By you or Ditka?
They entered Mexico illegally and have forced their way through that country. Yet you are trying to tell me that Mexico is not a safe place for Central American “migrants”???! Please.
They are already in violation of one country’s laws. It doesn’t matter if Mexico is not as safe as the US. It also doesnt matter if they have relatives in the US. Those are both non-issues to this argument. I have relatives in Ireland but it doesn’t mean I can illegally enter that country and expect to be welcomed rather than punished.
Entering America illegally is , well, illegal. People who enter the country legally can then ask for asylum, yes, but this is where you are getting tripped up.
People who enter the US legally can absolutely apply for asylum. I encourage them to if they think they need it. People who enter the US illegally are criminals.
Trump will allow them to apply for entry to the US. He has said as much. What he won’t do is allow them to enter illegally. An important distinction.
Very forcefully. With great force.
Yes, bobot. Knocking over those barricades required force. Great force.
OK, they must not beat the door down. So, can they walk up to our porch and ring the doorbell? No? Can they stand out on the sidewalk, and gaze longingly? That would make me uncomfortable. In my case, not a question of fear.
My Grandmother would have made them something to eat, but that’s probably why she’s in Heaven, while my chances are about fifty-fifty.
The caravan is 1,000 miles away and its numbers are dwindling just like the one in April. Why all the pants pissing about this one when history shows us that its nothing that can’t be handled with the tools already in place?
“There is no invasion. No one is coming to get you. There is nothing at all to worry about.” - Shep Smith earlier today
You’re simply wrong on the law. It is NOT illegal to enter the US without documentation to apply for asylum. Obviously it’s not illegal to apply for asylum at a port of entry. It is not possible to apply for asylum from outside the United States except at a port of entry.
BTW, under prevailing US immigration law, Central Americans don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of receiving a visa for entry as a migrant.
Well, it’s kinda obvious that it’s an issue that can be use to motivate the Republican base now that the Kavanaugh effect has fizzled out. It’s just too bad for Fox News that the Temple shootings and bombs kept getting in the news.
Midterms. Gotta rile up the base by appealing to its cowardice and bigotry so it runs to the Republicans and hides under their skirts.
Do you mean “as an immigrant”? A visa is something you apply for in advance, and there’s no such visa called “migrant.” There are several kinds of immigrant visas, though, such as for work, family relation, finance.
To apply for asylum you either present yourself at a port of entry, giving credible reason for your claim, or you have to have entered the U.S. on some form of visa (such as student, tourist, etc.) Those who enter at the border, and are deemed to have credible reason, are “paroled”–released into the country–with a court date, and sometimes required to wear an ankle bracelet. Those who are already in the country present themselves to ICE internally, and likewise are given a court date. Some cases may take years, and during this time the asylum-seeker has no access to social services. Some are given a work permit after 180 days, but some are not, so they are in a limbo state where they can’t work, and can’t get SNAP (“food stamp”), and–in come states–are not technically allowed even to attend adult English classes that are otherwise free for immigrants. At one time Haitians seeking asylum were allowed minimal public assistance under the Cuban-Haitian Entrant act, but that’s been ended, I believe. Of course, more than half of asylum cases are denied, and it seems that rate is going up. (These are the policies for adults. I don’t really know what the policy is for unaccompanied children)
It’s been a while since I worked in this field, but most people have no clue about the actual laws, which are complex and often change with respect to particular classes of people. (For example, there are special provisions for victims of human trafficking.) Probably the number one error is when people call asylum seekers “refugees.” “Refugee” is an official status of someone who has gone through a lengthy process, first with the United Nations, and then with the U.S. State Department (if they’re coming to the U.S.), which involves extensive scrutiny of one’s background. They must have been persecuted in their native country for one or more of a list specific reasons, cannot presently be in–or safely return to–their native country, and have to pay for their plane fare, (either with savings or a loan, through an agency called OIM). They get some initial public assistance to help them support themselves while they look for work and learn English, but that doesn’t last long, and many I dare say would not survive if they didn’t have some family already here to help them out. When they finally do get work, they’re usually glad to work their asses off at the most menial jobs, regardless of their educational background.
Once an asylum seeker is granted asylum, they essentially become just like a newly arrived refugee, which means they have some intitial, minimal assistance, and then must apply for residency after one year.
Because it’s incredibly convenient for the right. It’s sort of the perfect story to focus on, all things considered - a “large” number of immigrants migrating all at once. It’s excellent optics for the right. The fact that the whole story is bullshit iisn’t exactly a problem, nor has it been for quite some time.
Honestly I have to wonder why Shep stays at Fox. He’s gotta realize that what he’s saying here is completely undercut by what the actual draws on his network are saying, right?
People can apply for asylum if they enter illegally too. As a totally separate matter, they’re also guilty of unlawful entry.
The members of this migrant caravan are not interested in asylum otherwise they would have accepted Mexico’s offer of it. They are not interested in applying for asylum in the US or going trough the proper channels to enter America legally otherwise they would have taken steps to apply. They just want in. Yes, we have a system that makes their chances of success in that system overwhelming but that doesn’t mean that these caravan folks should be allowed to thumb their nose at our system. Not while true immigrants from other countries are abiding by our laws and applying for entry as required. Don’t like it? Change the system. But allowing people to demand entry or enter illegally is a recipe for disaster. Trump is right to send a strong message on this. It’s the Dems who have refused to do anything about the issue just so they can use it for political gain.
No doubt about it, “We hate you!” is a strong message. 'Course, that message has pretty much been sent, don’t you think? What with taking kids away, locking them up. Yeah, that would do it for me, message-wise.
Some of those earlier immigrants have walked away, left their children behind. Maybe they think its the only hope, however slender, that their children will be safe from the fear and horror they return to. Maybe they hold out the slim hope that someday, somehow, they can see them again?
Welcome to Sophie’s Choice, the Reboot! You must be so proud!
Please explain how people demanding something in another country is a recipe for anything. How do you propose we disallow people in an other country from demanding something?
What, exactly, should we do about a group people who constitute a drop in the bucket of our yearly immigration, a thousand miles away, traveling on foot with no resources, claiming to seek asylum in the US? You’re treating this like an emergency, like a disaster - but, as pointed out in another thread:
The border patrol is more than capable of handling it. We don’t even know that there’s going to be an issue. If the caravan keeps shrinking at the current rate, there will be nothing left by the time it reaches the border. Assuming it doesn’t shrink at all, the border patrol is still probably capable of dealing with a few thousand people asking for asylum - they get upwards of 20,000 just about every single month. So it’s a tiny, slow-moving problem that may resolve itself. It also happens to get wall-to-wall coverage on Fox News for some reason - weird, right?
So why are we treating it like a huge problem? Why should we be criticizing the democrats for “not doing anything” (this may be a good time to recall that most border states do not have democratic statehouses, and that every branch of the federal government is currently republican-controlled) when there’s really nothing that needs to be done? What should the democrats be doing?
Yes, I meant immigrant visas. Quite familiar with the legal aspects, thanks.
If you take those demands, throw them in a pot with some broth and a potato, you got a stew going.
What political gain have the Democrats had from their use of this issue, and in what way did they use this issue that resulted in political gain?
Oh. I see. So when they get there–after being heavily publicized on the way–they’re just going to shout “SQUIRREL!!!” and run in while CBP are distracted? Because they’re not “true immigrants” (“true immigrants” come from white countries). Because they didn’t leave their countries under threat of death and violence–no, they just left for the hell of it–a fun trip to bring disaster to the U.S.–and because they want to give these Democrats “political gain.” I see.