Octopus Overlords

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:54 pm Seeking refugee status averages an 18 month process.

We also used tear gas on immigrants during the Obama administration.

The process needs completely redesigned balancing all the issues that go into immigration.

Thanks. Really.

Good luck on the redesign. Should be soon, I assume.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 2:23 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:54 pm Seeking refugee status averages an 18 month process.

We also used tear gas on immigrants during the Obama administration.

The process needs completely redesigned balancing all the issues that go into immigration.

Thanks. Really.

Good luck on the redesign. Should be soon, I assume.

Shrug. It's a global problem; not just a US one. Balancing labor, security, and humanitarian aid is tough.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:02 pm Shrug. It's a global problem; not just a US one. Balancing labor, security, and humanitarian aid is tough.

Ok, no problem. My concern is that it's used for political purposes and nothing more. Even nailing down the specific issues doesn't seem to be high on their priority list, so it doesn't seem like they are trying to solve it.

Obama did more to curb illegal immigration that drumpf has even grandstanded about. I had no idea that included tear gassing people, which presumably includes mothers and children.

And thanks again for pointing out the hypocrisy in the media and through them, myself. I have no idea why I wasn't aware of it. I assume some combination of MSM liberal bias (yes, really) and it not being brought up here. Maybe it was and I missed it. Maybe it was and I've forgotten. In any case, I don't like ignoring one side for a thing and criticizing the other for the same thing, even if I'm not a fan of "both sides" arguments. In this case, it perfectly applies, and is valid imo.

I'm guessing it's because nobody wants it solved.

And it's an amazing political football. The left can cry racism, and the right can claim security.

I listened to a Science Vs. podcast where they tackled immigration and the conclusion is that immigration is good for everyone except the people who the immigrants are competing against for jobs, for which the large majority is non-high school graduate labor. But it's going to be scary and potentially damaging for all but college educated depending on how the labor markets change over the next decade. But it's good for consumers and the economy, so by not reforming the process, you get to use it politically and reap the economic benefits of immigration (both legal and illegal). At least this is how it's worked for the last 30 years. This administration, like everything else they do, is a dumpster fire.

I really don't remember the Obama administration gassing children, but maybe I was so excited for my abortion coupons and Obama phone that I missed it happening. (j/k for anyone that thinks I'm serious).

Regarding immigration, I've come to the conclusion that there are really large groups of people that like to keep immigrants illegal because the benefit from it tremendously. They hate the immigrants, but know they can't function without them.

If dairies had to use legal labor, they would likely have to raise that to eighteen or twenty dollars, and many dairies wouldn’t survive. “People are going to go broke,” the farmer said. The story was similar in the poultry, meatpacking, and other agricultural industries in the area.

...

The absurdity of this situation—funding and voting for politicians whose core promise is to implement immigration policies that would destroy their livelihoods—has led some of the Republican-­supporting dairymen to rethink their political priorities. “Everyone’s got this feeling that in agriculture, we, the employers, are going to be criminalized,” the first area dairy farmer I had spoken to said. “I’ve talked to Steve King face-to-face, and that guy doesn’t care one iota about us. He does not care. He believes that if you have one undocumented worker on your place, you should probably go to prison and we need to get as many undocumented people out of here as possible.” (A spokesman for King did not respond to multiple interview requests.) The second dairy farmer, speaking of Trump’s and King’s views on undocumented immigrants, added, “They want to send ’em all back to Mexico and have them start over. What a crock of malarkey. Who’s gonna milk the cows?”

There's a reason housing costs are well below national average in Texas and it's not just because there's so much flat land.

Just want to point out that there's a lot of talk here about "refugees" in connection with the caravan. I understand why that word is being used, but I think it's a little confusing when discussing the people in the caravan and their attempt to apply for asylum in the U.S.

I'm far from an expert in immigration law, but I've represented (pro bono) a number of clients seeking asylum, always with the assistance of a qualified immigration attorney working for an NGO. The point I want to make is that U.S. asylum law is really specific about who qualifies and who doesn't: Asylum in the U.S. is only available for people unable or unwilling to return to their home country "because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion."

In other words, it's not enough to be a refugee, be it from war or famine or socio/political chaos. Our asylum laws are only intended to provide a safe harbor for people who are being particularly persecuted in their home countries. Those laws are not intended and are not written to simply provide refuge to those fleeing a bad situation.

Of course, the boundaries of asylum law have been somewhat fluid over time, especially when the claim of persecution stems from "membership in a particular social group." My understanding (in part from an NPR piece I listened to last week) is that part of the issue we are facing today regarding the asylum component of our immigration system stems from a 1,700 percent increase in asylum claims over the last ten years. That increase was fueled by expansions over that time period in what "particular social groups" qualify, including expansions to include victims of gang and domestic violence, groups that wouldn't have qualified previously.

I've read and heard arguments that these expansions are a prime example of good intentions with unintended consequences. Because so many people unfortunately suffer or have a credible fear of gang or domestic violence, the number of asylum applications have exploded. Not surprisingly, Trump and Sessions (before he got the axe) started rolling back these expansions.

Anyway, just trying to make that point that we shouldn't call the people in the migrant caravan "refugees." My understanding is they are coming to the U.S. as "asylum seekers," which is not necessarily the same thing.

Trump: F**k your butterflies. They never did anything for me.

Apparently Trump's wall is more important than endangered species, along with 28 other laws that don't matter anymore.

...the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed a challenge by environmental groups. The justices this week upheld a District Court ruling to allow the Trump administration to bypass 28 federal laws, including the Endangered Species Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Air Act, to be waived for southern border wall construction.

I'm surprised this isn't getting more news attention:

BEDMINSTER, N.J. — During more than five years as a housekeeper at the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., Victorina Morales has made Donald J. Trump’s bed, cleaned his toilet and dusted his crystal golf trophies. When he visited as president, she was directed to wear a pin in the shape of the American flag adorned with a Secret Service logo.

Because of the “outstanding” support she has provided during Mr. Trump’s visits, Ms. Morales in July was given a certificate from the White House Communications Agency inscribed with her name.

Quite an achievement for an undocumented immigrant housekeeper.

I wonder why not?

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:54 pm Seeking refugee status averages an 18 month process.

In part because there are nowhere near enough judges hearing cases. Instead of sending 14,000 troops for a dog an pony show, how about sending in 500 judges to expedite the process?

Paingod wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:13 pm Trump: F**k your butterflies. They never did anything for me.

Apparently Trump's wall is more important than endangered species, along with 28 other laws that don't matter anymore.

...the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed a challenge by environmental groups. The justices this week upheld a District Court ruling to allow the Trump administration to bypass 28 federal laws, including the Endangered Species Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Air Act, to be waived for southern border wall construction.

Let's face it, the only endangered species worth protecting is the 1950s era straight white male. Maybe the late-century white college party boy too. But that's it.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 5:49 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:54 pm Seeking refugee status averages an 18 month process.

In part because there are nowhere near enough judges hearing cases. Instead of sending 14,000 troops for a dog an pony show, how about sending in 500 judges to expedite the process?

From the administration's perspective, the pace of the process is not a problem. That, at least, is working as intended.

In which the US continues its downward slide to utter horridness. ICE arrests 170 people who came forward seeking to sponsor migrant children. The majority had no criminal record.

Federal authorities have arrested 170 immigrants who came forward seeking to sponsor migrant children in government custody, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.

ICE said Tuesday that the arrests were of immigrants suspected of being in the United States illegally and took place from early July to November. They were the result of background checks conducted on potential sponsors of unaccompanied migrant children placed under the care of the Department of Health and Human Services.

More than two thirds of those arrested — 109 in total — had no criminal record, the agency said. Another 61 of those arrested did have criminal records, but ICE did not specify the crimes and said it could not breakdown convictions by violent and nonviolent offenses.

Congressman Says a “WallCoin” Could Fund Trump’s Border Wall

Ohio Rep. Warren Davidson has drafted a bill, called the “Buy a Brick, Build a Wall Act,” that he says would enable the government to raise money for a border wall by creating a cryptocurrency. President Trump is currently threatening to partially shut down the government if Democrats do not acquiesce to his demand for $5 billion in funding for a wall.

The bill itself, which Davidson submitted on Nov. 30, makes no explicit mention of cryptocurrency, but rather allows the Secretary of the Treasury to accept monetary gifts on the condition that it be used for a border wall. However, Davidson on Wednesday elaborated to NPR on the form that those gifts could take. “You could do with this sort of, like, crowdfunding site,” he said. “Or you could even do blockchain, and you could have wall coins.” Under Davidson’s proposal, the government would set up a public website to electronically accept donations for a “Border Wall Trust Fund.”

"cryptocurrency" + "blockchain" = problem solved

What the hell are taxes if not crowd sourced fund raising?

Geezus.

GreenGoo wrote:What the hell are taxes if not crowd sourced fund raising?

Geezus.

Mandatory crowd sourced fund raising.

Big difference.

Pyperkub wrote: ↑Fri Dec 14, 2018 11:22 pm

GreenGoo wrote:What the hell are taxes if not crowd sourced fund raising?

Geezus.

Mandatory crowd sourced fund raising.

Big difference.

Perhaps, but then people are free to leave if they so choose.

Something about cakes and eating them goes here, I think.

If Trump supporting doofuses want to waste their money, more power to them. That's less money available to donate to future xenophobic Presidential campaigns.

Blockchain? Good for electronic security? Yes. Block a chain of migrants? No.

gbasden wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:04 am If Trump supporting doofuses want to waste their money, more power to them. That's less money available to donate to future xenophobic Presidential campaigns.

It's a frightening precedent though. It's a way around any kind of congressional vetting or approval. What if someone wants to sponsor a "crowdfunded" government program to deforest California to stop wildfires? Or to deploy armed guards to elementary schools? Or any kind of government program? Allowing blind crowdfunding eliminates one of the final barriers to dumb shit: appropriations.

All of your examples involve various regulatory restrictions and other laws.

Environment issues, gun liability, etc.

Of course, in this case, some of those would apply too.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:52 am

gbasden wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 3:04 am If Trump supporting doofuses want to waste their money, more power to them. That's less money available to donate to future xenophobic Presidential campaigns.

It's a frightening precedent though. It's a way around any kind of congressional vetting or approval. What if someone wants to sponsor a "crowdfunded" government program to deforest California to stop wildfires? Or to deploy armed guards to elementary schools? Or any kind of government program? Allowing blind crowdfunding eliminates one of the final barriers to dumb shit: appropriations.

Well, just because someone croudfunds a project doesn't mean the project could go without congressional approval. Given the mess of eminent domain and waivers for all sorts of regulations I don't think the Proud Boys can just show up, hire Teichert and get going.

People who fund large amounts of money should go on some list and then be taxed accordingly.

Travel ban keeps Yemeni mother from seeing her dying 2-year-old

The Yemeni mother of a 2-year-old boy on life support in an Oakland hospital is being prevented from coming to the country to say goodbye to her son by the Trump administration ban on travel from certain Muslim countries, the child’s family says.

Abdullah Hassan was born in Yemen with a rare brain disease that initially affected his ability to walk and talk but quickly worsened. He is no longer able to breathe on his own. His father, a U.S. citizen who lives in Stockton, brought him to UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland for care about five months ago, and Abdullah is not expected to live much longer.

GOP: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

WaPo

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked several Trump administration policies that made it more difficult for victims of gang and domestic violence to seek asylum in the United States.

In a 107-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan wrote that the policies were “arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law” and ordered the government to cease their implementation.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, representing 12 adults and children who had sought asylum in the United States because they said they were sexually abused, beat and kidnapped in their home countries.

Each was denied asylum — even though asylum officers felt their accounts were sincere, according to the ruling — based on the new policies restricting who qualifies. Some already had been removed, though Sullivan decreed they should be brought back to the United States and allowed to make their case again.
...
Sullivan took aim at much of the new guidance. He wrote there was “no legal basis for an effective categorical ban on domestic violence and gang-related claims,” and he specifically invalidated the general rule that asylum officers should dismiss such claims in assessing applicants’ credible fear claims.

Sullivan also blocked the requirement that applicants alleging harm by someone other than a government must “show the government condoned the private actions or at least demonstrated a complete helplessness to protect the victim.”

The state department has an extra $10.6 billion of our money just sitting around that won't be building a wall, and it will instead go to where it will get evaporated akin to putting money into Iraq.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/th ... 5cf55c5404

WaPo

The Department of Homeland Security announced new measures Thursday requiring asylum seekers at the border to return to Mexico and wait while their claims are processed, possibly for months or years, describing the plan as one of the most significant changes to immigration policy in decades.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen outlined the new measures during a contentious oversight hearing with members of the House Judiciary committee, telling lawmakers the administration is preparing to implement the policy in coming days. Mexico’s new leftist government separately announced Thursday it will allow the United States to send asylum seekers who cross illegally back to its territory and provide them with work visas and humanitarian assistance while they wait.

The policy is likely to face legal challenges, and federal courts have repeatedly blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to tighten border controls by executive action. Nonetheless, the deal amounts to a significant diplomatic win for the administration, which has engaged in delicate talks to cajole Mexico to become an immigration antechamber for Central Americans seeking U.S. asylum.

The new policy will apply to migrants who request humanitarian protections at U.S. border crossings as well as those who enter the country illegally, DHS officials said. Citing emergency powers allowed under the Immigration and Nationality Act, Nielsen said the measures were needed to “bring under control” a surge of unmerited asylum claims by Central Americans that led to a backlog in U.S. immigration courts of more than 750,000 cases.

We'll offer you asylum. In a few years. Maybe. Please keep your now in limbo lives outside the US in the meantime.

I guess that gofundme scared them into passing a bill with funding for the wall along to the Senate.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... OJ188?il=0

Thousands more immigrant children were separated from their parents under the Trump administration than previously reported and whether they have been reunified is unknown, according to a report released Thursday by the inspector general for the Department of Health and Human Services.

The report found a spike in immigrant family separations beginning in the summer of 2017, a year prior to the "zero tolerance" policy that prosecuted immigrant parents who crossed the border illegally while holding their children separately in HHS custody. The families separated under zero tolerance were represented in a class action lawsuit, where a federal judge ordered that the government reunify them.

However, the government had no such order to reunify children separated prior to "zero tolerance." Some may have been released to family or nonrelative sponsors, but it is not known how many have been reunified.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigr ... ed-n959791

WaPo

The Supreme Court is not likely to review during its current term the program that shields young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children, leaving in place the Obama-era initiative that the Trump administration has tried to end.
...
If the court sticks to its normal procedures, that would mean that even if it accepts the case as a later date, it would not be argued until the new term starting in October, with a decision likely in 2020.
...
Trump has previously said he wanted the Supreme Court to take the case and find he had the authority to end the program.

A string of lower courts has said that Trump’s abrupt decision to terminate the Obama-era program was based on faulty legal reasoning and that the administration has failed to provide a solid rationale for ending it.

NPR

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered the majority of National Guard troops deployed at her state's Southern border to withdraw, condemning what she called a "charade of border fear-mongering" by President Trump, who has warned of an immigration emergency in the region.

"I reject the federal contention that there exists an overwhelming national security crisis at the Southern border," Lujan Grisham said, adding that the area has "some of the safest communities in the country."

The governor's order covers most of New Mexico's deployed troops, along with Guard members who have traveled from Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Wisconsin. In all, 118 National Guard troops have been deployed in New Mexico, the governor's office said.

Lujan Grisham ordered the withdrawal just before Trump delivered his State of the Union address, in which he railed against illegal immigration and labeled a group of mainly Central American migrants as "illegal immigrants" — despite the fact that most of them are traveling with legal humanitarian visas.

Federal vs state, presumably. I look forward to the outpouring of support from states rights advocates. Of course I have no idea how army deployment at the border fits into that picture so I look forward to new developments.

This should be fun.

I wonder if the idiotic Texas governor who thought Obama was coming to take his guns supports this action.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 4:41 pm NPR

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered the majority of National Guard troops deployed at her state's Southern border to withdraw, condemning what she called a "charade of border fear-mongering" by President Trump, who has warned of an immigration emergency in the region.

"I reject the federal contention that there exists an overwhelming national security crisis at the Southern border," Lujan Grisham said, adding that the area has "some of the safest communities in the country."

The governor's order covers most of New Mexico's deployed troops, along with Guard members who have traveled from Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Wisconsin. In all, 118 National Guard troops have been deployed in New Mexico, the governor's office said.

Lujan Grisham ordered the withdrawal just before Trump delivered his State of the Union address, in which he railed against illegal immigration and labeled a group of mainly Central American migrants as "illegal immigrants" — despite the fact that most of them are traveling with legal humanitarian visas.

Woot, I know where the Herion is going to be cheap now! right!?? right?

Just an update from the SW Naturalist Association,

Many of you are aware of the recent border wall activity in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas that was funded in the March 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act: $450 million for 33 new miles of border wall in Hidalgo & Starr Counties, TX. Well, excavators arrived on Sunday, 3 February on the east side of the National Butterfly Center (NBC), and on Monday, 4 February, the local Mission Police Department told the NBC to stay off of the levy and land beyond it – land that is privately owned by the NBC (which is completely illegal). ‘Authorities’ are clearly gearing up for this to happen very soon. I was at the NBC this morning (Feb. 6) and there was no activity yet, but the Director of the NBC said they expect the excavators to begin today. The NBC is right in the middle of this, and the wall is scheduled to slash through their property, Bentsen State Park, and a tract of the Lower Rio Grande National Wildlife Refuge on their El Murillo tract (sandwiched between the NBC and the state park). Contractors (SLSCO, https://www.slsco.com/contact/; and Foremost Paving, https://foremostpaving.com) are expected to begin clearing land on the NWR tract first, as it is federal property and low-hanging fruit. Other cultural and natural sites that will be affected include sacred land and cemeteries of the Carrizo-Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, the historic La Lomita Mission and Chapel, and a 900 year old Montezuma Cypress tree. The tribe has set up a camp at one of the cemeteries, and there are many motivated folks in the region ready to mobilize when the 150 ft wide excavation transect begins to clear all native woodland habitat for an all-weather, 24 hr security-lit road. What can you do to fight this right now? If you are a constituent of a jurisdiction led by any of the members of the bicameral committee that is currently working on a border security bill, we need your calls/tweets/FB posts to communicate the importance of no additional wall/fence/barrier in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.

California

Gov. Gavin Newsom is rescinding former Gov. Jerry Brown's deployment of California National Guard troops to the Mexican border, pulling most of 360 troops off their current missions but leaving some in the area to combat transnational drug smuggling.

"The border 'emergency' is a manufactured crisis," Newsom will say during his State of the State address Tuesday morning, according to advance excerpts provided by his office. "And California will not be part of this political theater."
...
The California governor is splitting the troops up into three new deployments in a move he will tell lawmakers will allow the National Guard to "refocus on the real threats facing our state":

110 troops to support CalFire's wildfire prevention and suppression efforts. Unlike the current deployment, which is funded by the federal government, the state will need to foot the bill for this new mission.

At least 150 troops to expand the California National Guard's statewide Counterdrug Task Force — if the Trump administration's Department of Defense agrees to fund the expansion.

100 troops for intelligence operations targeting drug cartels. The governor's office says some of these troops who are "specially trained counter-narcotic screeners" will be deployed to California ports of entry — both at the Mexican border and elsewhere. The governor's office says funding for this mission will continue to come from the federal government under the terms of the previous deployment agreed to by the Brown and Trump administrations.

I hope their rake budget is fully funded.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 4:41 pm NPR

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has ordered the majority of National Guard troops deployed at her state's Southern border to withdraw, condemning what she called a "charade of border fear-mongering" by President Trump, who has warned of an immigration emergency in the region.

CBS News

The Democratic speaker of the New Mexico House of Representatives says there is no way he would initiate impeachment proceedings against the state's governor for withdrawing troops from the border with Mexico. An online petition seeks to impeach Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham for treason in withdrawing about 100 New Mexico National Guard troops and has garnered more than 30,000 signatures.

On Tuesday, House Speaker Brian Egolf of Santa Fe said "no way, forget about it" regarding prospects for impeachment proceedings. He holds the authority to initiate House investigations.

Lujan Grisham has challenged President Trump's description of a security crisis on the border, while leaving about a dozen national guardsmen at the border to address humanitarian needs in a remote corridor for border-crossing immigration. The change.org petition, initiated by John Daniel of Ruidoso, New Mexico, says that Lujan Grisham has "overruled" Mr. Trump's authorization to deploy National Guard troops to the southern border and in doing so, claims that the governor "has deliberately and recklessly aided our enemies in illegal entry to the state, committing illegal activities and endangering the safety of its citizens."

Defiant wrote: ↑Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:18 am US Border Patrol Only Fed Pork Sandwiches To Muslim Detainee For Nearly A Week

Texas, it figures. People wonder if there is evil in the world - you need look no further.