June 19, 2018

USA: In 2013, During Obama Admin, Deportation Separated 72,400 Of U.S.-Born Children From Parents. President Obama Deported More People Than Any Other President In U.S. History.

That image above with child crying and children in cages were taken during the Obama administration and are being circulated around the internet making people believe these pictures were taken now during the Trump administration. (emphasis mine)

Zero Hedge
written by Tyler Durden
Sunday June 17, 2018

Having lost control of the 'Russia collusion' narrative (still evidence-less after 18 months and increasingly exposed for bias), and unable to gain any traction with their attacks on the Trump-Kim summit (hard to make a case that more nuclear armaggeddon threats are better than less), the deep state (hand in mouth with the left and the media) are currently attempting to spin Trump's enforcement of Obama policies as an indication that he is a baby-stealing racist.

You've seen the sad, dramatic, emotive images...

And now, as The Daily Caller reports, Democratic Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar is admitting that the Obama administration attempted to cover up the child migrant crisis occurring at the Southern border.
“It was kept very quiet under the Obama Administration. There were large numbers of people coming in. The Obama administration was trying to keep this quiet,” Cuellar told CNN’s Fredricka Whitfield.
Whitfield displayed a 2014 image of migrant children held in cages at a detention center, and Cuellar said that he released similar photos of children separated from their parents.

Cuellar added that the number of children being held at the border right now is similar to the amount during the Obama administration.
“We still see the numbers,” he said, adding that “not all of them are being separated. Some of them are coming alone.”
Do you remember John Legend being this pissed off at Obama? ๐Ÿ‘‡
Yeah, I don't either. Don't forget he and tons of other celebrities pushed the fake 'Hands up, don't shoot' lie. They're still pushing that lie and so many others. This is what he thinks is a role model.
Huffington Post
written by Elise Foley
Wednesday June 25, 2014

WASHINGTON — Immigration and Customs Enforcement last year carried out more than 72,000 deportations of parents who said they had U.S.-born children, according to reports to Congress obtained Wednesday by The Huffington Post.

The reports were sent by ICE in April to the Senate Appropriations Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee, as required by law. ICE confirmed the authenticity of the two reports, which lay out 72,410 removals of immigrants who said they had one or more U.S.-born children in 2013.

The reports show that even parents of U.S. citizens are among the hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants being expelled from the United States each year. They hold particular significance as President Barack Obama faces pressure to change his deportation policies to keep families together. Obama’s deportation policies are under increased scrutiny by those in both political parties as the House stalls on immigration reform and the government scrambles to deal with an influx of unaccompanied minors crossing the U.S. border illegally. While opponents of immigration reform have argued that Obama’s lax enforcement is attracting new unauthorized immigrants, reform advocates are turning to the White House to slow deportations.

Children born in the U.S. are given automatic citizenship, regardless of their parents’ immigration status, and a 2013 report by Human Impact Partners estimated that 4.5 million U.S. citizen children have at least one parent who is undocumented. When a parent is deported, their U.S.-born children sometimes leave with them. But some stay in the U.S. with another parent or family member. Some children end up in U.S. foster care.

Advocates for halting some deportations have pointed to cases involving parents of children who are U.S. citizens, saying parents should not be separated from their children except in extreme circumstances.

While most of the parents of U.S.-born children deported last year had been convicted of a crime, about 10,700 had no criminal convictions, although they may have fit other ICE priorities for removal, according to the reports.

ICE said 71,214 parents of U.S.-born children who were deported fit its priorities. The priorities include convicted criminals, people caught attempting to enter the country illegally, people who had returned after a previous deportation, and people who failed to report to ICE after a deportation order, according to the report. Because some people may have been deported more than once, the figures reflect total removals, not the exact number of individuals who were deported. The numbers do not include deportations of parents who fail to tell agents they have U.S.-born children or parents whose foreign-born children are undocumented.

The reports provide no detail about crimes that had been committed by parents who were deported. Critics of ICE priorities say the numbers can be misleading, because they lump together low-level charges and immigration offenses with violent crimes. Reform advocates argue that repeat immigration violations should not make immigrants a high priority for removal, in part because those who reenter the U.S. after being deported are sometimes simply trying to reunite with families.

There were 39,410 removals of parents who said they had U.S.-born children in the first half of 2013, according to one report. Sixty-two percent of those who were deported came from the interior of the U.S., while 38 percent were apprehended near the border. In both categories, strong majorities of those deported had been convicted of a crime, according to the report. ICE reported that 98 percent of its removals of parents of U.S.-born children in the first half of 2013 were considered priorities for deportation.

In the second half of the year, there were 33,000 removals of parents who claimed U.S.-born children. A majority — 63 percent — came from the U.S. interior, and 98 percent of the total fit ICE priorities, according to the report.

Colorlines reported in December 2012 that more than 200,000 removals of parents of U.S.-born children had occurred from July 1, 2010, to Sept. 31, 2012, based on a Freedom of Information Act request.

An ICE spokesman told The Huffington Post on Wednesday that the agency “is sensitive to the fact that encountering those who violate our immigration laws may impact families.”

“We work with individuals in removal proceedings to ensure they have ample opportunity to make important decisions regarding the care and custody of their children,” the ICE spokesman said in a statement. “For parents who are ordered removed, it is their decision whether or not to relocate their children with them. If parents choose to take their children with them, ICE assists in every way possible including helping to obtain travel documents for the minors or, when possible, allow for the family’s voluntary departure.”
ABC News
written by Serena Marshall
August 29, 2016

How many people have been deported under Obama?

President Barack Obama has often been referred to by immigration groups as the "Deporter in Chief."

Between 2009 and 2015 his administration has removed more than 2.5 million people through immigration orders, which doesn’t include the number of people who "self-deported" or were turned away and/or returned to their home country at the border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

How does he compare to other presidents?

According to governmental data, the Obama administration has deported more people than any other president's administration in history.

In fact, they have deported more than the sum of all the presidents of the 20th century.

President George W. Bush's administration deported just over two million during his time in office; and Obama’s numbers don’t reflect his last year in office, for which data is not yet available.
Who is being deported?

President Obama directed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to focus on criminals, not families, during his November 2014 executive action on immigration.
President Trump is doing the same thing as President Obama and you are making him out to be an animal racist who hates immigrants. The immigrants are most likely treated much better under President Trump than under President Obama since Obama refused to listen to whistleblowers as I show proof in tweet below and locked immigrant children in cages as is evident in 2014 pictures that the Democrats used to malign President Trump. (emphasis mine)
According to their website, "ICE has continued to increase its focus on identifying, arresting, and removing convicted criminals in prisons and jails, and also at-large arrests in the interior."

In fiscal year 2015, 91 percent of people removed from inside the U.S. were previously convicted of a crime.

The administration made the first priority "threats to national security, border security, and public safety." That includes gang members, convicted felons or charged with "aggravated felony" and anyone apprehended at the border trying to enter the country illegally.

In 2015, 81 percent, or 113,385, of the removals were the priority one removals.

Priority two includes "misdemeanants and new immigration violators."

That includes "aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic" violations, as well as those convicted of domestic violence, sexual abuse, burglary, DUIs or drug trafficking.

Who is not being deported?

With the focus on criminals and not families, the administration has moved away from those living and working in the U.S. without a criminal history.

"Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day," Obama said in November 2014 when announcing his executive action on immigration.

And while he tried to provide relief and a way "out of the shadows" for those without criminal histories with his immigration action, that was eventually stricken down by the Supreme Court not issuing a decision on the case, thereby upholding the lower courts action.

But by refocusing on criminals most families who are living and following the law are not targets for deportations.

What about raids against mothers and children?

Priority three for the administration is focused on those who have arrived after January 1, 2014. The administration has focused on preventing families from sending their children unaccompanied on a dangerous trek by emphasizing they will be returned.

Many of these unaccompanied children and mothers with children are fleeing violence in central America—coming from the northern triangle of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, some of the most dangerous countries in the world.

Many of the people migrating from that area to the U.S. claim refugee status and, if they can prove real harm will result in their being returned, they are allowed to remain until their case is heard.

There are critics, however, who state that many are not getting a fair shot at claiming refugee status and are being returned too hastily.

New York Times
written by Carl Hulse
Monday July 7, 2014

WASHINGTON — It was one of the final pieces of legislation signed into law by President George W. Bush, a measure that passed without controversy, along with a pension bill and another one calling for national parks to be commemorated on quarters.

“This is a piece of legislation we’re very proud to sign,” a White House spokesman, Tony Fratto, told reporters on Dec. 23, 2008, as the president put his pen to the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, named for a 19th-century British abolitionist. “This program has been very effective around the world in trying to stop trafficking in persons.”

Now the legislation, enacted quietly during the transition to the Obama administration, is at the root of the potentially calamitous flow of unaccompanied minors to the nation’s southern border.

Originally pushed by a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers as well as by evangelical groups to combat sex trafficking, the bill gave substantial new protections to children entering the country alone who were not from Mexico or Canada by prohibiting them from being quickly sent back to their country of origin.

Instead, it required that they be given an opportunity to appear at an immigration hearing and consult with an advocate, and it recommended that they have access to counsel. It also required that they be turned over to the care of the Department of Health and Human Services, and the agency was directed to place the minor “in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child” and to explore reuniting those children with family members.

The Obama administration says the law is partly responsible for tying its hands in dealing with the current influx of children. Officials have suggested that the White House might seek flexibility in the law’s requirements when it asks Congress to provide emergency funds to contend with the latest immigration crisis, a request that could come as early as Tuesday. About 52,000 minors without their parents have been caught at the Southwest border since October.

“Giving the secretary of homeland security additional authority and discretion that he can use to confront that situation more efficiently, making sure that we are acknowledging the humanitarian issues that are at stake while also enforcing the law, is a priority,” Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said Monday. “It’s the priority of this administration, and if you listen to the public comments of Democrats and Republicans, it sounds like it’s a bipartisan priority.”

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who helped write the measure, said the White House does not need new power to act. “That law already provides the administration with flexibility to accelerate the judicial process in times of crisis,” she said. “The administration should use that flexibility to speed up the system while still treating these children humanely, with compassion and respect.”

On Capitol Hill, Democrats said they expected that the administration’s initial request for border money would not push for changes in the trafficking law but that the White House would try to work with relevant congressional committees to eventually win revisions.

Democrats have shown reluctance to endorse narrow immigration law changes after House Republicans balked at a much more sweeping overhaul and seem hesitant to tinker too much with the William Wilberforce Act.

In a recent letter to Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, said Congress must ensure that the provisions of the trafficking victims act, “which passed the House and Senate unanimously and was also signed into law by President Bush, are fully enforced, so that due process is provided to unaccompanied children and the safety and well-being of unaccompanied children is protected.”

Republicans, who are calling for changes that would make it easier to send them back, blame President Obama for the surge of children at the border, saying he provided a lure by instituting a program that deferred deportations for some immigrants who entered the nation illegally as children.

They say the effort to point to the Bush-era law is a meant to deflect attention from the administration and make both parties culpable.

Representative Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican and a chief backer of the original bill, said multiple factors contributed to the crisis, including “exploitation of our laws, the ungoverned space in Central America, as well as the desperate poverty faced by those deciding to cross.”

“With all these factors in mind, it’s hard to think that today’s situation at the border can be directly attributed to a law that’s been in effect now for six years,” Mr. Fortenberry said.

What many can agree on is that the Wilberforce law was not enacted with the idea of dealing with the current flow of tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors or providing an incentive for children to reach the border.

“It is classic unintended consequences,” said Marc R. Rosenblum, deputy director of the U.S. Immigration Policy Program at the Migration Policy Institute. “This was certainly not what was envisioned.”

Given the tense partisanship that now surrounds nearly every aspect of border policy, it is hard to imagine that a bill making such substantive changes could breeze through Congress. But the trafficking measure did so in the Bush administration’s last weeks, and it did so with bipartisan backing without so much as a recorded vote in the Senate.

Advocates saw it as a breakthrough on sex trafficking after Congress had already scuttled an earlier attempt at broad immigration reform despite the strong backing of Mr. Bush.

Just two House Republicans — Representative Jeff Flake of Arizona and Representative Paul Broun of Georgia — opposed the measure when it first passed the House in 2007, but it went through Congress without opposition and with little notice in the post-election session of 2008.

Aides to Mr. Flake, now a senator, said he did not foresee the current problems but was more concerned about holding the line on federal spending at the time. He now backs revising the law. “Congress needs to change what it can, as soon as it can, to ensure that these unaccompanied minors are sent home without delay,” he said.

NBC News Published on Jun 18, 2018: During a New York City speaking event, Hillary Clinton took aim at the current zero-tolerance policy at the U.S.-Mexico border. Clinton added that, during the presidential campaign, she had warned of such policies occurring under President Trump.

No comments: