Hey, there! Log in / Register
Protest at the State House today over children in cages
By adamg on Wed, 06/20/2018 - 9:43am
Several groups have organized a protest at 12:30 p.m. in front of the State House to protest the Trump administration's decision to rip toddlers and other children from their parents at the border and put them in cages and tents.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
And no, there is no law requiring this
Snopes shows how Trump, et all are lying with their claim they are only enforcing a law and it's all the Democrats' fault.
state issues too
Massachusetts has a modest bill that protects the rights of undocumented immigrants. The bill passed the MA senate. It is currently under consideration in conference committee.
Some of the people going to today's protest will be meeting with their state reps. and state senators to ask that it pass and be sent to the governor. Baker said he would veto it. In order for it to pass, it would require a veto override vote.
Baker was going to send the MA National Guard to help Trump rip children from parents seeking asylum. He changed his mind Monday, 17 days after he announced it. Thing is, two days before he announced it he objected to the policy of taking kids from their parents on a WBUR radio show May 28. It had been going on throughout May. AG Sessions established the policy in April.
Here's what was in the news the day Baker announced he was deploying the MA National Guard to the border. BTW, it was completely voluntary (I.E. without obligation)
OK
From Snopes, "Under the 1997 settlement, DHS could detain unaccompanied children captured at the border for only 20 days before releasing them to foster families, shelters or sponsors, pending resolution of their immigration cases. The settlement was later expanded through other court rulings to include both unaccompanied and accompanied children.
The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 requires unaccompanied minors from countries other than Mexico and Canada to be placed in the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, or relatives in the U.S., while they go through removal proceedings. The bipartisan bill was approved by unanimous consent and signed by Bush.
But neither the court settlement nor the 2008 law require the Trump administration to “break up families.”
Right. The 1997 court settlement means they go to '...foster families, shelters or sponsors, pending resolution of their immigration cases.'
If there's no family, then the government has an obligation to place them somewhere they can locate them. It applies to unaccompanied minors. It was expanded to accompanied children.
OK, no problem. So, how long are the children held in concentra.., I mean cages, I mean 'facilities' until the DHS places them? Short answer is 20 days.
No problem. It's just a question of the horrible living conditions they have to endure while waiting for the paperwork to catch up with them.
So, tell Congress to pass a damn bill to properly address the matter.
Well, well, well...
"So, tell Congress to pass a damn bill to properly address the matter."
Looks like the President and Speaker Ryan met last night.
If Congress can pass a bill, and the President signs it, well, will everyone be happy?
See? Fourth Reich narrowly averted.
"The Art of the Deal". A highly recommended book.
Well, well, well...
I would say I guess your boy(s) bent under the will of people who know better than to stick kids in cages then, huh?
You like that book?
You should read a few comments from its author.
https://twitter.com/tonyschwartz?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%...
Trump has no conscience, says his co-author
Trump co-author Tony Schwartz: 'Sociopathic' Trump has 'no conscience'
Wrong, wrong, wrong
The breakup of families occurs because the Trump administration chooses to prosecute all illegal border crossings as felonies, which is a change as of 6 weeks ago.
Because the parents are now in US marshal custody awaiting federal court proceedings, the children can't be detained with their parents under the settlement and law you mentioned.
For at least the past 40 years, illegal border crossings for families were almost always dealt w/ as misdemeanors, and families would be processed civilly, through immigration proceedings, w/ electronic monitoring under the Obama administration. Thus, there was no mass separation of children from families like we're seeing now.
This Snopes?
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jul/28/ticker-fact-checking-web...
Snopes
Good thing you linked to Snopes, otherwise people may think you're using biased sources.
If you have time, please edit this to include links to the Washington Post, New York Times, Mother Jones, and preferably a meme that can be found on the Occupy Democrats Facebook page.
Godspeed to you, sir.
Sorry, it's the internet.
So I have to ask. Is this sarcasm? If so, can you demonstrate how Snopes is objectively biased?
I like this article....
But if you don't, there are others out there to peruse.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the-daily-mail-snop...
I'm looking
But not coming up with much. That Forbes article isn't smoking gun so much of an expose on the fact that Snopes doesn't want to disclose some of its methodology. Shady, I'll admit, but it doesn't mean that they're biased.
Right....
I also mentioned there are others out there to peruse if you don't like that one - sounds like you don't.
You can just google Snopes biased if you like. Doesn't seem overly trustworthy to me, but who knows.
As I said,
"I'm looking but not coming up with much." My time was a bit limited when I said that.
Here's some stuff I'm coming up with now, searching "is snopes untrustworthy" because "biased" isn't going to get what's really at the heart of the issue:
"Meme Falsely Claims We ‘Exposed’ Snopes.com"
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/meme-falsely-claims-exposed-snopes-com/
The Forbes article you talked about.
Food Babe blogs. Check out her anti-vaxx followers. Hard nope on that one.
A Vox article about some legal battles revolving Snopes that don't have anything to do with their trustworthiness
https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/7/31/16025460/snopes-legal-battle-lawsu...
Hilariously, a list of fake news outlets on Wikipedia, which you'll find is missing Snopes from the list
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites
A seeming blog who is as skeptical of your skepticism about Snopes
https://www.skeptical-science.com/critical-thinking/attack-fact-checking...
And so on.
So... If your claim is that Snopes is inherently biased, as I said, you haven't really substantiated that claim to show that there's any merit to it.
Not biased maybe just oversexed
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jul/28/ticker-fact-checking-web...
I read that in your other comment
While all of that could be true, and we'll let the court of law settle that, it has nothing to do with the veracity of their fact checking and in effect is basically a smear campaign.
Once Again - People Need A Civics Lesson
Why protest in front of the State House? That is the seat of state, not Federal power.
The protest should be at the O'Neil Building. That is the seat of power for the Federal Government in Boston and where DHS (i.e. ICE, the people taking away children from their parents) is headquartered in Boston.
Go block Causeway Street and the area behind the Garden.
What is Charlie Baker going to do if you protest at the State House? Agree with you and remind you that he has basically done all he can by not letting the Mass National Guard go to Texas.
By the way, down syndrome mocking Corey Lewandowski lives in Windham NH just over the border from Methuen. Go make hay up there too if you want. (His address is public record by the way on the Windham assessors site. It took me 10 seconds to look it up).
Good luck to the protesters, but get your facts straight first.
howdy! it looks like you
howdy! it looks like you missed explanatory text answering precisely your concern, in the link provided within the post! :)
"So what is Massachusetts doing to protect immigrant families? The state Senate passed a budget amendment with 4 basic protections, to stop police from helping round up immigrants and protect civil rights and due process. But the House is doing NOTHING, and Governor Baker has threatened to veto the Senate measure."
Whatever
It's not as if the protesters expect anyone in Boston to change the policy. The protest is to get more people engaged and more media attention. The Statehouse makes a better focal point for that. Plus, symbolically the state house represents the executive branch of government and the lets-hurt-the-childen policy is being developed and promoted entirely by the head of the federal executive branch. It's not the judaical branch making the decisions.
So yes, Statehouse is about the best place short of Washington.
I Had A Great Civics Teacher
He might want a word with you on your logic.
Going to the State House for this protest is like going to Fenway and yelling Yankees Suck. Yup, everyone inside agrees with you. Have a nice day.
This is why the yelling at that Hitler Youth Mistress last night in DC was great. An actor in this situation was made to feel uncomfortable. If you want change, make trouble. Make those actors feel uncomfortable. Those actors are on Causeway, not Beacon Street.
Oh really
Too bad you didn't learn any thing civic from him - did he teach at a Military Academy in NY, too? Preach the Civic Duty of ME FIRST EFF YOU?
Good God.
Yeah, and those rebels way back when protested in front of tree eventually name "liberty". The tree could of cared less. It was used as a, wait for it, gathering place to protest.
Fast forward. The state house is a gathering place for people to protest. That, it itself, has value.
But Wait There Is More
They also went up to North Square and burned down the Governor's House. The Revolutionary History of Boston has been sanitized a bit. Direct action caused more trouble, but eventually led to results.
http://www.newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/1765-thomas-hutchinson-moves-...
"could of cared less"
You hit two of my grammatical pet peeves at the same time. First of all, the saying is "couldn't care less", not the ever popular "could care less". If someone "could care less" it implies they at least care somewhat. And in no case would it be "could of cared less", it would be "could have cared less". Sorry to be so pedantic.
He lives on Rock Pond.
He lives on Rock Pond. Perhaps people could take a page from the playbook of Tony Soprano and put some big speakers on a boat and cruise over to his house. If Trump nuts are gonna ruin other peoples lives, the least decent Americans can do is make the Trump nuts annoyed.
It's 2018. The whole act of
It's 2018. The whole act of protesting is performative, to show the number of angry people who care about this issue, not necessarily to knock on some specific office's door. It's more symbolic than anything else and probably much easier to get a large crowd going outside the state house than the federal building, get on the news, show everyone the level of anger/outrage we have.
Although I also wouldn't be opposed to gathering a big crowd of people on Lewandowski's front lawn to yell "WOMP WOMP"
Trombonist road trip
Yes, I thought a troupe of trombonists may want to perform the "sad trombone" noise in front of his house...
I know just who you should call!
Call the HONK! folks and put them in touch with Vermin Supreme and this will likely happen.
yes, theoretically
I am upset about this issue, who isn't, went over to the State house during lunch. Attending something like this leaves me with very mixed feelings. I do not belong to organized groups of the kind that attend these rallies, and it feels to me not like outrage so much as political theatre. There do not feel like there are average people in the crowd who want to express their outrage, as much as people of different organizations who already know each other. I feel like an outsider at these type of rallies and not someone who shares the same goal. The chanting has a very staged feeling.
For instance, there are canvassers for Jay Gonzalez in the crowd. I was not approached by any, being an older person who is not a desired demographic, but I am always willing to listen to what a candidate for office has to say, no matter which party. I heard a very impassioned speaker at the end of the rally who I did not hear identified, and, after the rally asked another speaker, who preceded him, if that was Jay Gonzalez. He said no, that speaker was from the western part of the state, the guy seemed uncomfortable with my question. I thanked him. There is an uneasiness about questions being asked, but I am just an old person who can't hear very well anymore. Yes, if I am properly informed I should know what Jay Gonzalez looks like, but I thought that if this guy debated Baker it would make for interested viewing.
We all do what we can, maybe it is just the typical Massachusetts reserve, but attending these rallies, even sharing the same ideology, feels strange.
Thank you
Thank you for taking time outside of your comfort zone to stand up for what is good and right in the world. Those of us who could not make it do appreciate your efforts.
Very accurate!
Thank you for this very accurate commentary. Especially the bit about "there is an uneasiness about questions being asked". They are willing to talk at you, and give you the party line, but they do not want direct, probing, or plain honest questions. I also find this true of the various religious groups who approach one on the street, from the Rapture people to the Mennonites.
It's not like
the Common has a history of being a place of political gatherings and protests or anything.
I'm sorry, that was snarkey
I'd like an opportunity to reword:
The Boston Common is a traditional and iconic place of gathering and protest for the city, and has been for centuries.
Safe Communities Act
I can't confirm, but I imagine they're protesting in favor of the Safe Communities Act (S.1305, H. 3269) which have decent support in the legislature but have been held by leadership.
It would bar police from arresting or detaining anyone solely for federal immigration enforcement purposes. It keeps a very clear line between ICE and local law enforcement.
Has Obama's bowling improved or still like Special Olympics?
Maybe Lewandowski can meet up with President Obama who described his own bowling skills as "worse than the Special Olympics" as a late night national TV host and audience dutifully applauded and laughed. Please.
I believe the "cages" have been proven to be normal fencing that one might expect to protect children or even legislators. While at the State House, perhaps they should demand Charlie Baker tear down the State House
cagefence so he and legislators can run free onto Beacon.After, they can ask Marty Walsh to remove
cagesfences that surround most city parks and school playgrounds. This is mostly the Occupy crowd. Professional agitators."Protect"?
Com'on, you apologists for this monstrosity aren't even trying any more!
Because this:
"Baker, a Republican, had previously pledged a UH-72 Lakota helicopter and two military analysts to the border on June 1 and were expected to be deployed at the end of the month."
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/18/family-separations-charlie-bak...
Need to keep the pressure up on all sides.
John Costello
Your post was posted an hour ago... at 1030. There's now a reason for them to do s at 11:45.
See below:
Agree
Thanks Kris.
That is a very good idea.
"Every governor should, right now, sign an executive order requiring that any child so brought into the state has clear paperwork connecting them to a parent, with the parent's whereabouts, and an ability to contact the parent."
OK, so a small problem...unaccompanied minors. No parent in the picture? What about them?
Minor with an adult with no proof of relationship. What about them?
Having the information you require would go a long way towards solving the problem of 'absent' when they have immigration or other court hearings.
The issue isn't unaccompanied minors
You're either disingenuous or stunningly ill-informed. I'm betting on the former more than the latter, but it's probably a mix. The issue is children who have been separated from their parents, sometimes forcibly, sometimes with lies that they're being taken to have baths.
Who cares what the exact
Who cares what the exact venue of the protest is?
The local Federal facility I'm the most angry about is ICE in Burlington. But that's not a good place for an effective, visible protest.
In before the "But Obama..."
In before the "But Obama..." crowd.
Stop.
In before the "but Clinton,
In before the "but Clinton, But Bush...." crowd.
Actually it's Clinton...but hey...
The law and other court rulings are from the nineties. It's actually up to the legislative branch to write laws.
Congress is the legislative branch.
Mr. Pen and Phone did it as he wanted.
The current President is actually following the law. You don't like it? Well, it's up to Congress to set the rules. As it currently stands, here's how it goes...
As a poster in one of the previous 'concentration camp' threads pointed out (I believe she was an immigration lawyer, but I might be misremembering) the Government is obligated to take all 'amnesty' claims seriously. And she's absolutely correct. If a family presents itself at a proper port of entry, well guess what...they are not separated.
Repeat this out loud if you need to. They are not separated.
If a guy enters illegally with his fourteen year old 'daughter', well, they have to be processed separately. Can't let him take her to jail with him, because she might not be his daughter and would get raped worse than a donor at a Hillary Clinton fundraiser.
I, for one, am against human trafficking, a position the current AG shares with me.
So, if you cannot prove the provenance of the 'she's my daughter' claim, why take a chance?
Oh, there are thousands of rooms for intact families. They're full.
If I rob a bank with my ten year old son in the back seat of the getaway car, I'll probably find the police outside before I can finish the robbery because someone will call about the 'abandoned child'. So, kid's gone and I don't get to bring him to jail with me.
See, the problem here is simply put...if the illegal aliens could be counted on to vote Republican, that wall would have been built years ago.
I guess the stripper with the balloons, the Russians, Kim, Comey, the FBI guy bionking the nice lady that wants to 'stop Trump at all costs', the sports tickets from the press to bribe FBI agents, the recently released report about just how hopeless the FBI has become all must be put on the back burner because ICE, DHS and HHS are putting kids into concentration camps. Camps with soccer on TV.
Bullshit.
ED:
ED: Wilburforce is 2008.
My culpa.
Adam already covered this in the very first comment.
Read the Snopes article. You're flat out wrong. And your whole "immigrants would be democrats" argument is in effect showing how xenophobic you are.
12:30 pm
Sorry i have this thing called work.
Don't
you have this thing called lunch? Gee, there oughta be a law.
Protests are most effective when the reps are trying to get their work done at the State House, see, so business hours.
Ya
You eat lunch at your desk and work!
Massachusetts law
No matter whether you work for a salary or by the hour, after six hours you are required to take a half hour break.
There is a law
After six hours of work you are entitled to a half-hour break.
So did I. Went on my lunch
So did I. Went on my lunch break.
Protest
Good luck to the protestors. It's a beautiful day to protest, I hope they spend a lot of money in the City.
Quick question
Where would you keep detained illegal aliens? Also a fenced in detainment structure isn't a cage, but i get your bias/angle with the word choice.
They're not illegal and we're talking about toddlers
"Illegal" implies they've gotten their day in court, which they are entitled to, and they haven't. I realize it's hard to believe, but we are, at least nominally, still a nation of laws. Plus, you know, we're talking about kids here, many too young to even know their parents names, who may now never be reunited with their parents.
But you do you, mein Herr.
No illegal
Implies they crossed into a foreign country at an unsanctioned port of entry. Which they did!
Also if were a nation of laws, why do we currently have 11M + people here undocumented.
Then you're "illegal"
Immigration violations are civil offenses, not criminal offenses. If you've ever changed lanes without signaling, by your definition, you too are "illegal".
Which they didn't.
If "were" a nation of laws, why do you keep changing lanes without signaling?
If I rob a bank...
""Illegal" implies they've gotten their day in court, which they are entitled to, and they haven't."
...with my kid in the car, it only becomes illegal after I get my day in court?
" I realize it's hard to believe, but we are, at least nominally, still a nation of laws. "
So tell people that live in other countries to follow our damn immigration laws.
Looks like Trump and Ryan might have a deal. Operation Barbarossa narrowly averted (Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union 6-22-1941)
Or
we could have some humane immigration laws. You know, like ones where we do not snatch babies, toddlers and children from their parents?
Oh, BTW, a Nazi called. He wants his swastika back.
Gotcha
Some parents may have committed a misdemeanor, so the administration can abuse and torture their children. You really ought to look deeply into your soul and think long and hard about what you're attempting to justify here. It is shameful. History will not look kindly at all at the perpetrators and their apologists like you.
You can read up on that at your leisure.
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/19/621065383/what-we-know-family-separation-...
And in regards to the definition of the word "cage", looks like you need to read up on that, also:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/cage
An asylum seeker is not an
An asylum seeker is not an illegal alien.
Well, the typical illegal
Well, the typical illegal alien is someone overstaying a visa, which is not even a criminal infraction.
So I'd keep him the same place I keep myself when I get nabbed for running a yellow light on my bike, or accruing a library fine.
Then there are those who did in fact enter illegally. That's a misdemeanor, so a reasonable thing to do is the same thing done with defendants in misdemeanor cases: light bail.
Then there are those who come in to ask for asylum. According to the law, that's not a civil or criminal violation. Their request might be rejected, very true, but not only are they presumed innocent, they ARE innocent. And those are the people getting their kids torn away from them right now.
This is nothing more than political
Theater. Immigrant advocates yelled at Obama for keeping families together. Laws on the books mandate children detained for illegal entry must be housed in the lest restrictive setting, hence the separation of adults (their parents) whom are house in more traditional units.
Good article from NPR....
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/12/414023967/obama-i...
Love of tacos conquers all.
Looks like the DHS secretary does not like being heckled at her favorite Mexican restaurant, so this obscenity will be halted.