Debates
20 Jun 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyWhat I asked for was your source for your claim that some of the video was 'hoaxed', complete with what you called 'fake cages'.
I hate to use CNN as a source for anything but I'm afraid you wouldn't trust some other source.
"It is not the first time that alarming photos of caged children have been wrongly attributed to Trump administration policies. A photograph showing two immigrant children sleeping in a fenced enclosure, which sparked outrage when it surfaced last month, t ...[text shortened]... is[/i] outrageous.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/18/us/photo-migrant-child-cage-trnd/index.html
Not photos of Obama-era detainees called Trump-era detainees.
Originally posted by @zahlanziAs a libertarian I am no fan of Trump nor closed borders but it's as plain as the nose on your face, if there is a relaxation on this kids will become a ticket, a commodity to be used to cross the border. Folk accompanying children will be given a pass and asked nicely to attend court for their illegal crossing but you guessed it, they never show, and the children? What happens to them once they've served their purpose.
he is the one who made the mess in the first place.
if a drunkard takes a crap in the middle of the street i don't give him praise that after the entire world screamed at him to clean it up he actually does it.
what the hell is wrong with you people. have you such low self esteem that you praise him for the most inane and common sense things?
zahlanzi self righteous indignation 🙄
zahlanzi logic 🙄
21 Jun 18
The post that was quoted here has been removedSpeaking of misleading or dishonest, perhaps you didn't read Tom's post where he claimed that video was 'hoaxed', with 'fake cages'.
What he produced was old news about photographs.
Still waiting for the source for his claims of a 'hoax'.
I'm not surprised to see you practically tripping over yourself in your rush to choose sides against me.
21 Jun 18
&t=71
first touches on the US leaving the UN human rights council then continues with the "human down vote" lewandowski mocking a young girl with down syndrome.
But none of that is important because someone here used a naughty word (to express outrage over an outrageous state of affairs), eh, tommy?
Fuk you, tommy
21 Jun 18
Originally posted by @wajomaAnother Trump apologist. Check.
As a libertarian I am no fan of Trump nor closed borders but it's as plain as the nose on your face, if there is a relaxation on this kids will become a ticket, a commodity to be used to cross the border. Folk accompanying children will be given a pass and asked nicely to attend court for their illegal crossing but you guessed it, they never show, and the c ...[text shortened]... once they've served their purpose.
zahlanzi self righteous indignation 🙄
zahlanzi logic 🙄
21 Jun 18
Originally posted by @suzianneThe article addressed your question AND had a photo. The Obama era detainees thing was tacked on as a bonus. All you wanted was proof of the "outrageous charge" that a protest with a cage used had a crying kid in it which was used as anti-Trump propaganda. The article I replied with was exactly what you asked for.
What I asked for was your source for your claim that some of the video was 'hoaxed', complete with what you called 'fake cages'.
Not photos of Obama-era detainees called Trump-era detainees.
Originally posted by @suzianneI did *NOT* say the video was hoaxed. Yes, the cage was fake because it was used as a prop at a protest, which I SAID from the very beginning.
Speaking of misleading or dishonest, perhaps you didn't read Tom's post where he claimed that video was 'hoaxed', with 'fake cages'.
What he produced was old news about photographs.
Still waiting for the source for his claims of a 'hoax'.
I'm not surprised to see you practically tripping over yourself in your rush to choose sides against me.
What you are doing is borderline dishonest but for how I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were in a hurry and didn't understand.
21 Jun 18
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyRight, taking credit for a policy he created by rescinding it. The whole thing was started deliberately to firm up his base, they even said so, they WANTED the left to rise up in horror thinking their base will rise up equally and cover the votes up that would be generated by all this hooplah.
Yep, there you have it folks. The mob screams bloody murder in a full rage... then Trump takes action since Congress wouldn't... and you condemn him for it. What you're actually mad about is, with the stroke of a pen, he removed this talking point from your arsenal.
And you fall for it hook line and sinker.
Great work. You also point out the Obama deal with the children in 2014 ignoring the fact there was a sharp rise in unaccompanied children crossing the border where the parents were thinking probably the kids would be fairly treated, maybe get turned into citizens or some such.
The difference is this: Those kids had to be housed somewhere and they were in cages like today but the difference is they were dealt with in the 20 day limit imposed. Today those thousands of children will be kept indefinitely with ZERO hope of ever getting back with their parents. They may be in those prisons for LITERALLY months. That ok with you? And now we find babies less than a year old have been secretly shipped all around the world with nobody able to actually visit and see for themselves the conditions they are in.
Another issue is the the law says places children are put in have to be in licensed facilities and they are running out of those so they (administration lawyers) are going to court today to try to kill that part of the settlement, so they can be housed in MILITARY prisons. Just think a gaggle of 2 year old kids in military prisons PRECISELY because they want to bypass the part where kids like that have to be housed in licensed facilities.
But of course the administration is not cynical right?
So from here on out those families will be held in prisons together which has to be a lot better right? Still doesn't address the issue of the thousand of children already in custody.
The executive order could just as easily reversed that also but being cynical is Trumps MO so no such deal.
How can you say you don't like Trump but are ok with all this?
Now even his own fixer, Cohen, has condemned Trump for this action. He also surprised us by resigning his post as some kind of head of the RNC, financial head, not sure of his post but why he wasn't kicked out of that post in view of his present legal difficulties but that just goes to show the lack of virtue by the republican party.
21 Jun 18
For those ghouls that insist it is righteous to send people in jail who enter the US illegally, here is a wonderful piece of information that I, as a romanian, know and you don't (because sam bee told me to google it and educate myself):
http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/crime-enter-illegally.html
Turns out that entering the US illegally is a federal misdemeanor. Other misdemeanors include wearing the US flag as underwear (which you right wing patriots don't have a problem with) and neglecting to answer census questions. So yes, you support sending a family to an internment camp, a crime so heinous it is ranked in the same category as a Carl's Jr commercial and for which i would wager nobody ever done time for.
21 Jun 18
Originally posted by @sonhouseI heard (did not read) that the limit is (or was) 30 days. Do you have a source for "indefinitely" or "months"?
the difference is they were dealt with in the 20 day limit imposed. Today those thousands of children will be kept indefinitely with ZERO hope of ever getting back with their parents. They may be in those prisons for LITERALLY months.
Originally posted by @tom-wolseyOriginally posted by @tom-wolsey
The article addressed your question AND had a photo. The Obama era detainees thing was tacked on as a bonus. All you wanted was proof of the "outrageous charge" that a protest with a cage used had a crying kid in it which was used as anti-Trump propaganda. The article I replied with was exactly what you asked for.
No. Although at least one of the crying children on video was, in fact, a hoax. The child was legitimately crying, but the context of it was completely made up. The child was at a protest behind a fake cage that was used as a prop in the protest.
I asked you for your source for this outrageous accusation, and you still haven't provided it.
Yes, you said 'hoax', and yes, you said 'fake cages'. You also mentioned this was at some other 'protest'. As I said, all we've seen about this so far from you is some old news about a photo.
If you can't source where the video was debunked as a 'hoax', then you should just say so.