The law DOES require them to separate children from their families

[Sage_Rat]

@UDS

The law does not require the authorities to put someone in jail when they decide to prosecute them.

I have not stated otherwise. (Except in the previous, as a simplification of the subject.)

[Little_Nemo]

@Sage_Rat

The Trump administration does not have to PROSECUTE people who have crossed into the country illegally as criminals.

End of story right there. The Trump administration did not have to start this process. They chose to. And having chosen to start the process, they are morally responsible for all of the horrible consequences that arise from it.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Sage_Rat

Let’s take two options for how this tweet came into being:

1. The Trump administration carefully and cunningly pored through the laws, searching for some legal strategy that would allow them to separate families. Having done this, they then decided to disavow this strategy rather than seem tough and cruel, despite it being their very goal to seem tough and cruel.

2. The Trump administration does something horrible but stupid and are caught off-guard by sudden claims that they’re separating families - not something they’re actually doing so far as Trump knows. He flips out, asks what the hell is happening, and he’s told that there are laws that you have to throw people in jail if you prosecute them and kids aren’t allowed in jail. He proceeds to tweet in a moment of panic that it’s not his fault, it’s the law! Why does the world hate poor Trump and force him to do these things!?

Or

3. Beauregard says, “Let’s lock up all those dirty border crossers!”
   Trump says, “Fuck yeah!”
   Someone tells Trump, “Uh, Mr. President, what will we do with their kids? We can’t lock them up too.”
   Trump says, “Why not? Of course we can!”
   Someone says, “Well, I guess we could build cages in old Walmarts to keep them in, but that’s gonna be pretty rough on the kids.”
   Trump says, “Do I look like I give a shit about that? Anyway, maybe it’ll get some Mexicans to think twice about crossing the border. And hey, worst case scenario, it’ll drive the Democrats insane, and maybe we can use it to negotiate a border wall.”

Again: just because it’s not the purported aim of the policy doesn’t mean it’s not a fair characterization of the policy.

[Lord_Feldon]

@Sage_Rat

Let’s take two options for how this tweet came into being:

1. The Trump administration carefully and cunningly pored through the laws, searching for some legal strategy that would allow them to separate families. Having done this, they then decided to disavow this strategy rather than seem tough and cruel, despite it being their very goal to seem tough and cruel.

2. The Trump administration does something horrible but stupid and are caught off-guard by sudden claims that they’re separating families - not something they’re actually doing so far as Trump knows. He flips out, asks what the hell is happening, and he’s told that there are laws that you have to throw people in jail if you prosecute them and kids aren’t allowed in jail. He proceeds to tweet in a moment of panic that it’s not his fault, it’s the law! Why does the world hate poor Trump and force him to do these things!? But then, rather than admit that he did something wrong, his team doubles-down on both blaming the Democrats and laws, while maintaining the policy.

“The Trump administration” isn’t a thing. The United States hasn’t had a unitary executive since January 20, 2017. You could have one branch of “the” administration carefully and cunningly poring through the laws in a way that nevertheless catches the rest of “the” administration off guard. Twitter pundit Donald Trump has talked about how horrible it is, but is there any reason to think that he knew about it before seeing it on TV?

[Sage_Rat]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

AIUI, he’s mad because Trump’s policy is to prosecute all illegal border crossings; the separation is just a side-effect. But that silly dishonest media isn’t making that distinction! Indeed, those two articles don’t make that distinction in their headlines.

To which I say: fuck that. A person is responsible for the foreseeable outcomes of their choices. Trump’s policy has an obvious outcome, and he went ahead with it anyway. The distinction Sage Rat is drawing is an irrelevancy.

It matters. I supported the initiative to force Franken to quit, knowing that it would have no effect on whether Trump had to undergo an ethics investigation or anything else, because it’s still useful to be a strong foundation when attacking Trump and the current Republican party.

You can’t have the “Liberal/Lying Media” coming across as a Liberal and Lying Media when they’re being accused of just that every day. They need to keep their nose clean at this very moment.

To use the Travel Ban again, do you remember the media ever writing an article with the headline, “Trump policy to deny green card holders entrance to the USA!” And then yeah, you open that and scroll down, and down in the weeds they may or may not actually clarify that Trump was actually just trying to keep Arabs out, and this was just an oversite of incompetence? I, personally, don’t recall that article. And if I’d seen it, I would have said, “What a crock.” That’s not to support the Travel Ban, it’s just a hell of a weird way to talk about the issue. If I saw an article like that, my assumption would not be that the media was trying to inform the people in an honest and reasonable way. I would assume that they were trying to target some segment of the population that deeply cared about green cards and were willing to bend the truth to near snapping point in order to politically motivate that subset of the population into following the designs of the writer.

Propaganda is crap. I don’t care if it’s propaganda in the name of good. I don’t care if it’s hammering on a thing that is bad or a thing that was bad about a thing that was bad, it’s still propaganda and it’s still crap.

[Sage_Rat]

@Lord_Feldon

“The Trump administration” isn’t a thing. The United States hasn’t had a unitary executive since January 20, 2017. You could have one branch of “the” administration carefully and cunningly poring through the laws in a way that nevertheless catches the rest of “the” administration off guard. Twitter pundit Donald Trump has talked about how horrible it is, but is there any reason to think that he knew about it before seeing it on TV?

No, but that’s the point I was making, so I’m not sure how this is a counter to my statement.

[elucidator]

Not sure he doesn’t tune into Fox to remember his name.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Sage_Rat

Propaganda is crap. I don’t care if it’s propaganda in the name of good. I don’t care if it’s hammering on a thing that is bad or a thing that was bad about a thing that was bad, it’s still propaganda and it’s still crap.

…propaganda is a very emotionally charged word.

Now that you have chosen to invoke it: the burden of proof for this thread just got significantly higher.

You haven’t met the burden of proof yet for your OP. But now you are accusing “the media” of broadcasting propaganda. Your gonna have to do more than post a couple of links to prove that assertion. But I’d like to see what you’ve got.

[Sage_Rat]

@Banquet_Bear

…propaganda is a very emotionally charged word.

Now that you have chosen to invoke it: the burden of proof for this thread just got significantly higher.

You haven’t met the burden of proof yet for your OP. But now you are accusing “the media” of broadcasting propaganda. Your gonna have to do more than post a couple of links to prove that assertion. But I’d like to see what you’ve got.

I feel like you’re asking me to prove that the sky is blue while we are both staring at the big blue sky.

In your reading of articles, which presentation have you seen more of?

1. Trump administration has policy to separate children from families.
2. Trump administration has policy to prosecute border crossers as criminals.

Are you asserting that #2 is the majority or even a significant percentile of articles?

[HelenGawn]

@Sage_Rat

This is basically asking me to post a link to every article written on the subject. Are you honestly asserting that I could not find a news article with a headline basically in the form of, “Trump policy is to separate families at borders”?

But sure, here’s two:

Trump Blames His Own Cruel Child-Separation Policy on Democrats | Vanity Fair
Trump's Separation of Children and Families Is What You Voted For

In the Rolling Stone article, the two real-life stories were of women whose children were taken away after they applied for asylum. That’s legal. Let me say again: they broke no law, but their children were taken anyway.

And here’s the money quote from the Vanity Fair article:

Despite Trump’s attempts to shift blame for these bad headlines to Democrats, the policy is all his own. As Chief of Staff John Kelly told NPR in an interview three weeks ago, the plan to forcibly separate mothers from their children was explicitly designed as a “tough deterrent” to scare immigrants from trying to enter the U.S. “The children will be taken care of—put into foster care or whatever,” he said flippantly.

(emphasis added)

So much for “unintended consequence.”

And neither headline claimed that separation IS the policy.

[UDS]

@Sage_Rat

I have not stated otherwise. (Except in the previous, as a simplification of the subject.)

But you have stated that . . .

@Sage_Rat

But HAVING decided to prosecute you for criminal trespass into the country, the law DOES force the government to separate children from their families because children aren’t allowed to be put into jails.

This is false. Having decided to prosecute the parents, the government does not have to put them in jail pending trial. Thus the law does not force the government to separate children from their parents; the separation is a consequence not only of the government’s choice to prosecute the parents, but of the government’s further choice to put the parents in jail pending trial (as opposed to, say, agreeing to their being bailed to an immigration detention centre, where they could be with their children).

[Sage_Rat]

@HelenGawn

And here’s the money quote from the Vanity Fair article: (emphasis added)

So much for “unintended consequence.”

And neither headline claimed that separation IS the policy.

don’t mind me admitted in his post that he specifically intended to divert attention from the truth, saying, “So much for 'unintended consequences.”

The part that you bolded is not a quote, it’s what they’re telling you he said. The only thing they quoted him saying is that they’re taking care of the children.

What did he actually say that they summarized as “the plan to forcibly separate mothers from their children was explicitly designed [for that purpose]”? What is his actual quote?

[HelenGawn]

@Sage_Rat

In your reading of articles, which presentation have you seen more of?

1. Trump administration has policy to separate children from families.
2. Trump administration has policy to prosecute border crossers as criminals.

Are you asserting that #2 is the majority or even a significant percentile of articles?

Neither. The Trump administration has a policy THAT separates children from families. The policy was put in place to prosecute border crossers, legal (asylum seekers) and illegal.

“Zero tolerance” for illegal immigrants is not that far away from the policy under Obama. What makes this a huge news story is babies being ripped from their parents’ arms. If you think the media is dishonest in leading with that fact, you understand nothing about journalism.

[HelenGawn]

@Sage_Rat

What did he actually say that they summarized as “the plan to forcibly separate mothers from their children was explicitly designed [for that purpose]”? What is his actual quote?

Here ya go:

When asked by CNN in March 2017 whether the Trump administration was seriously considering separating migrant children from their parents, Kelly said, “Yes, I am considering in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network … I am considering exactly that.”

From here.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Sage_Rat

I feel like you’re asking me to prove that the sky is blue while we are both staring at the big blue sky.

…nope. We are in Great Debates. You’ve presented an opinion in your OP. I’ve challenged you to back it up.

In your reading of articles, which presentation have you seen more of?

1. Trump administration has policy to separate children from families.
2. Trump administration has policy to prosecute border crossers as criminals.

Are you asserting that #2 is the majority or even a significant percentile of articles?

I’m not asserting jack-shit. This is your thread, your OP, we are debating what you have asserted both in the OP and in subsequent posts. Lets pretend that #2 isn’t the “majority or even a significant percentile of articles (whatever the fuck you mean by that)”. How does that prove your assertion that the media are broadcasting propaganda?

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Sage_Rat

I think it’s fair to say that there’s exactly 0% chance that this was intentional. Steven Miller is probably ecstatic, but it wasn’t something he’d planned. Trump was caught off guard by the whole thing and it’s taken them the better part of a month to try and get their message together and firmly deny that it’s their policy and try to explain the pre-existing laws and procedures.

Again, if this was really unintentional then you should be deeply worried because it means the people at the top are pulling policy levers without a clue or care as to what happens.

For there to be zero chance this was intentional it would mean Trump woke up one morning and said let’s prosecute illegal immigrants and everyone else said, “Sure thing! We’ll get right on it!”

I seriously doubt Trump has a clue about much of anything and certainly not how the government works. He is a singularly incurious person (I said that of Bush as well…Trump is worse). But he has advisors.

So unless this was a literal whim one can assume someone sat down and strategized about this. Someone had a goal in mind such as find a way to make democrats pay for the wall or stop illegal immigrants from coming to this country. Then they started coming up with ideas to achieve those goals. As an idea comes up the pros and cons are listed. Presumably you want to come up with the most effective plan and be ready fro counter-moves.

There is no way the idea of criminally prosecuting all the illegal immigrant adults didn’t include consideration of what happens to the children.

That or Trump did this on a whim and no one dared say anything to him.

You tell me which of the above bothers you more.

[RitterSport]

NPR took a break in their reporting to explain that, while there’s no written policy to purposely separate kids from parents, since the policy required that parents are put in jail leading directly to the obvious result of separating the kids, they are going to call it a policy.

Yes, The Trump Administration Does Have A Policy That Separates Migrant Families

The Trump administration says it does not have a policy of family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border, but the administration has selected and is now defending a course of action, which by definition, is a policy.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Sage_Rat

Propaganda is crap. I don’t care if it’s propaganda in the name of good. I don’t care if it’s hammering on a thing that is bad or a thing that was bad about a thing that was bad, it’s still propaganda and it’s still crap.

You have not identified propaganda. You have identified an incredibly trivial, pedantic point, which is probably wrong anyway, but even if it were right it would be meaningless.

When you come up with a policy that has terrible consequences, I may correctly identify it as a policy that creates terrible consequences.

I swear, over the past 48 hours I have seen the most astonishing pedantry from folks confronted with this administration’s terrible shittiness. I cannot figure out why folks think that’s a good use of their time.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

@Sage_Rat

This is basically asking me to post a link to every article written on the subject. Are you honestly asserting that I could not find a news article with a headline basically in the form of, “Trump policy is to separate families at borders”?

But sure, here’s two:

Trump Blames His Own Cruel Child-Separation Policy on Democrats | Vanity Fair
Trump's Separation of Children and Families Is What You Voted For

My gripe is that Vanity Fair + Rolling Stone != “The Media”. To my personal ear, when people start attibuting things to The Media, 1 I suspect they’ll rant and 2 it sounds like something out of a conspiracy theory. Who are the shadowy figures pulling the strings of The Media? What are their dark motives, and what can good conservatives do to resist these villains?

See what I mean? It is similar to when people talk about Liberals. I can never get anybody to define that word, but to hear some people tell it, they are to blame for All Badness in the world. Or, The Left. It’s like Santa Claus, in everyone’s house at once, only more like a boogeyman under the bed. Ooga booga! :eek:

Is your beef really with The Media? If so, flesh it out. If not, please be more specific on this point.

[GIGObuster]

The law DOES require them to separate children from their families

Of course a law requires them; the point was, and still is, that what law to use took place by a change in policy and the application of a law that was intended for asylum or refugee applicants.

Snopes take on the OP’s title: False.

There is no federal law mandating children and parents be separated at the border; a policy resulting in that outcome was enacted in May 2018.

Although the questions were varied, their underlying question essentially was the same: Whether a so-called “law to separate parents from children” existed before the Trump administration. In some versions, President Bill Clinton’s administration passed such a law, and in other iterations, President Barack Obama detained twice as many children separated from their parents during his presidency.

On 5 June 2018, Trump attributed the policy to Democrats in general:

There is no federal law that stipulates that children and parents be separated at the border, no matter how families entered the United States. An increase in child detainees separated from parents stemmed directly from a change in enforcement policy repeatedly announced by Sessions in April and May 2018, under which adults (with or without children) are criminally prosecuted for attempting to enter the United States:

The “zero-tolerance” policy he announced [in May 2018] sees adults who try to cross the border, many planning to seek asylum, being placed in custody and facing criminal prosecution for illegal entry.

As a result, hundreds of minors are now being housed in detention centres, and kept away from their parents.

Over a recent six-week period, nearly 2,000 children were separated from their parents after illegally crossing the border, figures released on [15 June 2018].

[Attorney General] Sessions said those entering the US irregularly would be criminally prosecuted, **a change to a long-standing policy of charging most of those crossing for the first time with a misdemeanour offence.**

We addressed the “law to separate children” in a fact check about a purported statement made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Sessions did not make the statement attributed to him, but he did make a series of remarks in early April 2018 about a new border initiative involving the separation of children from parents at border crossings: