WNC Ralf Loc: Candler NC, in the mountains!

Do not believe you could pass the test!

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

You are full of shit, you liar.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

You are half wittedly trying to justify murdering babies. Ass wipe.

Elaine2025 Loc: Seattle, Wa

Prove it you frigging pathological liar

SteveS Loc: The US is my home.

Not sure how this has anything to do with immigrants, unless they were the rapists or victims, but the rapist should be paying for any expenses ensured, whether it be abortion or birth, not the taxpayers.

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

You must be a special kind of stupid if you believe that. Most of those sneaking across the border seeking asylum are here legally? Why do you think they are called illegal. I don't have a problem with anyone who comes into this country through legal channels but illegally entry, kick em' out unless the Democrats who seem to want to give them everything are willing to pay 100% of their total upkeep. Why wouldn't they try to sneak in? Because if they do get to stay they are almost guaranteed a free ride. More than we give our own people in need. As a taxpayer I don't think my tax dollars should in any way be spent on illegals.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

First refuge of a scroundel is persistent accusations everyone else is lying!

It is established fact, for those who care to know, that most immigrants are seeking asylum, and that whether crossing at checkpoints or crossing the border in between checkpoints, application for asylum is legal and appropriate.

Them’s the fact, fat boy and bitch-mouth.

(Sounds like a TV series on HBO, “FatBoy and Bitch Mouth!!”)

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

You mean the way that Christians have taken care of unwanted babies in this country that should have been aborted???
Christians you have to house, feed etc all these unwanted children so we don’t have banks robbers, rapists, murderers, gang bangers etc.
You want unwanted babies, take care of then financially and school them....., yes I know, you don’t even school your own!!! What a bimbo you are!
SS

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

SteveS has advanced an idea which at least is defensible. I’m not certain whether he is being straight about it or exposing us to sarcasm. I don’t agree with it for immigrants, but I think it’s sound for the Abortion idea.

“Just how serious are the dem's with regard to illegal immigration?

Maybe each lib should be accessed a 10% or maybe a 25% tax on all income to support the illegals they want to bring in, how about charging each immigration protester a participation tax.

If their confections are real they should all be willing to come forth with the funds for lodging, food, medical care and any other needed support without putting undue stress on our economy. If they are not willing to provide for these needs, it's just more BS talk, with no substance.”

I think he means ‘convictions.”

So, how about it FatBoy and Bitch-Mouth? Are you ready to affirm that pregnancies that you insist come to term become your own responsibility, tasking you with their support or partial support, or perhaps a persistent tax—10% to 25% Steve suggests—for their support?

Can you stand to put your money where your Bitch-Mouth is?

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

You are ignoring one important thing. If they sneak across the border into the US it's illegal. Get that through your head. It doesn't matter why they are crossing.

Quinn 4

Huey Drive: What the hell were you fighting for, those so many years ago? Keep America a white man country?
Elaine 2025:" Fascist Lib Democrats" Love it, it show that you have no idea what you are writing about.

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

[quote=Quinn 4]Huey Drive: What the hell were you fighting for, those so many years ago? Keep America a white man country?
Elaine 2025:" Fascist Lib Democrats" Love it, it show that you have no idea what you are writing about.[/

I wasn't fighting for people to commit crimes and not be punished but rewarded instead as the Liberals seem to want to do. I feel sorry for them and care less about their color but America can't be the savior for the whole world. Now tell me how these border crosses aren't breaking the law and should be considered anything but illegals?

Quinn 4

Huey Drive: America has been the savior of the whole world going all the way back to Wilson and WW I . America has been look on as the "Kingdom on the Hill" since day one. We America love it. It is call our "Manifest Destiny"

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

Check out our national debt and how much it has increased in the last 15 years or so and tell me we can continue letting other people and countries suck off the great American tit? We have run dry and it's time for us to come to that realization and fix it and not continue on the same downward track or soon there will be no America.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Actually, you misunderstand yet again. It certainly Does matter why they are crossing if they are seeking asylum!

And yes, it is illegal to cross the border; the civil penalties include fines of $50-$250, approximately what you would pay for a ticket for jaywalking, which you probably do each and every day of your life.

Read on:

What Is Illegal Entry?

U.S. immigration law actually uses the term "improper entry," which has a broad meaning. It’s more than just slipping across the U.S. border at an unguarded point. Improper entry can include:

entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place other than one designated by U.S. immigration officers (in other words, away from a border inspection point or other port of entry)

eluding examination or inspection by U.S. immigration officers (people have tried everything from digging tunnels to hiding in the trunk of a friend’s car), or

attempting to enter or obtain entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or willful concealment of a material fact (which might include, for example, lying on a visa application or buying a false green card or other entry document).


Penalties for Improper Entry

For the first improper entry offense, the person can be fined (as a criminal or civil penalty), or imprisoned for up to six months, or both. This is considered a misdemeanor under federal law (18 U.S.C.A. § 3559).
For a subsequent offense, or a reentry (or attempted reentry) after exclusion or deportation, the person can be fined or imprisoned for up to two years, or both. (See 8 U.S.C. Section 1325, 1326, I.N.A. Section 275, 276.) This is considered a low-level felony under federal law (18 U.S.C.A. § 3559).


(snip)

Civil Penalties

Entry (or attempted entry) at a place other than one designated by immigration officers can carry civil penalties instead of or on top of criminal penalties. The amount is at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or twice that amount if the illegal entrant has been previously fined a civil penalty for the same violation. (See 8 U.S.C. Section 1325, I.N.A. Section 275.)

http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/crime-enter-illegally.html


Asylum has three basic requirements. First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution in their home country.[3] Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group. Third, an applicant must establish that the government is either involved in the persecution, or unable to control the conduct of private actors.

(Snip)

The United States is obliged to recognize valid claims for asylum under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. As defined by these agreements, a refugee is a person who is outside his or her country of nationality (or place of habitual residence if stateless) who, owing to a fear of persecution on account of a protected ground, is unable or unwilling to avail himself of the protection of the state. Protected grounds include race, nationality, religion, political opinion and membership of a particular social group. The signatories to these agreements are further obliged not to return or "refoul" refugees to the place where they would face persecution.

This commitment was codified and expanded with the passing of the Refugee Act of 1980 by the United States Congress. Besides reiterating the definitions of the 1951 Convention and its Protocol, the Refugee Act provided for the establishment of an Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to help refugees begin their lives in the U.S. The structure and procedures evolved and by 2004, federal handling of refugee affairs was led by the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) of the U.S. Department of State, working with the ORR at HHS. Asylum claims are mainly the responsibility of the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).



In the wake of the child separation policy at the border, the government’s bizarre legal approach to migration has been thrown into the spotlight. Crossing an invisible line is a crime considered so heinous that ripping children away from their parents, and losing them indefinitely, is apparently justified. Except that this prosecution can be, according to documents reviewed by USA Today “seldom more than a symbolic undertaking,” with immigrants being “sentenced to whatever time they have already spent in the government’s custody and a $10 court fee” before they’re sent for deportation.

Yet while crossing the border without permission is a crime, unlawful presence in the United States isn’t. If you enter legally and overstay your visa, you’re not a criminal; if you sneak across the border, you are. Prosecuting those crimes requires a lot of resources: Half of the total arrests made by the federal government in 2014 were for immigration-related offenses. But more immigrants are now overstaying visas than entering the country unlawfully, according to the Center for Migration Studies. In 2014, 66 percent of those who entered illegally or became undocumented did so by overstaying visas, a commitment of a civil violation rather than a crime.

(Snip)

And that number is growing: Overstays have exceeded the number of illegal border crossings since 2007. In 2017, DHS reported that the number one nationality for visa overstays, among those who entered by air or sea, was Canada, with Brazil, the UK, and China also represented.

Why the difference? Why does U.S. law consider it so much worse to sneak across the border than to overstay a visa—surely, tricking the U.S. government into trusting you with the privileges of a visa and then abdicating your responsibility to leave is at least as grave a transgression as entering without permission? This difference goes back to 1929, and you’ll be shocked, I’m sure, to learn it’s rooted in racism.

The history of immigration in America is a history of racial control—of shifting categories of inadmissible, undesirable, unwanted peoples. As our government continues to enact a program of terror and misery on individuals, children, and families who come to the U.S. seeking a better life, it’s worth remembering the roots of this situation are in a racist program to exclude Mexicans, not in some high-minded respect for enforcing the law. After all, laws can be changed, and immigration law changed plenty of times in the 20th century. Maybe this one hasn’t because it’s right in line with America’s most racist impulses.


https://splinternews.com/how-crossing-the-border-became-a-crime-1827160001