ChiGoose

Who even knows anymore? Verification means nothing, facts are whatever, and nobody is on Truth Social. I just don’t think it’s super likely a judge is going to jail Trump over attacking the judge themself. All that aside, the Brooklyn Dad guy seems a bit too resistance-gritty for my liking.

I cannot believe you are criticizing noted court reporter Julie Kelly, whose credentials include graduating from [TBD] law school, being admitted to the bar of [state] and a long history of [x] years of being a legal professional. It’s almost as if you believe she’s a nobody who knows nothing but gullible people like that she tells them lies that fit their narratives…

I doubt a judge will consider him attacking them a violation because they don’t want it to seem personal. We saw this in NYC where the judge didn’t say much about Trump bashing him but threw the gauntlet down when Trump bashed one of the judge’s employees.

I find it interesting that so many people believe that Dems want open borders while the GOP wants to solve the border crisis. Both are lies.

Love that you believe the open borders nonsense. It’s the dumbest lie for the dumbest people and you have bitten hook line and sinker. Add in that most of the influx of people are asylum seekers, which makes them legal, not illegal, and it just adds to your ignorance. And so you take all of this idiocy that you believe and use it to justify treating vulnerable people like ***** because it makes you feel good. That’s a lot of justification to avoid recognizing that you’re the bad guy.

Your continued insistence on completely missing the point is remarkable. Also, seems like fraudulently inducing people to cross state lines for your personal political benefit might fit that definition there, buddy.

I just used the actual meaning of the words. Sorry if that’s a problem for you for some reason. Dictionary.com noun a city in which the local government and police protect undocumented immigrants and refugees from deportation by federal authorities: sanctuary cities where law enforcement cannot question crime suspects about their immigration status. Merriam-Webster “relating to or being a locality that provides limited cooperation to federal officials in the enforcement of immigration laws or policies”

I defined sanctuary city as it is actually defined and expressed my opposition for allowing people to die. Being on this board makes me wonder if being unable to read leads to conservatism or vice versa. But in any case, it is reassuring to see that pride of ignorance appears to be a staple of people who disagree with me.

How should one handle these events? Cheer the potential death of NICU babies? The real fun part is that most righties live in a fantasy world and unfortunately seem to enjoy the suffering of others.

WTF are you talking about?

If Greg Abbott called up JB Pritzker and said “We cannot handle this influx of people, can you help?” and Pritzker said no, then Abbott can go public with that; showing the hypocrisy of the Dems. Instead, he is shipping people across the country and delivering them with no warning to different communities. Here, Chicago is working to provide housing and resources for them but it takes time and they aren’t given notice of how many people are arriving and when. These people have trekked hundreds or even thousands of miles to find safety and the GOP is treating them as less than human. The whole sanctuary city thing is about how do you make people comfortable reporting crime if they are undocumented. If someone witnesses a crime, or is a victim of a crime, they are not likely to report the crime if the believe they will be deported. This provides great opportunities for abusers and other criminals to take advantage of them. By not handing over suspected illegal immigrants to ICE, sanctuary cities try to provide them with an environment where they can report crime. Of course, if you listen to the right wing propaganda that actually somehow has convinced people that the Dems want open borders (idiotic and obviously false), then I can see why you are confused as to what a sanctuary city is and means.

If you think shipping families across the country and just leaving them at someone’s doorstep with no warning is fun and good, then you’re just a bad person. If you still believe this open borders nonsense, then you’re a dumb person. What bothers me, as I have stated, is harming families for political points. I find the idea that someone would do it disgusting and the fact that so many people think it’s good is a shame on our country. As I stated earlier, if the border states wanted to work with other states to help take in the influx of people and provide them with housing and services, that’s fine and good. Busing people across the country and dropping them off random place with little to no warning is evil.

Oh, so it might be human trafficking if they were tricked with false information, huh? The Story Behind DeSantis’s Migrant Flights to Martha’s Vineyard Asylum seekers in Texas were recruited for the flights by a woman who appeared to be a former Army counterintelligence agent. “We were tricked,” one migrant said. “There were jobs there, they were told, and people to help them. The woman provided the mostly destitute migrants with free meals at McDonald’s and a place to stay at a nearby La Quinta Inn before the flight. The migrants each received a red folder containing a map of the United States, with an arrow stretching from Texas to Massachusetts. Another map in the shape of Martha’s Vineyard had a dot for the airport and one for the community services center. Also in the folder was a brochure, apparently fake, titled “Refugee Migrant Benefits,” in English and Spanish. The cover proclaimed, “Massachusetts Welcomes You,” and featured a state flag that was not in fact the state flag. Listed on the back were the names and numbers of a church, a synagogue and a nonprofit on Martha’s Vineyard. The pamphlet, reviewed by The Times, also promised “up to eight months of cash assistance” for “income-eligible” refugees in Massachusetts, apparently mimicking benefits offered to refugees who arrive in the United States through the country’s official resettlement program, which the Venezuelans were not part of.” “We were tricked in Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Mexico — and then in the United States,” said Carlos Guanaguanay, 25, who was approached by the woman called Perla while strolling the aisles of a supermarket near a shelter where he had been staying in San Antonio. He had told her he was searching for work, and she made him an offer he found hard to resist. *** Staff members at the community center in Martha’s Vineyard arranged for a migrant named Pablo to call home to Venezuela, Ms. Rolanti said. He appeared broken. “My love, we were tricked,” he told his wife, weeping uncontrollably. “This woman lied to us. She lied.”

Shipping vulnerable people across the country as part of a game to score political points is bad. That shouldn’t be a controversial opinion.

I appreciate the entertainment you provide on the rare occasions you are actually able to understand the written word.

LOL. You’re a joke. I’ve only ever voted for a Dem for president once. But apparently explaining reality to people who have isolated themselves in a fantasyland is very triggering to people like you. Yeah, ***** those kids, right? Who cares about kids, families, or people risking everything to survive when you can score political points?

I’ve already stated it earlier in this thread, but I’m opposed to an open border. I guess just assuming what other people believe is super convenient for the right because it seems to be all you guys ever do. I also already outlined what I think would help the situation without major changes to immigration law. I personally think that anyone who is ok with the human trafficking currently being done by Texas should be ridiculed, mocked, and shunned from decent society for the rest of their lives. They should never be able to be in public without being shamed. But that’s just me, I guess.

I’m talking about reality. Our immigration system is broken and some people have decided to leverage that for political gain by harming people. Sadly, it seems that this is actually popular with a lot of voters. Cruelty is the point, I guess. I don’t understand what your fascination is with being incredibly wrong all of the time. You seem to be completely and fundamentally incapable of understanding anything behind the fiction you’ve wrapped yourself in. I’m not sure if you just don’t understand how to read or if you’ve so encased yourself in your fantasyland that you cannot accept or even recognize reality. Everything seems to just be projection for you. It’s really sad.

So you agree that Texas and Florida should be arranging for care of the refugees who arrive there instead of busing them to other places with little to no notice? The biggest issue that I can see is that people want to traffic refugees for political points and astoundingly some people think this is a good thing. Last I checked, cities don’t set border policy. Neither do states. It would be fine for a red state governor to call blue state governors and try to arrange for them to help with the volumes of refugees. If the blue states refused, then that’s a pretty powerful message for the red state governor to use in the next election. It is unquestionably gross and disgusting to bus families and children across the county to place with little to no warning to be ready to care for them.

Sure. The city is working on how to provide them with safe shelter and necessities. Instead of trafficking people like Florida and Texas prefer to do.

There's a difference between coordinating with other cities to help deal with the surge in people and trafficking people across the country to just dump them off in other cities to make a political point. Frankly, whatever people believe about immigration and immigration laws, anyone who supports human trafficking for political points is a disgusting person.

A sanctuary city is simply a city that doesn't report suspected illegal immigrants to immigration enforcement. That's really it. Some cities do more with social services and such, some don't; but the main thing is that they don't hold people for immigration enforcement.

I'm not sure you understand what a sanctuary city actually is You'd have to go to the root causes of the crisis, which are many, including instability in Central America, underfunded/understaffed immigration courts, drug smuggling, etc. Much of the current crisis is being driven by refugees who are able to cross the border legally so long as they present themselves to the government and make their claim. However, the process can take a long time, which discourages compliance with the law and encourages them to find other means to enter the country. Here's a couple things that I think could put a good dent in the problem: Partner with some of the more stable Central American countries to coordinate processing of asylum claims and more orderly distribution of refugees throughout the region Increase funding and staffing for immigration courts and agencies to more quickly process claims If people could immigrate legally but would have to wait many years, they're more likely to come in illegally Immigration courts are currently severely under-resourced, causing delays to adjudication and creating incentives to enter illegally Beef up case management and other alternatives to detention It's expensive and often counter productive to house people while waiting for processing. This is especially true due to the delays caused by the overburdened immigration court system Having CBP officers handing out diapers and feeding immigrants isn't a good use of their time or talents Strong case management programs can help people navigate the immigration process and find safe and stable living conditions while their case is pending without requiring the US to house them A pilot ICE program called Family Case Management Program had an over 99% compliance rate with ICE check-ins and court appearances This allows people to be productive members of society while staying compliant with immigration laws Modify ports of entry to address increased immigration Ports of entry currently only allow a limited number of people to present claims per day. Legally, anyone should be able to present themselves at a port of entry to make a claim of asylum Currently, refugees have the choice of waiting for weeks or months to present their claim or finding another way into the country Ports of entry should be properly staffed to handle asylum claims in a timely manner, incentivizing people to enter the country legally Stabilizing the region Any aid to unstable Central American countries should be conditioned on progress on reforms and moving towards stability. Drugs I know it's controversial, but legalizing marijuana and looking at harm reduction policies for other harder drugs would reduce the demand for cartel drugs. Security Border security should be focused on how people actually come in to the country and utilize technology instead of a big dumb and expensive wall across the border Renovating and staffing the ports of entry to actually handle expected volumes of asylum claims would not only allow them to process people as they arrived, but it would incentivize future refugees to present themselves at ports and comply with the law instead of finding alternative pathways into the US More funding for sensors, drones, and other technologies that provide a low-cost, but more effective approach to identifying smugglers, drugs, and other contraband. Most contraband comes through ports of entry, so such technology, when paired with increases in staffing, should help catch more smuggling attempts Drones and cameras can provide real-time notice of people crossing the border outside of ports of entry Such solutions, however, would require strong conditions against their use to surveil US citizens living in the border zone I'd also like to see some comprehensive immigration reform that expands eligibility, but the above list is focused on how to reduce the crisis under existing law without changing who is able to enter legally and who is not.

It's actually not ok anywhere. It's just more disgusting when done by elected officials and celebrated by Americans.

You really truly believe that every Democrat believes the same thing huh? You've just created an idea of what a liberal is and assume every single person who votes Democrat believes the same thing. It's a ridiculous and childish thing to believe, but I bet it makes your feel good, which appears to be all that matters to you. Who cares about facts and truth when you can just slander everyone your disagree with? Ask yourself this: If the GOP has the solution for big cities, why can't they win elections?