nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Leroy42

Manic, do you think Trump is right to pursue a policy of separating children from their parents?

Is it the right thing to be doing, or just the best way to achieve the aim?

Call me Al

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not very pleasantly, obviously.

But the policy is simple enough. Of all the various options listed, the one which is not listed is the ability for the arrested parent to retain the child. Policies usually have an exemption for newborns.

Out of mild curiousity, what is the policy of Gardai when arresting an immigrant, or a sole parent? Is the child taken to the jail cell with the parent?

I think you know yourself Manic Moran that guards won't put children in jail. But they equally won't put them in a cage in a warehouse. And equally our government won't use them as collateral damage in an attempt to get their own way.

Water John

Manic, this is part of Point 2 you made above,
'The folks most objecting are mainly the ones who aren't so keen on Trump in the first place.'
Does this apply to his wife?

Manic Moran

Manic, do you think Trump is right to pursue a policy of separating children from their parents?

Is it the right thing to be doing, or just the best way to achieve the aim?

The latter, very obviously. I'm not even sure it's the best way, but it's obviously intended as a means to an end.

There is no inherent value in the criminal prosecution of illegal immigrants. They probably can't pay the fine, and a jail sentence will simply stretch already stretched incarceration budgets. Further, the children would have to be separated anyway, and repatriated back to the child welfare services of the originating country. Not really a fantastic outcome for anyone.

The best solution is to reduce the incoming traffic to begin with. Either by increased border enforcement, which is where the leverage aspect comes in, or by reducing incentive, which is where the deterrent effect comes in. This latter seems to be the expected outcome from Border Patrol. See interview here. https://www.msnbc.com/velshi-ruhle/watch/what-is-being-done-to-protect-children-at-the-border-1255813187850

everlast75

Manic Moran wrote: »

The latter, very obviously. I'm not even sure it's the best way, but it's obviously intended as a means to an end.

There is no inherent value in the criminal prosecution of illegal immigrants. They probably can't pay the fine, and a jail sentence will simply stretch already stretched incarceration budgets. Further, the children would have to be separated anyway, and repatriated back to the child welfare services of the originating country. Not really a fantastic outcome for anyone.

The best solution is to reduce the incoming traffic to begin with. Either by increased border enforcement, which is where the leverage aspect comes in, or by reducing incentive, which is where the deterrent effect comes in. This latter seems to be the expected outcome from Border Patrol. See interview here. https://www.msnbc.com/velshi-ruhle/watch/what-is-being-done-to-protect-children-at-the-border-1255813187850

No. He's not looking for increased border enforcement. That's not true. He is looking to build a wall.

They are two different things. The wall is a glory project for him. Nothing more

Secondly, with regard to the deterrent argument, the ends do not justify the means.

robinph

everlast75 wrote: »

No. He's not looking for increased border enforcement. That's not true. He is looking to build a wall.

They are two different things. The wall is a glory project for him. Nothing more

Secondly, with regard to the deterrent argument, the ends do not justify the means.

Regarding the deterrent argument, the death penalty for murder works so well doesn't it. Nobody ever gets killed in death penalty states after all.

MarinersBlues

Manic Moran wrote: »

The best solution is to reduce the incoming traffic to begin with. Either by increased border enforcement, which is where the leverage aspect comes in, or by reducing incentive, which is where the deterrent effect comes in. This latter seems to be the expected outcome from Border Patrol. See interview here. https://www.msnbc.com/velshi-ruhle/watch/what-is-being-done-to-protect-children-at-the-border-1255813187850

Have you any opinion on reducing the incentive by encouraging economic growth in Mexico through trade?
Potentially improving the standard of living in both Mexico and the US.

Manic Moran

MarinersBlues wrote: »

Have you any opinion on reducing the incentive by encouraging economic growth in Mexico through trade?
Potentially improving the standard of living in both Mexico and the US.

I'm no economist, but I am cynical about the concept of sufficient growth being made by trade so as to render the current problem at the border irrelevant and not worthy of dealing with. The US and Canada can only do so much to aid the Mexican economy.

Nobody ever gets killed in death penalty states after all

The recidivism rate is pretty low, though...

No. He's not looking for increased border enforcement. That's not true. He is looking to build a wall.

Agreed. Republicans as a whole, though, will be happy with increased border enforcement to include physical measures. Partially wall, partially sensors. If it's a virtual wall, that's good enough for them, and probably good enough for the voters.

MarinersBlues

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm no economist, but I am cynical about the concept of sufficient growth being made by trade so as to render the current problem at the border irrelevant and not worthy of dealing with. The US and Canada can only do so much to aid the Mexican economy.

Thanks for answering.

I am, and I do think it would work.
Socially, people are not inclined to move in big numbers once they can put a roof over their heads, feed themselves, and have some hope for their children being able to do so in the future.

FWIW I also think Europe should be pumping money into Uganda and the Lebanon to sort out our issues.
Nobody wants to leave their home if they have any chance of building a life there.

Captain Obvious

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not very pleasantly, obviously.

But the policy is simple enough. Of all the various options listed, the one which is not listed is the ability for the arrested parent to retain the child. Policies usually have an exemption for newborns.

Out of mild curiousity, what is the policy of Gardai when arresting an immigrant, or a sole parent? Is the child taken to the jail cell with the parent?

In the section under "Booking" in the document you linked.

If the arrest creates an interruption
in a child’s supervision and care, the arrestee
must be given reasonable opportunities to make
alternative arrangements for care if this has not
already been addressed by the arresting officer(s)
or other personnel.

So according to that document the detainee should be given the option of arranging care for the minor.

As to your question about policy in Ireland, what kind of circumstance are you referring to? If a person in charge of a child is arrested and detained then another family member will be sought. If that cannot be organised then TUSLA will place them with an emergency foster family. But the difference being illegals aren't arrested and detained immediately upon being discovered in Ireland.

20Cent

There seems to be no bottom to how low trump and his supporters will go. If you are arguing for children to be locked up best check yourself.

Call me Al

20Cent wrote: »

There seems to be no bottom to how low trump and his supporters will go. If you are arguing for children to be locked up best check yourself.

This is the president who had to bring a list of sympathy lines with him to trot out when he was meeting with the Florida shooting survivors.

He is simply incapable of feeling empathy towards anyone. This tactic won't change unless he begins to feel it will impact on him directly be that personally or politically.

TomOnBoard

I see Herr Gruppenfuhrer Miller being jettisoned in the near future as his supremacist strategies are seen by Trump to be perhaps a bit too extreme!

Gbear

Personally I think the massive undermining of the Mexican state by creating and maintaining a drug war for puritanical or cynical, profit-driven reasons is a bigger issue than trade.

Whatever about having a roof over my head, I wouldn't want to stick around in a place where drug barons murder people by the thousands.

Trump has, I believe, made some noise about supporting states rights to end prohibition, but as with anything he says, you can't really take it on faith. Sessions has been vocally against it, and as a religious fanatic, I'm sure Pence isn't keen either.

20Cent

So he's now announced a new branch of the military called the space force.

[Deleted User]

And used the phrase "Separate but equal". The ignorance is amazing.

pixelburp

20Cent wrote: »

So he's now announced a new branch of the military called the space force.

I'm quite sure this isn't the first time he has blathered on about a "space force" either, cos I'm nearly certain he spoke of one at another event that became sidetracked by unrelated brain farts. And for those wondering, yes, he is absolutely referring to a new branch of the military formed of space marines.

Remember when Newt Gingrich (wasn't it?) was rightly mocked for talking of moon bases? I guess the bar for pie in the sky waffle is so low now it's practically quaint to talk of mere astronaut soldiers as a real serious idea. AT a NASA event too - those Houston folks must have had a devil of a time stifling the laughter...

Thargor

Every newsfeed and website I subscribe to is just wall to wall children ripped from parents and thrown in cages, could we finally be seeing something that will actually damage them?

TomOnBoard

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm quite sure this isn't the first time he has blathered on about a "space force" either, cos I'm nearly certain he spoke of one at another event that became sidetracked by unrelated brain farts. And for those wondering, yes, he is absolutely referring to a new branch of the military formed of space marines.

Remember when Newt Gingrich (wasn't it?) was rightly mocked for talking of moon bases? I guess the bar for pie in the sky waffle is so low now it's practically quaint to talk of mere astronaut soldiers as a real serious idea. AT a NASA event too - those Houston folks must have had a devil of a time stifling the laughter...

Sounds like Vietnam revisited... Spaced-out Marines have been around for decades...

PopePalpatine

I guess it could mobilise Latino voters who didn't vote in 2016, I doubt it would significantly flip Republican voters.

LeinsterDub

Thargor wrote: »

Every newsfeed and website I subscribe to is just wall to wall children ripped from parents and thrown in cages, could we finally be seeing something that will actually damage them?

I honestly don't think America cares or at least elected Republicans don't care.

Muslim ban, guns massacres nearly daily, EPA being dismantled, healthcare being stripped from the poor. I could go on.

hmmm

It takes a lot to get me upset, and I haven't much time for left-wing politics, but what is going on now in the U.S. with the separation of families is beyond anything normal - a line has been crossed in my view. This is institutionalised child abuse, and we had enough of it in this country 40 years ago. These are not the actions of even a rogue state, these are the actions of real and present fascists.

It's time for sanctions on the U.S. If another country was doing this, the UN would be meeting to respond.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoncXfYBAVI

Kermit.de.frog

20Cent wrote: »

So he's now announced a new branch of the military called the space force.

This has been brought up before incidentally

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfHPLpXKfWg

Not sure how US taxpayers will feel about this!

Danzy

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I guess it could mobilise Latino voters who didn't vote in 2016, I doubt it would significantly flip Republican voters.

They are often more supportive of initiatives like this than others.

Reagan oversaw the opening up of migration, especially illegal migration, backed by the neo liberal right and well to do progressives.

The Latino community aren't strongly represented in those groups.

BabyCheeses

Thargor wrote: »

Every newsfeed and website I subscribe to is just wall to wall children ripped from parents and thrown in cages, could we finally be seeing something that will actually damage them?

I doubt it. Immigrants, especially ones who could be illegal are barely people to them. They could kill the children and you would still get a worrying amount of people being ok with it and blaming the parents for taking them there.

TomOnBoard

20Cent wrote: »

So he's now announced a new branch of the military called the space force.

"Space is a warfighting domain, so it is vital that our military maintains its dominance and competitive advantage in that domain."

FFS - Megalomania knows no bounds!!

pixelburp

hmmm wrote: »

It takes a lot to get me upset, and I haven't much time for left-wing politics, but what is going on now in the U.S. with the separation of families is beyond anything normal - a line has been crossed in my view. This is institutionalised child abuse, and we had enough of it in this country 40 years ago. These are not the actions of even a rogue state, these are the actions of real and present fascists.

It's time for sanctions on the U.S. If another country was doing this, the UN would be meeting to respond.

And would it surprise anyone to learn that apparently Ann Coulter has already declared these kids as "child actors", truly embracing her inner Alex Jones. You can forget about X% of republican leaning folk being turned, because American politics is so fanatical now they'll dismiss the audio as fake news.

I've seen some of the transcripts of the recording from the child detention centre (good god what a thing to type), and I can't bring myself to listen. It sounds heartbreaking and awful. Stephen Miller is some piece of work.

Billy Mays

Majority of Republicans support the policy

This is what that party has become

Hurrache

Apparently Space Cops may be illegal based on a treaty from way back that the US are a party to, not that treaties amount to much these days

https://www.state.gov/t/isn/5181.htm

Itssoeasy

I'm the same in regards to this current issue involving kids as young as two been separated from their patents. I mean surely to Christ the people in this administration have some bit of a heart or empathy for the kids ? The adults did break the law and I'm not saying they should get into the USA and stay(I think all countries have a right to border security) but the kids I'm sorry that's a different issue.

I mean America goes on constantly about being a Christian country and all that yet they seem to not show even the slightest bit of so called Christian compassion for children. This administration is even lying about the actual law they are basing this current action on. They are blaming the democrats even though it's a policy that was implemented by this one in April.