Tiff, what is the connection between the forced and indefinite separation of families and not "leaving children out in the sun"? I'm certainly not advocating that families be left in the blistering heat while a slow churning bureaucracy screens them, but separating families indefinitely in no way solves this. — Maw

Please provide a citation that suggests the separation is for an indefinite period of time. That is not how the law works nor would it make logical sense seeing the spike in those trying to obtain political asylum right now. My point is that when a group of people, legally present themselves asking for political asylum and the sheer numbers overwhelm a port of entry, we have to do something. Our detention facilities are not family centers and I understand that it is not the ideal, nor is it meant to be, Trump has implemented this policy as a deterrent but we have to take care of those who are affected by it. Hence we are doing the best we can, with what we have and that involves caring for minors while their parents work through the legal system.

None of this is without pain for those children separated or for those caring for the kids. The caregivers are not allowed to pick up a crying child, they cannot hug a child, they cannot comfort a child. Keep in mind that these guards are people too. At the same time Maw, if a woman comes into the hospital in labor and the child is born with Meth in it's body? That child is taken from that Mother until it is proven that she is safe to have it returned to her. Is taking her baby heartbreaking? Yes. Is it necessary? Yes. Until she can legally have her child returned someone has to care for that newborn, if not a family member then the newborn goes into a temporary children's shelter.

Ultimately, immigration policy in this country has been shoddy, and I am not a proponent of Bill Clinton's, Bush's, Obama's approaches. But Trump's policy takes a defective system and dials up the inhumanity, and the forced separation, the deceit, and the rabid language and inhumane treatment is inexcusable. — Maw

So what is YOUR solution?

There is no correlation Maw. One is an act of Mother Nature and the other is the choice of free will. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Oh Lord. No. The Trump administration's blithe indifference to Puerto Rico greatly impacted the high number of fatalities, despite the Government's original 64 death toll estimate. According to a study from the New England Journal of Medicine, "one third of the deaths were attributed to delayed or interrupted health care." — Maw

Maw, I get the loss of life and the reasons why and I assure you it is not lost on me. The actual death count is closer to 4,000 because of delayed and interrupted health care. We have a friend who lost everything as a result of Maria and has returned to PR. He freely admits that the infrastructure was held together with bubble gum and shoe strings before Maria but after? It was obliviated. I don't think there was indifference to PR by the administration but rather they got caught in what many administrations do and that is the one two punch, never expecting the third that always hits.

If I remember correctly (please correct me if I am wrong) the first punch was Hurricane Harvey that missed PR but nailed Texas. The second punch was hurricane Maria that nailed PR and the third punch was the collapse of the PR infrastructure which is tragic and I hope is never repeated.

It seems you folks in the USA are learning too much from the way Australians treat refugees. — Banno

NicK asked how anyone could call what the USA is doing inhumane when there is real inhumane treatment over in Australia on Manus and Nauru island and why wasn't I bringing it up to compare real time treatment of illegal immigrants? I told him I was not about to conflate the two as I had enough to deal with and I am not sure there is anyone here that would be willing to defend Australia's immigration policy.

That is another straw-man. Two wrongs don't make a right. I am growing to seriously doubt your intelligence. I mean this should be basic stuff for a "philosopher".

That is another straw-man. Two wrongs don't make a right. — Jeremiah

I never said they did, nor do I believe they do.

I am growing to seriously doubt your intelligence. I mean this should be basic stuff for a "philosopher". — Jeremiah

You are entitled to your opinion of me, have at it.

The USA is doing what it has done since colonial times. The people find an excuse to label a minority group as outside the approved cultural circle and then use that as an excuse to treat them like crap.

With the Native Americans they were considerd outside Christendom and savages, which people used as an excuse to treat them like animals.

That was true with the blacks as well, but they later expanded on that with social Darwinism.

They said the gays and LGBTQ community were unnatural, mentally ill and also outside Christendom.

The main target today are the immigrants, they decided they are criminals, then use that as an excuse to get their racist fix. Using that as an excuse to be giant dick heads.

Maybe if Americans knew their history better we won't be stuck in this loop.

Of course I am entitled to my own opinions, that was never in question.

The reason they were able to hold for 21 days was because at day 21, they were released, regardless if they have had their time in front of the judge or not. That was why the "catch and release" program was so popular. After being caught, held for 21 days, we legally had to release the illegal immigrant and they knew it. Our only way to abide by the law was to issue a court date, release those being held and contact them when their date came up in maybe 12 months, sometimes 2 years. As you can imagine the rate of appearing before the judge after being released was 30% at the highest. Where did the other 70% go?

Maw, logic this thru with me. Between the detention centers along Arizona's border with Mexico, we have the capacity to hold somewhere around 4k people within three detention centers. When we can handle the flow of those surrendering themselves to an entry point, asking for political asylum their stays were about 5 days. Now? We cannot even physically accommodate the asylum seekers AND follow the law we operate under in that we cannot hold anyone indefinitely. In other words, if a LARGE group of people present themselves at one time, it overwhelms our ability to process anyone as we normally would. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

None of this is relevant to the specific matter I'm discussing: Trump's zero tolerance policy. There is no excuse for separating a child from their parent. You can pontificate about the lacuna's of the 'Catch and Release' policy, but that does not justify the inhumane separation that is taking place.

Maw, please try not to go overboard in the idea that this is some form of genocide for it lessens the respect for those who were actually lost to genocide. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

History shows us that splitting families apart is often a prelude to genocide. The analogy is appropriate.

Here is your citation: here and here and here — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Daily Caller is not a legitimate source. Neither of the other two sources stat that immigrants are explicitly told their children will be separated from them prior to them arriving at the border. And I provided examples that makes that rather clear the policy is shrouded in deception.

Please provide a citation that suggests the separation is for an indefinite period of time — ArguingWAristotleTiff

There are very few systems in place to help reunite parents with their child, and the onus is "largely on the parents to locate their children within government custody and seek their return," which is profoundly draconian given that the Government separated them in the first place. The information that they are given and the process is Kafkaesque.

None of this is without pain for those children separated or for those caring for the kids. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Tragicomedy at its finest, Tiff.

So what is YOUR solution? — ArguingWAristotleTiff

I am not talking about the whole issue of immigration Tiff. You continually try to digress from the specific Trump policy I originally addressed, to a much wider problem.

Maw, I get the loss of life and the reasons why and I assure you it is not lost on me. The actual death count is closer to 4,000 because of delayed and interrupted health care — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Right. Ergo, one of the worst US atrocities within the last 20 years.

It should be noted that Hilary Clinton forecasted, during one of the debates, what Trump's draconian immigration policy would look like.

It's kind of funny in the face of the previous meltdown over "lost" immigrant children that people are upset the federal government is keeping children in centralized locations.

As I understand the law and jurisprudence, kids cannot be kept in federal facilities their parents are detained in. Also they can be released to guardians, if ties can be proven.

If someone is determined to come here illegally, the decent and safest thing would be to leave the child at home with a relative and send money back home. — raza

That's dangerously irresponsible. Someone with reasons to immigrate illegally should never leave his family back home to suffer in his place.

In other words, if a LARGE group of people present themselves at one time, it overwhelms our ability to process anyone as we normally would. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

In which we justify our insensitivity to other people's suffering because of our bureaucratic inadequacies.

There are very few systems in place to help reunite parents with their child, and the onus is "largely on the parents to locate their children within government custody and seek their return," which is profoundly draconian given that the Government separated them in the first place. The information that they are given and the process is Kafkaesque. — Maw

Additionally

'I cannot convey enough how much utter chaos there is,' said Michelle Brané, director of migrant rights and justice at the Women’s Refugee Commission, a research and advocacy organization that monitors immigration issues. 'The government does not have a proper system in place to track families and coordinate.'

In some cases, parents and children have gone weeks without being able to communicate with one another and without knowing each others’ whereabouts. From April 19 to May 31, a total of 1,995 children who arrived with 1,940 adults were separated from their parents, according to administration officials.

From that point, migrant parents and children become separate legal cases in the maze of government bureaucracy, and keeping them linked has proved challenging. Different legal protections are afforded to juveniles and adults in the immigration system, and as a result, reuniting families can take months or longer, several legal experts said.

“Once the parent and child are apart, they are on separate legal tracks,” said John Sandweg, who was acting director of ICE during the Obama administration.

Reunification becomes particularly difficult when a parent is deported without the child and is no longer on American soil, Mr. Sandweg said; in those cases, “there is a very high risk that parents and children will be permanently separated.”

And I think this Twitter thread, where Jacob Soboroff of MSNBC toured one of the larger immigration processing centers speaks for itself.

More on the Inspector General's report, and reaction to it:

Republicans seized on the report as proof that the deep state really is out to get Mr. Trump. The Strzok-Page texts understandably drew the most fire. But Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, was among those passing broader judgment, declaring the report “a damning indictment” of Comey and the entire Justice Department’s “mishandling of the investigation.” Twitter became a sea of dark conspiracy theories.

This should surprise nobody. Mr. Trump and his supporters were set on using the Horowitz report as part of their effort to delegitimize Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

Thursday morning, before the report went public, three Trump allies in the House fired off a letter to Mr. Horowitz, expressing concerns that his report had been watered down by people within the F.B.I. and Justice Department, and requesting that the inspector general hand over earlier drafts of his report for comparison. That’s right: Trump’s congressional allies now want to investigate the Inspector General’s investigation of the F.B.I.’s investigation.

Shortly before the findings were released, Attorney General Jeff Sessions told a reporter that he expected “a careful report” from the inspector general that would “help us better fix any problems that we have and reassure the American people that some of the concerns that have been raised are not true.”

Mr. Sessions got his careful report. Sadly, the president and his minions are committed to making sure that it in no way reassures the American people.

Bolds added.

https://nyti.ms/2JNMA65

It just seems like you don't understand why that slimy jerk Manafort is in jail. You don't seem to understand the actual purpose of the Russian investigation.

Mueller has already got 5 guilty pleas and 17 criminal indictments.You are so worried about that giant cry baby snowflake Donald Trump, that the reasons for the Russian investigation flies right over your head. If Trump is innocent he has nothing to worry about. — Jeremiah

I do understand the actual purpose of it. It's part of the racket to protect criminals.

I think Trump is not worried about the "investigation" in terms of it finding him guilty of collusion or of anything else.