Pelosi finally actually moves to Impeach Trump

[Saelune]

So its ok to torture them as long as they are here illegally?

That's pretty far out of left field. No.

We arent talking deportation. If we were, why are they kept in these concentration camps indefinitely?

Deportations take time. I truly wish they could be sped up and that these camps were vacant because all the people there were back in their home countries.

So you mean, like when Obama was President?

It was Trump who made it worse.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Deporting a person who is in the country illegally is not a violation of their rights.

You realize illegal immigrants are still entitled to due process, equal protection, legal representation, and the privilege of habeas corpus, and prohibited from illegal searches and seizures, and cruel and unusual punishment, right? No civil liberty in the Constitution as enumerated by plain text -- even post-Heller interpretation of the Second Amendment -- is restricted by citizenship. No, the vote is a civil right, not a liberty, and therefore not applicable to the discussion.

 

[Trunkage]

So its ok to torture them as long as they are here illegally?

That's pretty far out of left field. No.

We arent talking deportation. If we were, why are they kept in these concentration camps indefinitely?

Deportations take time. I truly wish they could be sped up and that these camps were vacant because all the people there were back in their home countries.

I'm assuming you think that most of the people in camps should be deported.

How many people from those camps have been deported already, do you think?

 

[Abomination]

Deporting a person who is in the country illegally is not a violation of their rights.

You realize illegal immigrants are still entitled to due process, equal protection, legal representation, and the privilege of habeas corpus, and prohibited from illegal searches and seizures, and cruel and unusual punishment, right? No civil liberty in the Constitution as enumerated by plain text -- even post-Heller interpretation of the Second Amendment -- is restricted by citizenship. No, the vote is a civil right, not a liberty, and therefore not applicable to the discussion.

They did say "deporting" and they made no argument that they should be denied due process.

 

[Avnger]

Deporting a person who is in the country illegally is not a violation of their rights.

You realize illegal immigrants are still entitled to due process, equal protection, legal representation, and the privilege of habeas corpus, and prohibited from illegal searches and seizures, and cruel and unusual punishment, right? No civil liberty in the Constitution as enumerated by plain text -- even post-Heller interpretation of the Second Amendment -- is restricted by citizenship. No, the vote is a civil right, not a liberty, and therefore not applicable to the discussion.

They did say "deporting" and they made no argument that they should be denied due process.

The context of the conversation was in regards to ICE raids. ICE raids and detentions have a very well documented history of human rights abuses including a denial of due process.

 

[Abomination]

The context of the conversation was in regards to ICE raids. ICE raids and detentions have a very well documented history of human rights abuses including a denial of due process.

And just because some deportations are done ignoring due process does not mean that all are done ignoring due process.

While I do believe that illegal immigration is a mountain that was made out of a molehill according to US perspective, a nation has the right to turn people away from its borders. Someone who manages to enter a nation without even obtaining a Visitor visa, or a residency visa, or a work or student visa, or some sort of refugee status, or at least some form of documentation of entry, is 100% unwelcome and would be turned away at the border without due process - so just because they managed to evade border security grants them additional rights? People are to be rewarded for entering a country illegally in a smart/lucky way?

 

[Silvanus]

so just because they managed to evade border security grants them additional rights? People are to be rewarded for entering a country illegally in a smart/lucky way?

What's "additional" about it? There exists a very baseline level of responsibility a state has towards everybody within it. It doesn't include unlimited residency, but it most certainly includes legal representation and basic human rights.

That's not additional. It's far less than the privileges enjoyed by those with settled status in the US.

 

[tstorm823]

so just because they managed to evade border security grants them additional rights? People are to be rewarded for entering a country illegally in a smart/lucky way?

That's essentially why people are detained at all. They have the right to plead their case in court before being deported.

 

[Abomination]

so just because they managed to evade border security grants them additional rights? People are to be rewarded for entering a country illegally in a smart/lucky way?

What's "additional" about it? There exists a very baseline level of responsibility a state has towards everybody within it. It doesn't include unlimited residency, but it most certainly includes legal representation and basic human rights.

That's not additional. It's far less than the privileges enjoyed by those with settled status in the US.

A person who seeks to enter the country without authority is prevented entry if they can not provide it. No trial, no investigation, just straight up "No. Go away."

But if someone manages to enter the nation by sneaking in they now get those additional protections because they managed to get caught after they crossed the border. Those who follow the law get a more raw deal than those who don't.

 

[Silvanus]

A person who seeks to enter the country without authority is prevented entry if they can not provide it. No trial, no investigation, just straight up "No. Go away."

But if someone manages to enter the nation by sneaking in they now get those additional protections because they managed to get caught after they crossed the border. Those who follow the law get a more raw deal than those who don't.

Those outside the country are supposed to be conveyed legal protections and basic human rights by the state they're in. Crossing the border doesn't somehow convey special privileges; at every stage, they are entitled to the basic status mandated by international law.

The willingness people have to deny legal representation is honestly quite astounding.

 

[Trunkage]

so just because they managed to evade border security grants them additional rights? People are to be rewarded for entering a country illegally in a smart/lucky way?

What's "additional" about it? There exists a very baseline level of responsibility a state has towards everybody within it. It doesn't include unlimited residency, but it most certainly includes legal representation and basic human rights.

That's not additional. It's far less than the privileges enjoyed by those with settled status in the US.

A person who seeks to enter the country without authority is prevented entry if they can not provide it. No trial, no investigation, just straight up "No. Go away."

But if someone manages to enter the nation by sneaking in they now get those additional protections because they managed to get caught after they crossed the border. Those who follow the law get a more raw deal than those who don't.

You could also claimed that the ones following the law are the stupid ones. Current wait times for America is by the decade. Meaning its literally useless standing in line. The line is going nowhere.

These wait times are done by design. Its to put off people wanting to go to America. Hence people found another way to have their case being heard.

If your waiting in line, you are smart enough to realise the reality of the situation and will probably be excluded on that basis alone

 

[tstorm823]

You could also claimed that the ones following the law are the stupid ones. Current wait times for America is by the decade. Meaning its literally useless standing in line. The line is going nowhere.

These wait times are done by design. Its to put off people wanting to go to America. Hence people found another way to have their case being heard.

If your waiting in line, you are smart enough to realise the reality of the situation and will probably be excluded on that basis alone

You're talking about immigration wait times (which is a stupid mess that everyone knows needs reform). But people who get detained and wait for a hearing are mostly pleading for asylum, and asylum doesn't have a decade long line to wait it. You can ask for asylum at the border without waiting jumping over or waiting 10 years.

 

[Abomination]

A person who seeks to enter the country without authority is prevented entry if they can not provide it. No trial, no investigation, just straight up "No. Go away."

But if someone manages to enter the nation by sneaking in they now get those additional protections because they managed to get caught after they crossed the border. Those who follow the law get a more raw deal than those who don't.

Those outside the country are supposed to be conveyed legal protections and basic human rights by the state they're in. Crossing the border doesn't somehow convey special privileges; at every stage, they are entitled to the basic status mandated by international law.

So the nation that they occupy is the one that is responsible for their well-being even if the nation they're in did not want them to enter that nation in the first place? "Haha, you touched it last, your problem now."

The willingness people have to deny legal representation is honestly quite astounding.

Folk should have legal representation, but there comes a point where someone breaks into a store, is being told to leave by the owner, but the owner is then expected to pay for the trespasser's room and board while they remain in the store and then organize the legal proceedings to have them evicted from the store.

Seeking asylum I am 100% behind but one should still apply openly and honestly about it.

 

[CaitSeith]

The context of the conversation was in regards to ICE raids. ICE raids and detentions have a very well documented history of human rights abuses including a denial of due process.

And just because some deportations are done ignoring due process does not mean that all are done ignoring due process.

Enough of them have ignored due process to become a problem. Specially now that ICE targets American citizens that look suspicious.

 

[Bedinsis]

Took me forever to actually post a response to your post, but better late than never.

The reason I asked for your predictions earlier was due to my own knowledge of my lack of knowledge regarding how things are in the US and how people are thinking about it, so your doubt of non-Americans being able to understand and predict how things would turn out was in my opinion possibly grounded in some truth. I will however say that nobody knows everything so despite my acknowledged limited perspective I will respond with my thoughts to your predictions.

Easy 1)Joe Biden is not going to win the nomination.

Yeah, no real objections here. Even if I knew nothing of Biden the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of Democratic nominees. Some of them will have to drop out. More specifically of Biden: Hillary Clinton tried to become president as a previous cabinet member with media presence stretching back and failed; it makes sense that background is not as valued.

Easy 2)Elizabeth Warren takes down Bernie Sanders to win the nomination.

From what I've seen she seem to attract the attention of people that went for Bernie in the previous Democratic primary, so sure, I can see that happening.

Easy 3)Democrats move for impeachment in the lead up to the election.

*scratches forehead* What was the title of this thread again?

Easy 3)(cont.) On the off-chance Trump is ousted, they win big. But on the much more likely chance the Senate doesn't remove Trump, they use the "failed attempt" as a rallying cry to push voter turnout expecting a win that way.

Ah, the prediction is what will happen with the impeachment. Yeah you're repeating what I've heard elsewhere regarding if impeachment attempts are meaningful, so I cannot really object. And the Democrats would only move for impeachment if they either thought the cause was ground for impeachment or if it provided enough the appearance thereof for them to try to impeach, so it's only natural for them to campaign that the sitting president ought to be impeached.

Bold Prediction List (if I'm right about these, I expect you all to make me famous):

*scratches forehead again* Does that mean you actually believe these predictions? Or what do you mean?

Bold 2)Partisan demographics shift slightly. The male/female divide between Democrats and Republicans widens slightly, but the racial divide slightly weakens as specifically young men in racial minorities vote more for Trump than 2016. This results in a slight boon for Trump when all combined.

I honestly don't think this is a long-shot. If we accept that Warren secures the nomination, and the US population reminds as dug-in in their current opinions on election day as when Trump was elected, then there probably will only be slight differences in how people vote. And sexism is a thing, so if one party is represented by a woman and the other by a man then those for whom that is important, however slightly, will make some difference. With that in mind, Warren gaining more female votes and Trump gaining more male votes makes sense. And people voting more along gender lines than along "race" lines I don't see as improbable.

Bold 1) National Popular Vote Interstate makes the election a democratic one.
[---]
Bold 3) National Popular Vote Interstate leads to victory for Trump, who'd otherwise lose.

Your post is the first time I've ever heard of the National Popular Vote Interstate. For this reason I think this will not happen. If it was likely to happen more people would've talked about it.

Since predictions are fun, even if you look back at it in a year and can only laugh at your own stupidity of the time, I'm gonna make my own prediction:

Trump will, if elected for a second term, be impeached. He has enough skeletons in the closet that one of them ought to be grounds enough for impeachment, and I don't think he's clever enough to have them all covered up. And one of them ought to be either compromising enough that Republicans would lose all the face if they did not move for impeachment or not be "friendly fire" enough that any leading Republican would get caught in the crossfire. My read is that the Republicans do not like Trump since he's an outsider that usurped the nomination, and he hardly is presidential. If they can secure a way to get rid of him without it reflecting badly on the GOP and therefore hurt their chances to get reelected they'll do it.

 

[Trunkage]

You could also claimed that the ones following the law are the stupid ones. Current wait times for America is by the decade. Meaning its literally useless standing in line. The line is going nowhere.

These wait times are done by design. Its to put off people wanting to go to America. Hence people found another way to have their case being heard.

If your waiting in line, you are smart enough to realise the reality of the situation and will probably be excluded on that basis alone

You're talking about immigration wait times (which is a stupid mess that everyone knows needs reform). But people who get detained and wait for a hearing are mostly pleading for asylum, and asylum doesn't have a decade long line to wait it. You can ask for asylum at the border without waiting jumping over or waiting 10 years.

When you say mess, what do you mean.

Mr personally, it's just that the numbers we (all countries) are taking are so low, it's never going to clear.

But then, I personally find it funny that Trump's trying to build a wall when there are more Chinese immigrants seeking asylum the wrong way than Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador combined.

Edit: I also find it funny that Australia is taking in more refugees than America currently. Even in its height under Obama, it was only a few thousand more than Australia.

 

[Abomination]

The context of the conversation was in regards to ICE raids. ICE raids and detentions have a very well documented history of human rights abuses including a denial of due process.

And just because some deportations are done ignoring due process does not mean that all are done ignoring due process.

Enough of them have ignored due process to become a problem. Specially now that ICE targets American citizens that look suspicious.

Yes, but it's a bit of a baby and bathwater scenario here. Just because some people have been hard done by does not mean that deportations should not happen.

 

[tstorm823]

When you say mess, what do you mean.

Mr personally, it's just that the numbers we (all countries) are taking are so low, it's never going to clear.

But then, I personally find it funny that Trump's trying to build a wall when there are more Chinese immigrants seeking asylum the wrong way than Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador combined.

Edit: I also find it funny that Australia is taking in more refugees than America currently. Even in its height under Obama, it was only a few thousand more than Australia.

The immigration system in America is generally pretty lenient on qualifications, basically if someone here wants you or your country of residence doesn't want you and you aren't a felon, you qualify. But not really, because there's a ridiculous bureaucratic labyrinth of quotas and limits to get through, and some people will die before they get here because people once feared we'd just have too many Irish to deal with that now Indians get snubbed. And it's totally possible for someone to be told "we're sorry, we've got too many rich immigrants already, try again next year." All of that is a mess.

We have a system, where we let large amounts of people into the country on visas, and tell them that they have to leave when the visa expires, knowing full well that we are very literally incapable of enforcing that. That is a mess.

 

[Trunkage]

When you say mess, what do you mean.

Mr personally, it's just that the numbers we (all countries) are taking are so low, it's never going to clear.

But then, I personally find it funny that Trump's trying to build a wall when there are more Chinese immigrants seeking asylum the wrong way than Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador combined.

Edit: I also find it funny that Australia is taking in more refugees than America currently. Even in its height under Obama, it was only a few thousand more than Australia.

The immigration system in America is generally pretty lenient on qualifications, basically if someone here wants you or your country of residence doesn't want you and you aren't a felon, you qualify. But not really, because there's a ridiculous bureaucratic labyrinth of quotas and limits to get through, and some people will die before they get here because people once feared we'd just have too many Irish to deal with that now Indians get snubbed. And it's totally possible for someone to be told "we're sorry, we've got too many rich immigrants already, try again next year." All of that is a mess.

We have a system, where we let large amounts of people into the country on visas, and tell them that they have to leave when the visa expires, knowing full well that we are very literally incapable of enforcing that. That is a mess.

How do you intend to track them? Becuase that is not an only American issue. Our immigration system is worried about boat people (similar to Trumps Wall) but rounding up boat people hasnt stopped illegal immigrants. Because it's only a small part of the issue

And we have locked up the boat people for 6 years. I see these border camps in the US being the same, unable to send them home, unwilling to let them in. They'll be stuck in limbo for years. See also Somalia having the same refugee camps from the war in 91. No one in or outside of Somalia wants them so they just languish

 

[tstorm823]

How do you intend to track them? Becuase that is not an only American issue. Our immigration system is worried about boat people (similar to Trumps Wall) but rounding up boat people hasnt stopped illegal immigrants. Because it's only a small part of the issue

And we have locked up the boat people for 6 years. I see these border camps in the US being the same, unable to send them home, unwilling to let them in. They'll be stuck in limbo for years. See also Somalia having the same refugee camps from the war in 91. No one in or outside of Somalia wants them so they just languish

I wouldn't intend to track visa overstays, if that's the question. If someone passes background checks and qualifies for a visa, I wouldn't put a date they had to leave by. I'd say "welcome to America, we owe you nothing, and we'll kick you out if you cause trouble. Otherwise stay as long as you'd like." Because while I love a a good system of law and order, writing unfeasible laws is a bad system of law and order. Even if I wanted everyone to stop picking their nose, I wouldn't ban it, because the law would accomplish nothing but making people respect laws less.

The people in the detention centers aren't like that. We are very capable of sending them back. It's just that immigration courts aren't keeping up with demand at the moment. But admittedly, the US isn't positioned to have as bad a refugee crisis as places outside of the Americas. Europe, Asia, and Africa just have so many situations where a millennium old cultural minority can get pinched off by modern political boundaries and suddenly be homeless. The Americas don't really have that situation in the same way. We also don't have a whole lot of major international conflict these days in this hemisphere. People may colorfully describe the Northern Triangle as a war zone, but deporting someone to Honduras is not the same thing as sending someone back to Syria right now.