That’s incorrect, Jon.dbackjon wrote:The others didn't have child separation as a feature. It is inaccurate to say otherwise.kalm wrote:
Interesting and FTR, I was asking honestly. An Obama immigration official was on one of the establishment networks this morning vehemently saying Otherwise. I don’t trust any of them.
Some children were detained - but only if they were unaccompanied, or the parent committed a real crime (not just entry).
When accompanying parents are detained, the children are always separated from them. It has been that way for decades - because it is the law. States also have similar laws - children cannot be housed in adult facilities, period. So when the parents are detained, the children are placed in foster care or in housing specifically for juveniles.
What you are referring to is catch and release. If the parents are NOT detained, then obviously they are not separated from their parents (and they disappear). But adult detainees have always been separated from children. Under every administration going back for years.
What you and others are arguing for is open borders. You don’t want illegal immigrants detained, and you also don’t want a physical barrier to their entry. The separation of children is just a ploy now that you and others have been forced to admit that there really is a crisis on our southern border. And if the do nothing House would propose a bill that increases the number of immigration judges, beefs up CBP, improves the size and condition of existing detention facilities (that existed well before Trump), without poison pills, then I’m pretty sure Trump would sign it. But they won’t do that.
The monthly numbers of border crossers being detained is now in six figures. Our ability to cope with the flood is overwhelmed and Congress won’t act. Blame Trump all you want but as soon as he isn’t President any more, CNN and the NYT will stop telling you to care even though the crisis will continue.
Can you think of a non- open borders solution?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
