Amnesty International declares Trump prison camps, "nothing short of torture." - Polidicks

But you have time to play the victim (then immediately prove yourself wrong, lol) the second you get a chance. You really should take a step back and reconsider things though. Your second post only goes to contradict your first as others have pointed out. Valuing the amount in your account more than the lives of innocent children is pretty blatantly sociopathic. So you should rethink things then maybe consider revising your claims.

Don't worry, I'm sure ICE will pull the old "I was only following orders" excuse which out so well for all those death camp guards.

You can choose what policies to support yeah, but you're saying that the shit that you don't support is tolerable in that candidate. I would never vote for someone who willingly supports torture of this degree on fucking civilians. You knew that policies like this were on the table when you voted for this monster and now that you know they're in place you still do.

What the hell is with you and the rest of the Dutch that brag about this shit?

You seem to be alone in that which implies it'd be a matter of your interpretation rather than them not actually being related. Either way this fails to address the most important part of my post: You played victim when someone said you'd have to be sociopathic to support Trump at this point. You then went on to make a claim that in the context of this thread comes across as extremely sociopathic. So you need to either retract your first post or revise your second by addressing how it wouldn't be sociopathic.

Hey lets be fair maybe he doesn't support families being split up, maybe he's more in for the institutionalized racism and steady destruction of America's power and relevance in the modern world.

You do realize that human rights abuses should be grounds for rejecting a politician in totality right? "Yeah man it sucks that he's torturing and traumatizing small children but hey no one's perfect..."

Sure, Mussolini may have destroyed Italy's humanity and freedoms; he might have murdered and tortured citizens and aliens whose only crime was either being in his way or opposing him -- but god damn it the man made the trains run on time so I'm just going to have to pick him because I agree with that policy the most.

heh yeah hitler was a vegetarian he was a pretty rad dude actually

Donating to charities is a different ballpark than handling the children of asylum seekers in a way that people consider torture.

Yeah, those people are dotted throughout the US. White supremacists, KKK, bigots and racists. Every country has them. But we have a president that enables the behavior, so they get to show their true colors for a while

We can't either.

Not just torture -- child abuse and torture. Literally torturing children and abusing them for political purposes. Far more insidious than 'torture' could imply on its own, despite how insidious torture itself is. It speaks to the capacity to forgive an unlimited series of punishments to people who did not in any way earn it - just so long as there's profit to be gained at the end of the day.

Money isn't real, you know. It's just an idea.

Asylum-seekers are NOT illegal immigrants. Asylum is a nationally (and internationally) recognized process of legal safe harbor. Applying for it requires that you are already within the United States, and explicitly states that the manner in which you entered the United States and your immigration status within the United States do not matter. You can stay in the US for up to a year before applying, and cannot be deported or detained while the asylum process is underway. Basically, this is not a battle against illegal immigration. It's a battle against immigration in general -- particularly as it relates to Hispanics.

settling for a "eh, we'll get through this, whatever" is frankly spineless. if even this doesn't push the limits of your principles, it's hard to believe you have many at all

Pure Unfiltered Evil

I do not support the current separation of children and hope that congress acts quickly to remedy the situation, but some of this is factually false: 1) You can apply for asylum status at any port of entry to the US. You may apply for asylum if you are at a port of entry or in the United States. 2) Being in removal (deportation) proceedings can prevent you from getting asylum status. So if you wait to claim asylum status until after you've been apprehended for illegally immigration, then it may affect your ability to claim asylum. Yes. You may apply for asylum with USCIS regardless of your immigration status if: You are not currently in removal proceedings You file an asylum application within one year of arriving to the United States or demonstrate that you are within an exception to that rule. Information is from the the Q&A section of the official US Citizenship and Immigration Services website: https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/questions-and-answers-asylum-eligibility-and-applications

Oh yeah, and asylum seekers who follow the rules and visit an official port of entry to the US to claim their status are being told to try again later and turned away. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/at-the-us-border-asylum-seekers-fleeing-violence-are-told-to-come-back-later/2018/06/12/79a12718-6e4d-11e8-afd5-778aca903bbe_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_border-1145am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory If they try the official channels, they get the human equivalent of a busy signal, which is at least a modest step up from being treated like a criminal and jailed and separated from any kids who escaped with the family. Trump is trying to close the southern border entirely, despite America's international humanitarian obligations which Trump agreed to uphold as part of his oath of office.

None of that contradicts what I've said. You just provided further details to expand into some of the specifics of the points I made. Your immigration status is irrelevant, as is how you can to enter the United States. You may apply for asylum for up to one year after your entry, and how and where you entered the country is not a disqualifying factor. While being involved in the deportation process can prevent you from getting asylum status, deportation once the asylum process has begun, excepting in the event of a disqualifiying crime, offense, or development,, is not supposed to occur.

Ive given up trying to explain the issues with this to friends/family on FB. All I get back is "why is this a problem now, this is an old policy and nobody complained when obama did it. You just hate trump"

Trump is, of course, defiant. Oh, and he once again threatened to shut the government down if he doesn't get funding for his stupid fucking wall. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-defiant-as-crisis-grows-over-family-separation-at-the-border/2018/06/18/210c78ca-730f-11e8-805c-4b67019fcfe4_story.html Shoutout to Republicans for being so insulted by the very concept of a black President they elected the first President who needs help colouring inside the lines.

Is being at a port of entry considered being present within the US? If so, then sure. It just seems like an odd way to phrase it. I brought up the instance of already being in the deportation process because this whole issue of children being separated is about people who are being detained for illegally immigrating. As far as I've seen, these people are claiming asylum status after they've already been detained. If that's incorrect, please let me know. I haven't seen any reporting about illegal immigrants putting in their asylum paperwork, and having ICE come arrest them because of it. So while these people do have the right to apply for asylum, their situation makes it less likely that they'll get approvals (not to mention that the large majority of asylum requests from central american countries are denied anyway). It seems like we simply need to adjust the law to allow for holding areas that keep families together.

Oh shit, my bad, I didn't realize that the policies of Trump that I and others could potentially support would be reflected by him only enacting policies that I and others agree with. Oh wait, turns out you get the bad with the good when you elect someone. And there's so much bad to lump in with Trump that the idea that anyone would support him is saddening.

This is your daily reminder that the current policy of treating asylum seekers as illegal immigrants and the policy of separating children from their families, are both executive decisions that could be nullified before you can say "Fox and Friends". It doesn't need to go through Congress, Trump can make it all happen in six hours if he wants. But he won't, because he's using these families, and these children, as leverage to make Congress fund his stupid fucking wall. The President is condoning systemic actions that have been described by the UN as child abuse as a bargaining chip to build a massive boondoggle of a physical monument to his megalomania. The law does not need to be adjusted, full stop. The President needs to be adjusted, and Stephen Miller needs to be removed from the White House before he starts putting yellow stars on latino immigrants. (BTW ICE is already doing this, more or less, but it's been doing it since 2013 so blaming Miller would be incorrect.)

There are two different kinds of asylum: affirmative and defensive. Obtaining Asylum in the United States | USCIS Affirmative asylum can be applied for by filing the appropriate application in a government office at any time within a year of entering the United States, regardless of how you entered the country or your current immigration status. Defensive asylum can be applied for when surrendering yourself at a port of entry or when being captured by ICE on attempting to enter the country. Both forms of asylum have slightly different processes, but both are also legal and recognized forms of immigration that must go through the courts, and those going through either process still have legal and constitutional rights.

I don't know, I'm confused too!

Maybe some Second Amendment people should do the nation a favour and target the fuckers responsible for this, this is behind appalling and it's clear the current government doesn't give a shit about voters/legislature. I know this kind of sentiment is really just hot air but it makes me legitimately angry that the US of all nations is behind this for a change instead of some third world shitheap or authoritarian state such as the PRC. So yeah, if any politician was on the receiving end of some violence I'd rather it was Trump and his collaborators.

https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1008873030066626561 Just reminding you all that Tucker Carlson is a fucking cunt

He's from the Netherlands.