June 18, 2018

"F--- you, Melanie. You know damn well your husband can end this immediately...you feckless complicit piece of s---."

Tweeted Kathy Griffin, in response to a message from Melania Trump's office that said "Mrs. Trump hates to see children separated from their families & hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform. She believes we need to be a country that follows all laws but also a country that governs w/heart."



Interesting that she wrote out "fuck" and "shit" but merely gestured at "cunt" by writing "feckless."

ADDED, without comment:

397 comments:

1 – 200 of 397   Newer›   Newest»
Jim said...

Nice to have Ms. Griffin on the Robert DeNiro Committee to re-elect Donald Trump 2020.

MayBee said...

It is interesting, isn't it?

We are spun up about this issue. All heat, no light. As Althouse said the other day, what is the policy alternative? What do people want to be done? Because I believe the answer the pushers of this storyline want is.....let everyone though.

David Begley said...

Obama could have ended it too. So why no attacks on Saint Michelle?

Darrell said...

Illegals can end it immediately, too, by just staying on their side of the border?

Didn't Obama send Dem operatives to Central and South America to solicit these child border-crossers? Maybe we should bill the Democratic Party for all expenses incurred?

Henry said...

How does the president end it immediately?

MayBee said...

I suspect the "why now" is to detract from the IG report. Also to take advantage of Mother's Day and Father's Day. We'll see if they can extend the outrage long enough to get a few "This is not my country" think pieces on 4th of July.
It's not social change unless we can get lots of directionless hate going.

mccullough said...

Beyond tired of the people who don’t live with the downsides of illegal immigration braying about how terrible it is the government doesn’t let illegals with minor children live in other people’s neighborhoods.

The government isn’t torturing people. These folks need to turn back or live in Mexico. The US isn’t the repository for people from shithole countries.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Leftwing asshole celebrities really cared about the children during the glorious Obama years.
So much caring.

Wince said...

For that matter, can’t these families end this immediately themselves residing in their home countries
?

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Original Mike said...

Kathy Griffin is back? Great...

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Please please please make the orange "badly crafted marionette" (thanks DBQ) the face of the democrat party.

Sebastian said...

Illegals try to game our asylum laws.

Then the left tries to blackmail us to support illegals gaming our asylum laws.

mccullough said...

I want these kids out on the same blocks and sent to the same schools as the kids of all these Twitter and FB humanitarians. Let’s start with the Clintons. Send 50 of these kids to the Chaooaqua manse. Send 50 each to the Obama’s 5 houses. I want these kids enrolled in Sidwell school this fall.

Fucking hypocrites.

Fabi said...

Kathy wants Trump to act like a dictator.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Sylwester said...

The Democrats should seize this opportunity to propose a law to prevent such situations.

The law might direct our Federal Government to immediately settle in the USA all foreign families to who set their feet on US ground and who want to stay here forever. Each such family should be provided with housing, and all the children should be enrolled immediately in US schools.

The Democrats seem to think that this solution to the problem would be politically popular. The Democrats should embrace this common-sense solution and campaign politically on it.

Fernandinande said...

This is your brain on outrage.

stevew said...

To achieve the outcome they desire the Left insists that the law be ignored or suspended; sometimes, like this one, for example. They are unwilling to do the work necessary to update and change the law. So there is only one explanation for this approach that makes sense to me: this is all sound and fury to advance a political agenda, namely to damage or get rid of Trump.

-sw

Bay Area Guy said...

Kathy Griffin - the true definition of insanity.

I'm Full of Soup said...

We should close the border to absolutely everyone for five years so we can do a detailed headcount of every illegal who is already here and then we can make an informed decision on what to do with them. If they fail to register for the headcount, they get deported ASAP no questions asked if they should come into contact with any govt agency or law enforcement.

Matt Sablan said...

I don't think Trump can just decide to not enforce the laws just because. I mean, he *can,* but that's a dangerous precedent.

etienne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

Another women's issue. Women are the easiest target for memes owing to soap opera.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The deep state hack press and the leftwinger celebrity socialists are coordinating their message.

Trumps hate children.

David Begley said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I'm Full of Soup said...

The world would be better off if these people stayed home and tried to fix their own countries. America can not be the destination for everyone who wants to come here especially when many of them already hate us.

Unknown said...

the 24/7 campaign has yielded the 24/7 "protest".

Might Obama has struck out.

Greg P said...

The Democrats can end it any time they want, by working with the good people to change the law so you can't apply for asylum if you're caught entering the country illegally

Then there's no family separation, just deportation

But they don't care about family separation, they care about destroying US laws

So f them

MikeR said...

Althouse, there are a lot of deranged internet commentors. They should be ignored. So why do you keep highlighting the words of this deranged person? She is not an important person in any way.

Fernandinande said...

It's a pretty scary brain picture, check it out!

Fabi said...

"Russia, Russia, Russia!"

Sorry. That's was last year's attack Trump narrative. I'll update my files.

"Kids in cages, kids in cages, kids in cages!"

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

who wore it better?

Ivanka. Not even close.

dreams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Begley said...

Yeah, why doesn't Sidwell Friends just volunteer to educate 100 of these kids this Fall?

TreeJoe said...

This has to be the worst reported story in recent memory.

"Trump's policy"

"The President has the choice."

etc.

Questions never reported on on CNN, NYT, etc.

Is this new since Trump took office? No.
Is this a law controlled by Congress? Yes.
What would be a better alternative? Silence.
How do you prove someone is the parent of the child? Silence.
How do you prevent unscrupulous people from stealing children on their way to the border in order to gain access? Silence.

....

This is a terribly messy situation that has been scaled WAY up by decades of a damn near open border. This sudden attention on the fact that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE cross the border and alot of them get warehoused into a process, and it's not a 3-4 star hotel, is ridiculously poorly reported.



Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

How much tax payer waste is paying the Mueller investigation?

Nonapod said...

Maybe I'd be willing to listen to these lectures and high minded proclamations from various wealthy personalities if they'd be willing to house dozens of these poor children and their families in their homes indefinitely. But moral superiority is easiest when it doesn't cost anything and you don't have to live any of negative consequences of the polcicies that you're advocating because of your wealth.

Wince said...

The deep state hack press and the leftwinger celebrity socialists are coordinating their message. Trumps hate children.

I suspect that message resonates among the wealthy and childless, not parents of children in less affluent districts.

gspencer said...

I'm trying to determine the relative ranking here. Is a "feckless cunt" (Ivanka) higher or lower than a "feckless complicit piece of shit" (Melania)?

Guess only the Democrats know the answer.

roesch/voltaire said...

I wish people would not sink to Trump,s level and just point ou that enforcing the existing law does mean separating children from parents and Trump and Miller could end this if they wanted to.

etienne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tommy Duncan said...

Oh for the happier times when Republicans were just pushing old ladies in wheelchairs off cliffs and disenfranchising minority voters.

Time to submerge and get on with my day of starving children and silently repressing minorities.

Please warned that this comment may include elements of sarcasm.

MayBee said...

Gabriel Malor, who pretty much can't stand Trump, has a great Twitter thread about the facts this am:

https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/1008703234503008256

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Trump Haters Go Full Godwin on Migrant Kids in Detention Centers.


The meme the meme the narrative the meme.

That IG report must be swallowed up by the meme/ the narrative. Full Godwin.

MayBee said...

roesch/voltaire -

They could end it and do what instead?
As I understand it, families are given the option of going back home (or at least leaving the US) rather than be separated. What is your alternative solution?

Tommy Duncan said...

Remember that 330,000,000 Americans are one meal away from hunger!

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Roesch - why didn't Obama end it!? Why! for pity sake.

Obama hates children.

MayBee said...

A few years ago- maybe 2014?- the big summer issue was that people were sending their children unaccompanied, right?

Ray - SoCal said...

I wonder when and what Trump will communicate to shatter this Overton Window...

Illegals are gaming the system.

Families caught at border up 300% in last year...

He could Start applying the Geneva convention. Force Mexico to take them for those applying for asylum. Supposed to apply in first country they reach.

MayBee said...

People will say it wasn't as big a deal with Obama because he didn't do it for everyone. But if you care about kids being ripped from their families, it shouldn't matter to you if it's 5,000 kids or 10,000 kids.

Who you should be angry with are the activists who encourage these migration pushes- and tell people to claim asylum if they are caught crossing illegally. They are the ones willing to let children be put in these conditions so they can push their own agenda.

tcrosse said...

Of course, those children are being fattened up for the table.

Michael K said...

R/V was promised no math on this topic.

He needs his safe space.

Henry said...

@r/v -- How would the Trump administration actually end it? What policies would be superseded, at what levels, for what duration? What would be put in place instead? How does this relate to the original rationale for the policies?

I sincerely would like to read a thorough brief of what is going on.

Henry said...

@MayBee -- The Gabriel Malor link is useful.

Clyde said...

I feel nothing but schadenfreude over the karma that has so manifestly crushed Griffin's soul. Sad!

Anonymous said...

Long ago (before the passage of the 19th amendment) my grandmother was visiting relatives in North Carolina. It was election time, and, chatting with a little girl of 6 or 7 in the company, she asked, "Well, miss, are you a Republican, or a Democrat?" To which the little girl proudly responded, "Ah am a lady, ma'am, and a lady does not concern huhself with politics."

If alien observers had only the social media catlady brigade by which to judge women who concern themselves with politics, they would have to conclude that that little girl was correct.

Kate said...

On the one hand, the metallic blanket and dress comparison is funny.

On the other hand, a metallic blanket is used because it is cheaply and easily disinfected or discarded. A cloth blanket needs laundering -- the cost and logistics! -- and can carry lice. Elites have probably never faced caring for groups of distressed children.

rehajm said...

Orange vs Orange

tim in vermont said...

You know what would stop people from bringing children through risky situations like this, a wall. But we can’t have that because Republicans want the more pliable labor and the Democrats want the new, more pliable electorate.

chickelit said...

Quaffy Griffin can't even bother to spell Melania's name right. Fuck that bitch.

Fernandinande said...

Mortal coils of 5 lumps of differentiated tissue separated after SUV being chased by Border Patrol crashes.

How those crashes got into Groucho Marx's pajamas, I don't know.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

There is a slight of hand going on in the reporting, of course. "Separating children from their parents at the border" is standing in for two very different things, even when they qualify their remarks as applying to "asylum seekers.". Parents who cross illegally will be jailed (while their claim for asylum is adjudicated) and separated from their children, who will be placed with relatives or a church-based group. [The "missing children meme results from these relatives' and churches' habit of ignoring follow-up calls and letters from ICE.]

As Kirstjen Nielsen tweeted earlier that if parents cross at a regular border station and declare for asylum there, no separation occurs. Only illegal crossings result in the application of the Federal Law that separates children. And we really need R/V and others that are so critical of this process (that is over a decade old) what should we do at this point, when the "parent" crosses illegally and then requests asylum?

1. Let them all in, keeping the kids with the parents and granting de facto residency?
2. Separate as the law says to, placing the parent in custody until the asylum claim can be verified?
3. Keep the children with the parent in custody, in violation of the law (jailing a child without cause) so they can be "together"?

Or what? What is the great intelligent progressive response to this non-crisis?

MayBee said...

Thanks, Henry.

I will do a clickable Gabriel Malor Twitter Thread link so Althouse will like me.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Why would so many masses of people from socialist paradises want to come to Nazi-lead Amerikkka?

chickelit said...

Griffin aborted every pregnancy she carried. That is why her heart bleeds for "the children."

Balfegor said...

I'm pretty sure this whole "separating families" thing is an artifact of a Federal district court opinion from 2015 that ordered the Obama administration to stop holding children of illegal immigrants together with their parents. So if there's anyone who deserves excoriation for this, it's the judiciary. Previously, (and sensibly), the authorities detained children together with their illegal immigrant parents.

Big Mike said...

I think that sums up the left wing attitude after eight years of Obama -- just get out your pen, pick up your phone, and ignore the existing laws and regulations. Fix it!

Children. Hollywood actors and unfunny comediennes are just children.

Big Mike said...

On the left-hand picture posted by Orli Matlow, he says where it was taken, but not the circumstances. Or the date, for that matter. Is this another Obama-era atrocity laid at the feet of Obama's successor?

Balfegor said...

Well, that and as others have pointed out, the parents do have control over whether their children have to go through this -- the parents don't have to break our laws.

Anonymous said...

DB@H:

Trump Haters Go Full Godwin on Migrant Kids in Detention Centers.

I saw the tweet from General Hayden yesterday. Contemptible.

This is cretin-level propaganda, so crude that one would think that only a population subjected to North Korea-like conditions of privation and isolation would respond with anything but disgust and contempt at so ham-handed an attempt to manipulate.

And yet well-fed literate (in a certain sense of the word, I guess) people with access to all the books, news and information they want are lapping it up just the same.

I would like to think that the higher-ups pushing this shite are merely cynical, but I'm coming 'round to the position that most of 'em buy into it themselves, lock, stock, and barrel.

Fernandinande said...

chickelit's pfoof-reader's eyes observed...
Quaffy Griffin can't even bother to spell Melania's name right.


If true, I bet Melanie of crypto-porn song "Brand New Key" fame, and her husband Peter Schekeryk are disappointed.

Anonymous said...

Kids are just wedges to get in and curry the sympathy of the dim.

harrogate said...

That "who wore it better" Tweet is *gold*, and on many levels.

Anonymous said...

r/V: I wish people would not sink to Trump,s level...

Got your timeline reversed there, r/V. The people you're referring to sank way down low before Trump ever showed up in politics. They just decided they wanted to go even lower after he did.

They've been at it for decades and they've really honed their skills. I think they're more than a match for Trump in the "batshit, no-class assholes" competition, if in nothing else.

rehajm said...

The detained kids get couture! What the hell are we complainjng about!

(Your little memes don’t work on me.$

narayanan said...

@r/v -- How would the Trump administration actually end it?

also how many rounds of court challenges before it can be implemented

Anonymous said...

Balfegor: Previously, (and sensibly), the authorities detained children together with their illegal immigrant parents.

True, but that's also Think of the Children fodder, and if that policy were restored the Outrage Machine would switch over without missing a beat.

In fact, though all these compassionate critics wholeheartedly agree that we need immigration controls, and it is a vile slander to claim that they want open borders, there is unfortunately no possible way to keep out anyone who wants to come in, no matter how innocuous it might look at the outset, that won't be exactly how Nazi Germany started.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The news media are all in alignment that the policy to kill children and eat them is all Trump.

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

The Trumps are guilty of complicity, collusion, conspiracy, and all kinds of c-words, some of them possibly against actual laws.

Anonymous said...

I will say that there are honest progs who emphasize the need for enforcement of employer sanctions, and I agree with them. Serious jail-time for a few of the more egregious, high-profile malefactors would go a ways toward cleaning things up, but nobody in Washington will touch that, because too many people, D and R, are complicit.

The dishonest progs (and righties, too) will of course come up with all sorts of reasons why that just isn't possible in a free society that values human rights, either.

Sydney said...

Sigh. I’m so tired of all this hate.

Big Mike said...

@Dickin’Bimbos, yup. Any day now CNN is going to report — with a perfectly straight face — that Trump runs kids through a wood chipper and sells the results for dog food.

Big Mike said...

@Angle-Dyne, but what about laws and judicial opinions that bar employers from confirming that the job applicant is a citizen or legal resident?

Howard said...

"I fuz onlink doink my dooty" was not a viable defense at Nuremberg. You people make me wish there actually was a vengeful god that would mete out eternal damnation to the deplorable scum who get their rocks off seeing Latin American kids in cages. The Anti-Christ is kept alive and well by Heartland Christians.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

See, you fucking idiotic centrist squishes and soft Republicans? Learn! Being nice won't get you anything. Expressing compassion won't get you anything. Mouthing the nice platitudes won't get you anything. Playing by the Left's rules (where virtue signalling is paramount) won't get you anything.

Why bother? They're going to call you racist, sexist, homophobic, and (new, now) a child-hating Nazi equivalent anyway. Just go about your business and let them wail. State the case for your policies and leave the emotional appeals out of it.

Well, that's not quite right either. Feel free to use appeals to emotion! Point out American victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants. Point out illegal immigrant children victimized by traffickers--helpless kids lured here by Leftist promises of lax enforcement who were subsequently made sex slaves and other horrible victimizations--and express your horror at those terrible crimes. Appeal to the emotions of Americans who take umbrage at the suggestion that not everyone should have to follow our laws!

But don't, ever, try to out-compete the Left & Media when it comes to making the same kind of emotional appeals they're making (those designed to push their own agendas). You will receive nothing for it but scorn and hatred. It might seem paradoxical (by agreeing with them you'd assume they'd want to encourage you & support you where you're agreeing with them) but it should be expected.

They hate you and they want to win. They aren't interested in convincing you or changing your mind about anything--they want to destroy you and they want to ostracize you; they want to cast you out of respectable society. Giving an inch to their emotional blackmail will result in MORE hatred directed at you.

Learn!

tim in vermont said...

I wish people would not sink to Trump,s level and just point ou that enforcing the existing law does mean separating children from parents and Trump and Miller could end this if they wanted to.

By declining to enforce duly passed laws, but it’s not tyranny if its done to promote liberal ends!

Seeing Red said...

They’re using space blankets? Cool! I had one as a kid after Apollo 9. One side silver, one side blue. We wanted to be astronauts. I still have my moon map from Dial Soap.

Tim said...

All illegal detainees need to be held at the border and all costs need to be directed to the foreign consulates (Mexico, etc.) Then maybe the foreign governments will do something about the exodus.

tim in vermont said...

"I fuz onlink doink my dooty" was not a viable defense at Nuremberg. You people make me wish there actually was a vengeful god that would mete out eternal damnation to the deplorable scum who get their rocks off seeing Latin American kids in cages. The Anti-Christ is kept alive and well by Heartland Christians.

Somebody is getting their rocks off here, Howard, I think its you and your hatred of your fellow Americans. We have borders, we didn’t choose to drag these children along on their little jaunt to violate US laws. Why are prisoners in the US who ware US citizens separated from their children?

There is a concept called an “attractive nuisance” and that would be the open border with Mexico and it could be fixed with a wall, and forcing people coming into this country to pass through proper border controls, and not be playing hide and sneak in the desert, with children in tow.

But points on the Godwin’s law thing. That is so effective!

Anonymous said...

Big Mike: @Angle-Dyne, but what about laws and judicial opinions that bar employers from confirming that the job applicant is a citizen or legal resident?

Yup, that's what I mean. "You can't control immigration by horrible mean method A (the children!), you have to approach it on a different level, say, method B."

Next day: "You can't use method B, it's racist! Discriminatory! And the children! Use method C".

The day after that: "Method C! Muh civil rights! The children! Why aren't you enforcing the law mandating method D?"

The day after that: "...which we have an army of lawyers lined up to challenge."

(When this cycle is complete it repeats from the beginning.)

And don't just blame wailing progs for this eternal cycle.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

What's the objection to the mylar blankets? They're shiny and the President's daughter wears shiny dresses. How is that a funny slam, exactly?

You weepy centrist are tiresome. Just say that any law enforcement action that inconveniences illegal immigrants with children is officially ugly and won't be tolerated. Make it your policy to accept minors and any women with minors who make any kind of asylum claim anywhere, at any time, and allow them to live in the US pending their asylum hearing. Oh and if they don't bother to show up for that hearing or they receive an adverse ruling don't then deport them--that'd be "splitting up families" again and that's also officially ugly. They've probably given birth to a new automatic US citizen in the meantime, anyway (but don't call that kid an "anchor baby" because that also is officially ugly).

Let's go back to the Obama era reality, in other words--the one that induced tens of thousands of kids to make that dangerous crossing as unaccompanied minors (resulting in the horrible deaths of many of them).

Let's just get the open borders reality over with, already. You guys can start patting yourselves on the backs and continue telling the rest of us how much better (more moral, more concerned with the welfare of children, etc) you are.
The tedium is the worst part, now.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

The cages were in 2012-2014 or so, moron. The pictures you see now aren't of cages they're of large non-cage detention centers (with school classes, cafeterias, etc). Your Lightworker installed the cages. In his defense he HAD to in order to have some place to house the huge number of migrants his stupid policies (mainly of using "discretion" to not kick people out quickly and/or to allow people a reasonable hope that if their minor kids could sneak in we would let them stay) induced to illegal immigrate here.

Anonymous said...

Howard @10:16:

You've never been an intelligent commenter, Howard, but developing a modicum of self-respect, some mastery of your own baser drives, some sense of your own dignity as a human being, would help to prevent you from going full-retard and degrading yourself as you do in the comment referenced.

Anonymous said...

Hoodlum: What's the objection to the mylar blankets? They're shiny and the President's daughter wears shiny dresses. How is that a funny slam, exactly?

Obviously you have no appreciation for that refined type of wit usually associated with catty old queens and characterized by all snark and no substance.

Achilles said...

Howard said...
"I fuz onlink doink my dooty" was not a viable defense at Nuremberg. You people make me wish there actually was a vengeful god that would mete out eternal damnation to the deplorable scum who get their rocks off seeing Latin American kids in cages. The Anti-Christ is kept alive and well by Heartland Christians.


That is perfect.

Put it on a campaign commercial.

Make sure everyone knows democrats paid for it.

HoodlumDoodlum said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fabi said...

"You people make me wish there actually was a vengeful god that would mete out eternal damnation to the deplorable scum who get their rocks off seeing Latin American kids in cages."

Lulz

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Mike said...The "missing children meme results from these relatives' and churches' habit of ignoring follow-up calls and letters from ICE.

Yeah, I noticed that too: when we release the kids to the custody of their families here in the U.S. (or people who claim to be their family, whatever) and those people drop out of sight and don't bother coming to official hearings then it's a scandal because "you heartless monsters have lost children! They could be anywhere, they could be in danger; how dare you!" When we don't turn them over to people here in the U.S. and instead keep them safely in custodial detention (with free schooling, shelter, meals, healthcare, etc) it's a scandal because "how dare you lock up innocent little kids?! Look at the pictures of their blankets, look at the pictures of the fences they must live behind--have you no decency?!"

It's all a scam--an emotional scam. No matter what you do you're a monster just for trying to enforce some of the existing laws. Nice centrist people fall for it every fucking time, though; their greatest fear is apparently to be found guilty of some ugly thought or behavior themselves--mustn't have that!

It was a JOKE when the Simpons had Helen Lovejoy repeatedly wail "think of the children!!" but now that's apparently the basis of our government. Thanks, centrists.

Balfegor said...

Re: HoodlumDoodlum:

I think this is why ultimately, we need a wall -- a "smart" system with sensors and ICE teams picking people up when they cross illegally is inevitably going to result in people being taken into custody, and then either they get released into the US (the whole point of their lawbreaking), or we end up having to deal with problems like this: children accompanying illegal migrant parents. If you just block entry with a wall and funnel people towards the normal checkpoints, sure you won't prevent all illegal entry (there's still tunnels and ladders, and a wall will do nothing for people who enter legally and overstay their visas). But you can tamp down on a lot of this nonsense.

I've been a weak supporter of the wall in the past, and had the view that if we had effective immigration enforcement internally, we wouldn't need the wall at all. But this whole episode of breast-beating about the children of illegal immigrants is in the process of convincing me that the wall serves an independent function.

brylun said...

Under Obama's Catch & Release program, only 3.5 percent of Unaccompanied Alien Children who are apprehended are eventually removed from the U.S.

So the alternative is to just have open borders, as during Obama. Voters have rejected this alternative.

tcrosse said...

"You people make me wish there actually was a vengeful god that would mete out eternal damnation to the deplorable scum who get their rocks off seeing Latin American kids in cages."

Sticks and stones, Howard.

bagoh20 said...

Is there any more obvious case of posing and virtue signaling? I wonder how many people would choose to sponsor these families. You need to do it without knowing anything about them though, becuase that's what you are advocating that we do as a nation. Let them move into your house, pay their expenses, and don't bitch about it or you are a Nazi and a racist. Are any celebrities doing that with all their easy money?

Renee said...

Better access to legal check points will prevent the exploitation of smugglers. Their lies, their false promises, their raping, their extortion, and their abandonment of migrants in the middle of no where. Why aren't people up in arms about that?

I rather have a legal check point, know that they coming, and having a family member with a background check meet them at the board if they are requesting asylum due to gang violence.

Safety for all.

Howard said...

tcrosse: it's gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives in their pathetic failing shithole towns in the land that the future forgot.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Balfegor - I tend to think the best solution is to address supply by changing the incentives of potential migrants. These aren't stupid people and they are understandably highly motivated to take advantage of any opportunities. When the facts on the ground indicated that the best way to get kids in was as unaccompanied minors (who would then be released to their family already here and who would then likely be counted as Dreamers and/or get another path to full citizenship and benefits thereof) the potential migrants reacted accordingly and we saw a huge spike in unaccompanied minor immigration. It was dangerous but it was also an entirely rational response on the part of potential migrants. Obama's many other softenings w/r/t illegal immigration likewise served to increase "pull."

Mandatory EVerify makes it harder for illegal immigrants to get work. Taking a hard line about denying any public benefits to illegal immigrants makes illegal immigration less beneficial. Cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants decreases the demand for illegal immigrants.

The ONLY thing a "wall" has going for it is that it's a large, visible commitment to enforcement of existing immigration law--and one that can probably continue to serve as a "passive" and auditable commitment no matter who is elected next (that is, we can easily see if "the wall" is torn down and it could in theory serve as a deterrent even if a given President doesn't want it to). It is otherwise a large waste of resources--expensive both in terms of material of political capital.

But! That's not a small thing--it's a HUGE deal. Sophisticated centrists scoff at we rubes who thing "a wall" might be a good thing, but they fail to account for the fact that we KNOW we've been lied to over and over again by politicians of all kinds who say they care about border enforcement (to get elected) but then do everything in their power to undercut it once in office. We remember McCain's ad saying we ought to "build the danged wall" and we remember how he did everything he could to promote a pro-amnesty, pro-open borders agenda. We're not stupid!

A wasteful commitment like "a wall" is not a first-best solution but it may very well be the best response given the complete lack of trust we have in our actual government. I don't blame people for being cynical enough to support "a wall."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Howard said...
tcrosse: it's gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives in their pathetic failing shithole towns in the land that the future forgot.


Failing towns? They must just no have enough 3rd world illegal immigrants, I guess, to help bid down the price of labor. Once those towns get a goood dose of diversity (and take on the cost of educating & caring for hundreds of thousands of dirt poor uneducated unskilled immigrants) I'm sure things will turn right around. Solid plan, man.

tcrosse said...

Save it for the playground, Howard.

tim in vermont said...

it’s gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives in their pathetic failing shithole towns in the land that the future forgot.

Tomorrow belongs to me...

tim in vermont said...

Hey, you went Godwin first Howard, now it’s a Godwin exchange.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Balfegor said...I've been a weak supporter of the wall in the past, and had the view that if we had effective immigration enforcement internally, we wouldn't need the wall at all. But this whole episode of breast-beating about the children of illegal immigrants is in the process of convincing me that the wall serves an independent function.

By the way, I 100% agree with this underlying sentiment--the more the "reasonable" Left & Centrists demonstrate they'll oppose even basic enforcement of existing laws the less I'm willing to support "compromise" and "comprehensive reform" proposals regarding immigration generally--they're SHOUTING their intention to oppose any enforcement once it comes down to it and that undercuts any promise they might make in terms of a compromise agreement later. They're SHOUTING that we cannot trust them to honor any concessions (as part of a compromise) agreement they might later make.

The people (Left & Right, Repub. & Dem) objecting loudly now are telling you as clearly as they can that they cannot be trusted when they make promises regarding enforcement in the future.

FullMoon said...

Griffin. DeNiro. Kimmel. Maher. Pelosi. etc.

How much is Putin paying these people to promote dissent in America?
What is their reward? Simple ego driven attention from their cultish followers, or something more nefarious?

exhelodrvr1 said...

Yeah, Demos. Going after Melania like that is going to get you a lot of votes.

Waiting for all the criticism of her comments from the left ...

William said...

I just hope they're not spoiling these kids by putting raisins in their gruel. And I hope any greedy kid who asks for more gets soundly thrashed. They should open up a luxury restaurant right next to the detention center. They say hunger is the best sauce, but it doesn't have to be yours. Who wouldn't savor their tiramisu with more relish if they could eat it in front of hungry children?

tim in vermont said...

Boy howdy, when the Democrats launch a propaganda offensive, their followers sure stand up and take notice.

Fabi said...

"...it's gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives in their pathetic failing shithole towns in the land that the future forgot."

This is fantastic! If you're not a campaign consultant for the left you should apply now. America needs you!

tim in vermont said...

I just hope they’re not spoiling these kids by putting raisins in their gruel. And I hope any greedy kid who asks for more gets soundly thrashed. They should open up a luxury restaurant right next to the detention center. They say hunger is the best sauce, but it doesn't have to be yours. Who wouldn't savor their tiramisu with more relish if they could eat it in front of hungry children?

There are billions of actually hungry children in the world, not these kids, who are well fed, but billions of them. You could take your sick idea and open a chain.

walter said...

Howard said..
Oh yeah? Well..you don't matter!

Meanwhile, summer heat descends upon San Francisco's excrement littered sidewalks.


Blogger HoodlumDoodlum said...The cages were in 2012-2014 or so, moron. The pictures you see now aren't of cages they're of large non-cage detention centers (with school classes, cafeterias, etc). Your Lightworker installed the cages. In his defense he HAD to in order to have some place to house the huge number of migrants his stupid policies (mainly of using "discretion" to not kick people out quickly and/or to allow people a reasonable hope that if their minor kids could sneak in we would let them stay) induced to illegal immigrate here.
--
Hey..facts are stubborn things..but no hindrance to stupid memes born of TDS.

William said...

I've read that something like 65% of the people in Mexico said that they would move to America if they could. That's quite a lot of people moving to America. Can someone on the left explain to me if there are any illegal immigrants that we have an absolute right to deport besides convicted rapists and murderers.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

They should open up a luxury restaurant right next to the detention center. They say hunger is the best sauce, but it doesn't have to be yours. Who wouldn't savor their tiramisu with more relish if they could eat it in front of hungry children?

6/18/18, 11:30 AM

San Francisco has many high end restaurants where patrons eat their tiramisu with relish before stepping out into sidewalks strewn with needles, shit, used condoms and homeless people. So a variant of your idea is already in operation. In a leftist city.

Jim at said...

Blasted with this crap from every angle all weekend.

I don't care. I cannot be made to care.

Go through the process and immigrate legally. Otherwise, stay the fuck home.

Balfegor said...

Re: Tim in Vermont:

There are billions of actually hungry children in the world, not these kids, who are well fed, but billions of them. You could take your sick idea and open a chain.

I mean, isn't that kind of the point of resorts in places like Cuba? Or even Mexico or Thailand? I think that market is pretty well saturated already.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

William said...

I've read that something like 65% of the people in Mexico said that they would move to America if they could."

It beats me why they want to come to a country as irremediably racist, sexist, homophobic and horrible as America, run by a dictator and filled with deplorables.

I mean, I don't remember hearing about all the Jews who were clamoring to move into Hitler's Germany.

Achilles said...

It breaks Laura Bush's Heart to see Obama's policies enforced


This is a clearly coordinated assault by the globalists.

Laura was such a cuddly and lovable tool.

But she didn't give a shit during the Obama administration when over 100,000 kids from central america were separated from their parents.

Those kids were useful as globalist props during the Obama years.

Balfegor said...

Re: exiledonmainstreet:

San Francisco has many high end restaurants where patrons eat their tiramisu with relish before stepping out into sidewalks strewn with needles, shit, used condoms and homeless people. So a variant of your idea is already in operation. In a leftist city.

Come to think of it, how do posh restaurants in major US cities keep homeless people from blocking their entrances? In the old days in Korea, you had to bribe beggars not to make a scene at funerals, and in Japan you used to have to bribe sokaiya not to make a fuss at your annual shareholders meeting. Do beggars in the US just not do that sort of thing? Or are the police willing to step in with truncheons and suchlike to keep them away from posh establishments? Otherwise, you'd think that would be a pretty lucrative scam -- forcing restauranteurs and shop owners to pay you protection money not to stink up their entrances and scare all their customers away.

Tank said...

Achilles said...

It breaks Laura Bush's Heart to see Obama's policies enforced


This is a clearly coordinated assault by the globalists.

Laura was such a cuddly and lovable tool.


Reason 500 why Jeb! had to be defeated and thrown into the trash heap of globalist traitors.

William said...

Just about every gay person in the Islamic world can reasonably claim asylum in this country on the reasonable fear of persecution. However, if any person in this country claims that Islamic rule is oppressive, he will be denounced as a bigot. In similar fashion, the families from Central America can claim that their lives are in danger from gangs, cartels, or oppressive regimes can seek asylum here. If, however, you claim that these countries produce criminals and rapists, you are a bigot.

Ken B said...

“Feckless” is the new, deniable, “cunt.”

Achilles said...

Howard said...
tcrosse: it's gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives in their pathetic failing shithole towns in the land that the future forgot.


The tears are delicious.

Everyone knows you are frauds.

You are only worthy of mockery and derision.

FullMoon said...

. The Anti-Christ is kept alive and well by Heartland Christians.

Notice how the common theme when complaining about the current imagined Republican/Nazi atrocity is to include "Christian"?

Attempting to re-identify Christian as a derogatory term. Many of the people crying loudest about Russian and Chinese fostering hate and distrust in America are so simple minded they do the job for free.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

"But she didn't give a shit during the Obama administration when over 100,000 kids from central america were separated from their parents."

The Bushes remained mum throughout the Obama years despite the fact that Obama blamed Dubya and his policies for everything bad that happened from 2009-2017.

They have plenty to say now, though.

They have succeeded only in destroying every remaining bit of goodwill many (not all) Trump voters once felt for them.

Balfegor said...

Re: William:

In similar fashion, the families from Central America can claim that their lives are in danger from gangs, cartels, or oppressive regimes can seek asylum here.

Sessions has actually clarified that "asylum" is for people who are being persecuted on the basis of a characteristic like religion or race/ethnicity. A corrupt/incompetent/ineffectual law enforcement environment doesn't count because that's not persecution -- your government is just bad at its job.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...


"Come to think of it, how do posh restaurants in major US cities keep homeless people from blocking their entrances?"

Good question.

FullMoon said...

Howard said...
tcrosse: it's gonna hafta be good enough to know the deplorables pay in this life with their meaningless lives


Yeah, that is part of the problem. Many have already paid with their lives.
Doesn't garner the attention of white cop shooting black criminal, though.

Tank said...


exiledonmainstreet said...

"Come to think of it, how do posh restaurants in major US cities keep homeless people from blocking their entrances?"

Good question.


They feed them out the back door?

Quaestor said...

The Voltaire Image Appropriator wrote: I wish people would not sink to Trump,s level [sic] and just point ou [sic] that enforcing the existing law does mean separating children from parents and Trump and Miller could end this if they wanted to.

The vast majority of children separated from parents by legal processes in this country are American citizens whose parents have committed crimes such as viewing child pornography, tax evasion, spanking defined as child abuse, Mormon plural marriage defined as child abuse, Christian Science defined as child abuse, practices of the Jehova's Witnesses defined as child abuse, drug dealing, gang violence, fraud, burglary, armed robbery, extortion, murder, terrorism, actual child abuse, and rape. There are tens of thousands of taxpayer-supported group homes and hundreds of thousands of foster parents who are given taxpayers' money to care for these children thus separated from their parents.

I wish roesch/voltaire would not sink to the level of roesch/voltaire and instead clearly specify which lawfully enacted and constitutionally tested laws President Trump should invalidate by the kind of high-handed, undemocratic, and frankly cowardly tactics employed by ex-President Obama to circumvent existing laws rather than seek their lawful repeal.

n.n said...

Illegals, native and alien, are subject to incarceration.

Then there's Obama's trail of tears. In particular, on the trans-Mediterranean trek.

rhhardin said...

The dress gives a huge boobs in a bag effect.

Anonymous said...

Notice in the photo at the top of Laura Bush's article that the kids in line all have new, clean clothes on and new shoes. Badly mistreated. Probably cleaner and better fed than they have been in weeks or months.

The Republicans will have to find a solution to this ( confine the kids and parents as one big happy family then put them in buses and dump them on the south side of the Rio Grande.). The two key points to remember are that these are children of ILLEGAL immigrants arrested at the border; and that the parents are the ones who brought these kids into this situation not the US government.

If you haven't read it Rich Lowry explains the legal problem faced by the administration.

hombre said...

Democrats are pissed because child trafficking is being stopped at the border.

Quaestor said...

Griffin. DeNiro. Kimmel. Maher. Pelosi. etc.
How much is Putin paying these people to promote dissent in America?


Not a penny. The question should be how much is Trump paying these people to help ensure his reelection

Yancey Ward said...

If you are going to detain people at the border who have entered illegally, then they have to be separated from their children. Here is what you cannot do- you cannot forcibly detain the children in facilities that also house non-family adults, which is always going to be the case since we don't build and run individual family detention centers/prisons.

Now, you can make the argument that the children should be put into foster care and not imprisoned at all, but the only other argument that the families not be detained at all is not going to work politically, and the Democrats are catching on this.

Quaestor said...

The dress gives a huge boobs in a bag effect.

Paps in a poke?

Yancey Ward said...

When you detain the children with adults that are not family, you become responsible for all the harm that comes to them from those adults. Given this reality, you must detain the children separately, and ideally subdivided by age- the government is still responsible, but in the latter case the government can institute policies that control which adults have contact with these children.

Deb said...

So much ugliness. What has happen d to this woman?

walter said...

“How can it be?” he continued. “How can it have gotten to this point?”

Remember, this is the man whose job is to glorify San Francisco, which tells you something about how far the city has sunk.

“We can’t be quiet anymore,” D’Alessandro said. “We’ve got such a glorious history, such a beautiful setting, and the fact is, we’re letting it all slip away into this quality of life now that is not good for anybody. We’ve become complacent, and I think we’ve taken this as a kind of new normal, and it’s not. It’s wrong, and we have to do something about it.”

He said so many visitors are sending complaints to him about their experiences in San Francisco, he’s got to speak up. He joins a growing chorus of people whose jobs make them dubious about telling a columnist their real opinions of San Francisco, but who say they have to because working behind the scenes isn’t moving the needle. Well, so to speak.

In January, I told you about hotel managers and owners speaking out. Kevin Carroll, executive director of the Hotel Council, which represents 110 hotels, said at the time, “People say, ‘I love your city, I love your restaurants, but I’ll never come back.’”

In February, I told you that the Union Square Business Improvement District, which assesses extra property taxes to pay for services in the shopping mecca, was having to train retail workers on what to do when a severely mentally ill or drug-addicted person wreaks havoc in their store.

“We’re desperate enough to expose ourselves to look for solutions,” said Karin Flood, executive director of the business improvement district.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Clean-up-San-Francisco-s-streets-tourist-12839281.php
---
A security robot has been pulled from the streets amid claims the machine was harassing homeless people.

The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals had deployed the robot to try and bolster security and reduce crimes, like car break-ins and vandalism, that had become rampant on the SPCA’s campus, the organisation’s president said in a statement.

The robot’s intent was “not to disrupt homeless people”, Dr Jennifer Scarlett said.

But local media reports quoted people living in a nearby homeless encampment saying they felt targeted, with Dr Scarlett telling the San Francisco Business Times that people erecting a camp “put a tarp over it, knocked it over and put barbecue sauce on all the sensors”. She said sidewalks around the organisation's campus were often cluttered with “needles and tents and bikes”.

Since a report on those concerns went viral, Dr Scarlett said: “We’ve received hundreds of messages inciting violence and vandalism against our facility, and encouraging people to take retribution.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/security-robot-harass-homeless-people-san-francisco-suspended-a8113646.html

langford peel said...

Why are we worrying about these baby shit hole monkeys. Send them all back the next day. No asylum. End that right now. End of problem. Send them back home. Don't teach them how to wash themselves or how to brush their teeth and use a toilet. Send them back.

The new Italian government has the right solution. The Good Times are over for you.

walter said...

exiledonmainstreet said...I mean, I don't remember hearing about all the Jews who were clamoring to move into Hitler's Germany.
--
Must be seeking "crumbs".

langford peel said...

I certainly hope that the Bush family will be barred from any future Republican party events.

becauseIdbefired said...

The way this story goes is those who arrive at a port of entry and legally apply for refugee status do not have their children separated from them (except for nebulous "safety" concerns). The separation only applies to those who have illegally entered the US, in which case parents are sent to some kind of jail.

Does anyone have any insight into the facts of this?

It seems pretty important. After all, we routinely separate criminal parents from their children. Is anyone arguing to let criminals out of jail on account of separating children from parents? It seems to me the US is a big country, and there are probably more instances of both parents being jailed and separated from their children than at the border.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Alan Dershowitz and Bill O'Reilly come out against the separation. One on moral grounds, one on optics. I leave it to you to decide which was which.

Starting to cut into the bone of Trump's support.

Dan Hossley said...

I see Kathy Griffen still hasn't found a new job. Way too much time on her hands. Maybe she should contact Starbucks, they're always looking for baristas.

Henry said...

Everyone is against separation.

The question are just pretty rudimentary -- what is the alternative to separation? How do you transition to it? How do you avoid the drawbacks to the alternative that led to the policy we have now?

Maybe there should be a Disney-run theme park just for these families.

I'm serious.

Sammy Finkelman said...

>> She believes we need to be a country that follows all laws but also a country that governs w/heart."

This is, of course, impossible.

Not only that, but it's not realistic to expect a situation where BOTH conditions are violated.

But how far you go in the direction of governing with heart and how far you go with enforcing all laws varies.

Comanche Voter said...

If Ms Griffin's statement (the deranged Democrat Dingbat from Hollywood) was intended as argument, it's not terribly persuasive. Name calling is for seven year olds on the playground. Ms. Griffin's statement isn't much better than saying that Mrs. Trump is a poopyface.

Ah well--keep on babbling.

Wince said...

Who wore it better: Children detained in McAllen, Texas or Ivanka Trump?

"Do you like your quasi-futuristic clothes, Mr. Powers? "

langford peel said...

Hey ARM.

The God Emperor's support is rock solid and growing every day.

Keep dreaming loser.

Sammy Finkelman said...

>> he way this story goes is those who arrive at a port of entry and legally apply for refugee status do not have their children separated from them (except for nebulous "safety" concerns). The separation only applies to those who have illegally entered the US, in which case parents are sent to some kind of jail.

Attrney general Jeff sessions decided he wanted to charge each person crossing the border with a criminal violation (which allowed him to detain them rather than having them wait, free in the U.S. for years) not tyhat he catually wants to jail thenm for long. The prosecution necessitates the separation of children from parents because children cannot be detained in jail with their parents.

President Donald Trump (or at least Speaker Paul Ryan) wants to change the law so taht children can be imprisoned together with their parents, but Ryan's methso of changinbg the law will not work: it's being attached to an immigration bill that certainly will not ass teh senate and may not pass the House.

In fact don't expect any immigration bill to pass this year - expect instead a government shutdown in ZOctober that doesn't end before the election.

Trump now says he will shut down the government if he doesn’t get full funding for the wall.

Enough Democrats are actually willing to give him that, provided that they also get legal status for those who were covered by DACA.

But he keeps on sayinbg he also wants several other things (at least in a bill that legalizes DACA)

1. An end to sanctuary cities and states

2. And an end to the visa lottery,

3. And reductions of grounds for family re-unification.

And it possible Democrats might also accept symbolic action against sanctuary cities and states – I stress symbolic – but they are not going to remove any eligibility anyone has to legally immigrate in anything but a comprehensive bill and even theer the visa lottery but not family re-unification, which affects voters.

So the federal government is heading toward a shutdown that will not end before the November election.


Anonymous said...

Blogger Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Alan Dershowitz and Bill O'Reilly come out against the separation. One on moral grounds, one on optics. I leave it to you to decide which was which.

Starting to cut into the bone of Trump's support.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

They both need their maids, pool boys, gardners, etc.

Sammy Finkelman said...

10.The immigration is heading toward the place the slavery issue was before the Civil War, although it won’t have such bad consequences – just dominate U.S. politics, and there won’t be any other issue.

Quaestor said...

Starting to cut into the bone of Trump's support.

Funny how this "separation of children from parents" never cut into the bone of Obama's support.

langford peel said...

The President's tweet put his finger on it today.

We don't want to turn into Europe. Or should we call it Eur-rape instead.

Even Germany is turning against mass illegal immigration.

The Italians have the right idea finally. Turn them back at the border. No excuses. No pleas. Send them back to their shit hole countries and let them sort out their own problems.

MayBee said...

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan -

Coming out against the separation is the easy part. It's coming up with a solution that's the hard part:

- people come into the country illegally, not at ports of entry
- they are discovered.
- they are offered the option of returning home as a family
- instead, they claim asylum
- while they are held to see if the asylum claims are valid or a sham, the children are removed so they are not held with a bunch of adults in a prison setting. Not being with the people claiming they are their family members is due to a legal ruling in 2015

What part do you, Bill O'Reilly, and Alan Dershowitz want to change that results in no family separation
keep in mind
- a large number of teens come here without family members in the first place

Scott M said...

Kathy Griffin - the true definition of insanity.

Because if you do her repeated and she doesn't change?

MayBee said...

"I'm against the separation" is the new "I'm for common sense gun control"

You say those words, and you are magically absolved. Absolved of being a racist or a hater or having blood on your hands, and absolved of having to actually come up with any solution. Just POOF! You say it and you are a moral and good person.

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael Fitzgerald said...

Unbroken.

gilbar said...

The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals had deployed the robot to try and bolster security and reduce crime....
nearby homeless encampment saying they felt targeted, with Dr Scarlett telling the San Francisco Business Times that people erecting a camp “put a tarp over it, knocked it over and put barbecue sauce on all the sensors”.
Sounds like it was the robot that was being targeted!

She said sidewalks around the organisation's campus were often cluttered with “needles and tents and bikes”.Since a report on those concerns went viral, Dr Scarlett said: “We’ve received hundreds of messages inciting violence and vandalism against our facility, and encouraging people to take retribution

So, there's a War going on between Bums and Animal Lovers; and the Animal Lovers have escalated by making an alliance with robots (HK's?)
If you wrote this scifi; your editor would reject it

MayBee said...

Via Drew McCoy, here's a story from 2014:

Asylum Fraud in Chinatown: An Industry of Lies

Just in case you think people would never lie when seeking asylum.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Everyone is against separation.”

Who is everybody? This isn’t demonstrated to be true here in these comments sections.

“The question are just pretty rudimentary -- what is the alternative to separation? How do you transition to it? How do you avoid the drawbacks to the alternative that led to the policy we have now?”

It seems that when Cuban balseros were interdicted by the Coast Guard they were taken to holding areas, keeping family units intact. Why can’t this be utilized again with Central American asylum seekers? This doesn’t mean they should automatically be given asylum, but in the interim the asylum seekers could be treated in a more humanitarian way.

MayBee said...

Inga- you think it would be better to bring these family units to Guantanamo and hold them under military rule? No communication with the outside?
You think that would not provide outrage for the outrage machine?

MayBee said...

By the way - Asylum Seekers who come here through points of entry and claim asylum are NOT separated from their children like this. This is happening to people who are caught crossing borders illegally and THEN claim asylum.

But sure, the humane thing to do would be to intercede, catch the people in Mexico, and hold them in military encampments in Mexico. Like we did with the Cuban balseros.

walter said...


Kathy Griffin Retweeted
Nada Bakos
‏Verified account @nadabakos
47m47 minutes ago

I think we can do away with the terms Democrats and Republicans. We have entered a new area whereby we can define political parties by 'ok with and/or making policy for child camps and refusing to fix it (regardless of what they say)' and 'not ok ripping families apart'.

Quaestor said...

Inga wrote: Why can’t this be utilized again with Central American asylum seekers?

Perhaps it is because those "balseros" were the beneficiaries of a law tailored explicitly to encourage their migration into the United States, specifically the Cuban Adjustment Act, Public law 89-732, of October 16, 1966.

The "asylum seekers" are just garden variety law-breakers who are no more entitled to the custody of their children than the tens of thousands of American children in group homes or foster care because their parents have been charged or convicted of crimes.

Do you think these Central Americans are entitled to special consideration not routinely granted to United States citizens? Or are you just reflexively anti-American?

Tim said...

Send ALL of the illegals back. Build the damn wall. Tax remittances to Mexico. Absolutely NO welfare for illegals. Make it worthwhile for them to stay out of the US. We do not need any of them. There is a legal way to emigrate. Use that.

walter said...

Kathy Griffin Retweeted
Jim Carrey
‏Verified account @JimCarrey
Jun 17

Sanctioned, embraced, normalized by POTUS, evil is pushing the boundaries. Sociopaths have risen to the top. This Father’s Day we’ll abduct children from their families at our border because the GOP has no bottom and Stephen Miller wasn’t what his Father wanted. #bewaretheunloved

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“But sure, the humane thing to do would be to intercede, catch the people in Mexico, and hold them in military encampments in Mexico. Like we did with the Cuban balseros.”

Exactly. The family units were kept together, even townfolks were allowed to stay together.


“The child who captured my heart was 10-year-old Yudelka C├ęsar.

She lived at Camp Oscar Three under a huge yellow tent with her family and the friends from her Havana neighborhood, who had all pitched in to buy a boat.

Yudelka saw me interviewing people and brought me her diary. She had written all she had endured from the moment her mother woke her up and told her they were leaving Cuba on small white cards that came every day with prepackaged military meals.

She had tied the cards together with two plastic bag clips.

"It's our story," Yudelka told me. "Take it to the United States and print it."”

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/20-years-ago-35000-balseros-fled-castros-cuba-on-anything-that-would-float/2193473

MayBee said...

Exactly. The family units were kept together, even townfolks were allowed to stay together.


I was being ironic. There is no way the activists who are pushing this story would be ok with holding people in military camps in Guantanamo They don't even like it that we're holding terrorists there.

walter said...


Kathy Griffin
‏Verified account @kathygriffin
46m46 minutes ago

Kathy Griffin Retweeted Donald J. Trump

“Billy told Emma that he likes her.”

“Omg did he tell her that he likes likes her?”

“Will tell you more after history class!”

Kathy Griffin added,
Donald J. Trump
Verified account @realDonaldTrump
Comey gave Strozk his marching orders. Mueller is Comey’s best friend. Witch Hunt!
53 replies 59 retweets 312 likes
--
Yeah..clearly she's a Twit whose opinion is worth following.

Achilles said...

Inga said...
“Everyone is against separation.”

Who is everybody? This isn’t demonstrated to be true here in these comments sections.

Oh look a Republican is president and Inga can jump around in fake outrage that an obama administration policy is still in affect.

We want the families to stay together happily and legally in their own countries.

You don’t give a crap if they stay together or not.

It actually seems that you prefer they are separated as the Obama policy stipulated so you have another bloody shirt to wave around.

Please keep this up. You are utterly transparent.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

MayBee said...
Coming out against the separation is the easy part. It's coming up with a solution that's the hard part:


This is a self-defeating 'solution'. They are going to roll over on this.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

To add to that, the Cuban balseros were taken to GTMO, which is a US Navy Base. So keeping the Central American asylum seekers in Mexico wouldn’t exactly be the same as being housed on US property.

walter said...


Kathy Griffin Retweeted
Walter Shaub
‏Verified account @waltshaub
1h1 hour ago

Walter Shaub Retweeted Anna Galland

ACTION ALERT: THIS IS THE BIG ANNOUNCEMENT.

Be ready to go!!!!! Date, time, details announced in the 8:00 hour.

This is it folks!

WE MUST NOT TOLERATE THESE ATROCITIES!

Walter Shaub added,
Anna Galland
Verified account @annagalland
Look for an important announcement TONIGHT on @allinwithchris re *major protest against family separation* in DC & nationwide. @RepJayapal, one of our utmost champions, will share plans. All hands on deck. @chrislhayes @MoveOn @domesticworkers @waltshaub #FamiliesBelongTogether
111 replies 2,087 retweets 3,366 likes

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

Balfegor said...

Come to think of it, how do posh restaurants in major US cities keep homeless people from blocking their entrances? In the old days in Korea, you had to bribe beggars not to make a scene at funerals, and in Japan you used to have to bribe sokaiya not to make a fuss at your annual shareholders meeting. Do beggars in the US just not do that sort of thing?

That would be considered aggressive panhandling in most jurisdictions and a call to the local PD would solve the problem. Most panhandlers in the US would just sit outside, not too near the door, with a sign of some kind and hope to guilt the restaurant patrons into giving them a little money.

Achilles said...

MayBee said...
Inga- you think it would be better to bring these family units to Guantanamo and hold them under military rule? No communication with the outside?
You think that would not provide outrage for the outrage machine?


That is exactly what she proposed.

She would wave a bloody shirt at Trump if it happened.

MayBee said...

To add to that, the Cuban balseros were taken to GTMO, which is a US Navy Base. So keeping the Central American asylum seekers in Mexico wouldn’t exactly be the same as being housed on US property

Ok, then we'll fly them over to Gitmo in a military camp.

You think that would be acceptable? Do you think separating the children is the real problem, or do you think that's the hook the activists are using? I think its the hook.

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga...Allie Oop said...

“I was being ironic. There is no way the activists who are pushing this story would be ok with holding people in military camps in Guantanamo They don't even like it that we're holding terrorists there.”

I know. However it deserves a response. Being housed on some military base not far from the Mexican border in the same way the Cuban balseros were housed with families intact, would be preferable to separating children from their parents.

Henry said...

@Inga -- I think setting up some kind of housing for illegal immigrants in this position would be the humanitarian thing to do. But you are talking about tens of thousands of people.

Anyway, here's some facts from Vox:

ORR facilities were already 95 percent full as of June 7; 11,000 children are being held. (Remember, most of these are probably children who arrived in the US without their parents.) According to the New York Times, the government “has reserved an additional 1,218 beds in various places for migrant children, including some at military bases.”

How about releasing children to sponsors?

A PBS Frontline investigation found cases of teenagers getting released to labor traffickers by ORR. The agency told Congress in April that of 7,000 children it attempted to contact in fall 2017, 1,475 could not be contacted — leading to allegations that the government “lost” children, or that they’d been handed over to traffickers.

For the most part, though, it’s probable that the families ORR was unable to contact made the deliberate decision to go off the map.


How did we get here:

When Central American migrants, including many unaccompanied children, began surging across the border in early 2014, Mr. Obama, the antithesis of his impulsive successor, had his own characteristic reaction: He formed a multiagency team at the White House to figure out what should be done...

The officials met in the office of Denis R. McDonough, the White House chief of staff, and convened a series of meetings in the Situation Room to go through their options. Migrants were increasingly exploiting existing immigration laws and court rulings, and using children as a way to get adults into the country, on the theory that families were being treated differently from single people.

[They decided] to vastly expand the detention of immigrant families, opening new facilities along the border where women and young children were held for long periods while they awaited a chance to have their cases processed...

The steps led to just the kind of brutal images that Mr. Obama’s advisers feared: hundreds of young children, many dirty and some in tears, who were being held with their families in makeshift detention facilities...

Before long, the Obama administration would face legal challenges, and be forced to stop detaining families indefinitely. A federal judge in Washington ordered the administration in 2015 to stop detaining asylum-seeking Central American mothers and children in order to deter others from their region from coming into the United States.

Under a 1997 consent decree known as the Flores settlement, unaccompanied children could be held in immigration detention for only a short period of time; in 2016, a federal judge ruled that the settlement applied to families as well, effectively requiring that they be released within 20 days. Many were released — some with GPS ankle bracelets to track their movements — and asked to return for a court date sometime in the future.

JAORE said...

You know, I was on the fence about this issue. But the cogent argument by Ms. Griffin has persuaded me.

Text, baby, text.

MayBee said...

Inga- do you think the activists who are upset now would not be pushing sad stories about children being kept in military encampments? I'm guessing the answer is they would be, because *somebody* brought the idea of holding children in prison-like camps with their parents to court, which is how we got the 2015 decision.

hombre said...

ARM: “Starting to cut into the bone of Trump's support.”

Yes, because Trump supporters think the children should be allowed unfettered entry and their parents should get to tag along. (Sarc.)

Honestly, it becomes a treat to decide which Althouse lefty says the stupidest things.

Balfegor said...

Re: Achilles:

Oh look a Republican is president and Inga can jump around in fake outrage that an obama administration policy is still in affect.

To the Obama administration's credit, this isn't a policy they came up with ex nihilo. They came up with it because a judge ordered them to do this. It's the judiciary that deserves everyone's hatred and scorn here, not Trump, and not Obama.

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Inga- do you think the activists who are upset now would not be pushing sad stories about children being kept in military encampments? I'm guessing the answer is they would be, because *somebody* brought the idea of holding children in prison-like camps with their parents to court, which is how we got the 2015 decision.”

I don’t care about the spin. Let’s try to get away from it and look at it as people who are against seperating children from their parents. Housing families intact would be far less of a black eye to any administration than what is happening now.

Jim at said...

Housing families intact would be far less of a black eye to any administration that what is happening now.

Sending them back - intact - to their country of origin and having them immigrate legally would be even better.

MayBee said...

Let’s try to get away from it and look at it as people who are against seperating children from their parents. Housing families intact would be far less of a black eye to any administration that what is happening now.

No black eye is NOT the ultimate goal of the united states. You are agains separating children from their parents. It is illegal to house children with parents who are being held in a prison-like camp. Adults held in a prison-like camp are being held because they tried to come here illegally, not claiming asylum until they are caught.

So what you are actually saying is....don't punish adults who come here illegally if they have children. Let them go. Is that right?

MayBee said...

They have every right as it is to go back as an intact family.

Henry said...

To summarize: The Obama policy was to vastly expand detention of individuals and families, together.

The facilities were not attractive.

Indefinite detention was immoral and illegal.

Court rulings established limits for this approach -- you can detain adults until a criminal hearing, but you can't detain children in an adult prison.

The Obama administration tried to avoid this dilemma by limiting detainees to ICE facilities -- bureaucratic detention rather than criminal -- allowing families to remain together.

The Trump administration opted for a harder stance -- holding all adults until their criminal hearing. Which, by law, means the children must be separated.

The Trump administration could opt for a more humane position by a) building enough ICE facilities to hold all the detainees in non-criminal detention centers. Or b) not detaining families.

The Obama administration tried option a and it failed due to lack of facilities.

That leads to option b.

Henry said...

Option b -- not detaining families -- is what encouraged more illegal immigrants to bring children with them. See the graf from the New York Times article I linked above:

Migrants were increasingly exploiting existing immigration laws and court rulings, and using children as a way to get adults into the country, on the theory that families were being treated differently from single people.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 397   Newer› Newest»