False claims about immigrant children and the refusal to correct them

There is a report going around the Internet, which I’ve seen on my Facebook feed many times, that the Trump Administration “lost track” of about 1500 immigrant children who had been ripped away from their families at the border and put in places unknown. A new article in The New York Times (below) corrects this error:

Did the Trump administration separate nearly 1,500 immigrant children from their parents at the border, and then lose track of them?

No. The government did realize last year that it lost track of 1,475 migrant children it had placed with sponsors in the United States, according to testimony before a Senate subcommittee last month. But those children had arrived alone at the Southwest border — without their parents. Most of them are from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, and were fleeing drug cartels, gang violence and domestic abuse, according to government data.

Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees refugee resettlement, began making calls last year to determine what had happened to 7,635 children the government had helped place between last October and the end of the year.

From these calls, officials learned that 6,075 children remained with their sponsors. Twenty-eight had run away, five had been removed from the United States and 52 had relocated to live with a nonsponsor. The rest were unaccounted for, giving rise to the 1,475 number. It is possible that some of the adult sponsors simply chose not to respond to the agency.

Losing track of children who arrive at the border alone is not a new phenomenon. A 2016 inspector general report showed that the federal government was able to reach only 84 percent of children it had placed, leaving 4,159 unaccounted for.

On Monday evening, Eric Hargan, the deputy secretary for Health and Human Services, expressed frustration at the use of the term “lost” to refer to the 1,475 unaccounted-for children. In a statement, he said that the department’s office of refugee resettlement began voluntarily making the calls as a 30-day follow-up to make sure that the children and their sponsors did not require additional services. Those calls, which the office does not view as required, Mr. Hargan said, are now “being used to confuse and spread misinformation.”

In many cases, the statement said, sponsors cannot be reached because “they themselves are illegal aliens and do not want to be reached by federal authorities.”

The children, then, were not taken away from their parents, and the “lost track” can’t be placed solely at the door of the Administration. The article has further explanation of how HHS has been unable to find the children.

What is the case, and this is both true and reprehensible, is that there is a new Trump administration policy that does mandate such separation, and the policy has been going on (apparently unofficially) since October:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a new “zero tolerance” policy earlier this month that included imposing criminal penalties meant to deter Central American families from trying to cross the border illegally.

If a mother or father is with a child when apprehended for the crime of illegal entry, the minor must be taken from the parent. Hundreds of immigrant children have already been separated from their parents at the border since October, and the new policy will result in a steep increase. “If you don’t want your child separated, then don’t bring them across the border illegally,” Mr. Sessions said.

It’s not clear what has happened to the children that have been separated from their parents since October. This is a deeper explanation on the practice of separating families.

I can’t imagine a draconian mindset that would separate parents and children, and there’s surely a way to keep them together even if it must be in detention. The new law mandates that parents be put in detention (with possible deportation or criminal trials, depending on whether they’ve crossed the border illegally before), while their kids are given into custody of Health and Human services. And another lie from Trump: he accused this new policy of being installed by Democrats, but in reality it was the decision of Jeff Sessions.

Read the article (click on screenshot):

In the meantime, Control Leftists have been tweeting out pictures of supposedly detained children separated from their parents. Here are two instances, one by the odious Linda Sarsour and the other by civil rights activist Shaun King:

But, as Politico reports, these aren’t what they seem; they were children in custody four years ago during the Obama administration (I can’t find any more information about them):

President Donald Trump on Tuesday taunted online activists who shared photos of children at immigration detention facilities as a means of criticizing his administration, noting that the photos had been taken during the tenure of his predecessor, Barack Obama.

“Democrats mistakenly tweet 2014 pictures from Obama’s term showing children from the Border in steel cages. They thought it was recent pictures in order to make us look bad, but backfires,” Trump wrote online. “Dems must agree to Wall and new Border Protection for good of country…Bipartisan Bill!”

The photograph in question began to circulate online over the weekend, shared by Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau and activists Shaun King and Linda Sarsour, among others. It shows two children lying on green mats on a concrete floor behind a chain-link fence. The photo was taken by The Associated Press and was published by The Arizona Republic in 2014 as part of a photo gallery. Favreau later deleted his tweet.

When I looked yesterday afternoon, King and Sarsour’s mistaken tweets were still there, and if you see them above they will still be up, since the tweets link to the original site (would these people have put them up when Obama was President?). While some people who posted them issued a correction, like Jake Silverstein, King and Sarsour let them stand as an indictment of Trump.

The use of these pictures to indict Trump really is an example of “fake news.”

Look, Trump is bad enough, and his immigration policy odious enough, that we don’t need to promulgate unsubstantiated allegations about “lost children”, nor put up fake pictures to buttress that. Such behavior, and the refusal to correct false claims, simply gives Trump and the Republicans ammunition about “fake news” and supposed Democratic vendettas. But I do call bullshit on people like Sarsour and King who, having already been corrected in the comments to their “fake tweets”, leave them up anyway.

65 Comments

  1. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    This is the great problem with the internet in the current world. Purposely false information is the order of the day. There is nothing to stop it and really, nothing to correct it. People confuse all of this with journalism and we are off to the races to the bottom.

    In fact, if you think of it – when parents get arrested for crimes in this country, nothing to do with immigration, the children are separated and often have to be turned over to local authorities, as they say. This happens everyday. Do we think only single people break the law?

    • Ken Kukec
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:59 am | Permalink

      Used to be, politicians could get away with making inconsistent speeches to different audiences — could give a civil-rights speech to a predominantly black audience one day, for example, then turn around and give a law-and-order speech to a predominantly white audience the next. I thought the internet, and the concomitant proliferation of recording devices, would put an end to that practice.

      And by and large, it has. But the rise of social media has enabled the problem to recrudesce in an even more nefarious form: susceptible micro-audiences can be targeted and flooded with bespoke messaging, much of it of dubious veracity. This is one of the primary methods by which the Russians interfered in our last presidential election — and by which they will no doubt try to interfere with our next.

      • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:07 am | Permalink

        While, as you say, politicians have given different speeches to each audience, they usually differ in tone and topic. Their sins are mostly omission. Trump will say anything to any audience, even saying different things to the same audience on different days. Sometimes even saying conflicting things in a single speech.

        • XCellKen
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

          But every speech to every audience will contains Trump’s boasts about himself lol

          • Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

            Yes, he always brings out his “old favorites”: Lock her up, everything I do is huge/the best/etc, and so on. He really makes me sick. People say we need to understand where these voters are coming from. I say, what could they be thinking to elect such a person?

            • Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

              What could they be thinking? I dunno. Maybe ask Roseanne Barr?

      • Randall Schenck
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:07 am | Permalink

        And of course, since our president does not even acknowledge Russian involvement he is doing nothing to stop it.

        I don’t think anyone thought about the damage done by FOX news or the fact that for many people in this country, that is the only channel.

        • mirandaga
          Posted May 31, 2018 at 10:46 am | Permalink

          I never thought I’d be saying this, but just out of curiosity I started watching Fox News and have to say that its coverage of the news (as opposed to its political commentary, which is ghastly) is far more fair and balanced than NBC or CBS (and way more so than NPR!) when it comes to Trump. I find this troublesome in the extreme.

          • Posted May 31, 2018 at 10:48 am | Permalink

            Examples please?

            • mirandaga
              Posted May 31, 2018 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

              “Examples please?”

              A reasonable request, but this is an impression over time and has more to do with spin than with any single out-and-out lie.

              The closest I can come to an example: CBS (my go-to news channel) loves to have a reporter ask a question like “Does the president intend to [do x—some highly unlikely and highly controversial thing],” to which the response might be “The president has no intention of doing [x] at the present time.” This gets reported as if it were a firestorm—“Trump doesn’t rule out [x]!”—when, in fact, there’s not story there at all.

              I see almost none of this kind of thing on Fox. But you’ll have to watch both and decide for yourself.

  2. Posted May 30, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    I will admit that I was taken in earlier by this “lost children” meme.

    I totally agree that we have to point out fake news regardless of whether it is from the left or right or in-between. It is not good enough to just ignore it but make it clear that fake news is bad for all.

  3. Dee
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I can’t speak to this, but recently I have seen Shaun King issue a correction on a story he posted. It was a long and detailed correction. I would expect him to do something similar here too.

    • Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:16 am | Permalink

      He’s sure waited long enough!

      • Dee
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:48 am | Permalink

        Yeah, it took a few days for him to post the correction I saw, but given the level of detail it contained, I figured it took a while to write. I was pretty impressed with it too, so I’m hoping he does something similar in this case.

  4. barn owl
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    Wonder if Sarsour and King will blame Ambien Digits Syndrome for their tweets?

  5. Ken Kukec
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:19 am | Permalink

    On Twitter, Trump falsely claimed (as is his wont) that Democrats were responsible for a “horrible law” that separates children and parents at the border, when in fact there is no such law, only a new “zero tolerance” policy adopted by the Trump administration last year.

    This jerk has built his entire career on the portion of Abe Lincoln’s aphorism that goes “you can fool some of the people all of the time.” Trump, his minions in government and state tv, and his ghoulish mouthpiece Rudy Giuliani think they can gaslight the entire nation. But (per Honest Abe again) you can’t fool all of the people all of the time — and that will be Trump’s downfall.

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:41 am | Permalink

      Last night at another of his pep rallies he again said the investigators (FBI) put spies in his campaign. Even members of his own party in congress are saying that is nonsense but he will not give it up. It is just too good for him. When accused of teaming up with the Russians why not turn it upside down and say the FBI was spying on me. If it makes no sense….even better.

      • Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:43 am | Permalink

        Even Fox News reporters are calling Trump on this.

        • Randall Schenck
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:55 am | Permalink

          Big day in court this morning. Apparently the court has turned over more than a million documents taken in the Cohen raids back to Cohen’s lawyers and they have a couple of week to go through all of that. The total that the federal mediator has gone through is something like 3.2 million documents. One item taken in the raids was a paper shredder. They say the investigators are putting back together, some of the shredded documents. That must be fun.

          • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:02 am | Permalink

            That is good news. Should be tough going through all those shreds, Sounds like a job for good software. I bet they find lots of evidence of crimes since he’s been Trump’s fixer for a long time.

            • Saul Sorrell-Till
              Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:18 am | Permalink

              I’ve always wondered how easy it is to reassemble shredded documents. After all, the fact that they were shredded in the first place is the equivalent of a big neon sign with an arrow saying ‘dodgy stuff here’ so they must have come up with a method.

              I know the Penguin did it to Max Schreck in Batman Returns, so apparently all you need is ‘sellotape and a lot of patience’.

              • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:29 am | Permalink

                I don’t think the Penguin had this technology:
                http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2009/07/unshreddable.html
                http://www.unshredder.com/

              • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:34 am | Permalink

                There is nothing inherently suspicious about shredding documents. I’ve worked for years at places that routinely shred. These were at pharmaceutical companions and their intent is to protect IP. Cohen is a lawyer – law firms also routinely shred documents in an attempt to keep private stuff between themselves and their clients private.

              • darrelle
                Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:54 am | Permalink

                To add to mikeyc, businesses can get in serious legal trouble for not properly disposing of certain types of documents. And for good reasons.

              • Ken Kukec
                Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:55 am | Permalink

                As I recall, a team of Iranian peasant women managed the task in Ben Affleck’s thriller about the 1979 hostage crisis, Argo. So we’ve got two unimpeachable cinematic examplars. 🙂

              • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:59 am | Permalink

                It’s when the shredder is still warm to the touch during the raid that gets those FBI guys excited.

              • Saul Sorrell-Till
                Posted May 30, 2018 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

                I meant more in the context of seeing a load of shredded documents in Cohen’s office. In that context I think suspicion is warranted, along with the presence of a big lumpy man with rubber gloves and a pair of handcuffs.

              • infiniteimprobabilit
                Posted May 30, 2018 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

                I’ve got a cheap little shredder. I shred my old bank statements. I used to put them in the recycling bin at work till one of the foremen brought me one that he found blowing around the carpark.

                I think it would be quite feasible (though a significant programming effort) to write a computer program to match up scans, and just scan the strips of shredded paper.

                The sort of shredder that cross-chops as well and produces spaghetti – now that’s another matter.

                cr

        • Ken Kukec
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

          As happens almost quarterly, Fox News had a moment of clarity yesterday, when Shep Smith spent a couple minutes putting the lie to various fever-swamp conspiracy theories.

          • Posted May 30, 2018 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

            Oh, I forgot to include my standard Fox disclaimer. I don’t actually watch Fox. I heard about this via Twitter. It was not only Shep but Judge somebody also.

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:18 am | Permalink

        I watched part of Trump’s speech last night, as much as I could stand. His demagoguery on immigration, and his attacks on our norms and institutions, have grown worse. He actually claimed “Nancy Pelosi loves MS-13.” Our nation has never seen anything like this before. We can but hope, that when the time comes, our body politic has sufficiently strong antibodies to expel this noxious invasive pathogen.

        • Randall Schenck
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:32 am | Permalink

          I hear big things are expected with the N. Korean Summit. There could be a McDonald’s or Burger King franchise in the deal. I bet Kim gets the franchise.

        • Mark R.
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

          I listened to excerpts. The crowds eating up his demagoguery was even more terrifying than his unhinged rant. I can only see in this wreck of a human being a fascist behind the podium. This quote with its accompanying rabid cheers was especially rich. “They’re going to pay for the wall and they’re going to enjoy it. They do nothing for us.”

          At the same time, if the Republican strategy for 2018 is to go after immigrants and rev up the bigots, I say ‘good luck’.

          • Posted May 30, 2018 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

            They will and it will work where it counts for them.

            • Mark R.
              Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

              It hasn’t worked so far for them. Democrats have won every race so far where their opponent used Trump tactics and/or were directly supported by him. Look at the polls esp. regarding DACA. It’s just not a dinner-table topic like healthcare is. Dems are running hard on healthcare, and that’s a much better issue to run on.

    • XCellKen
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

      Ken, since you are from Cleveburg Ohio, do you remember the Captain Penny Show ???

      He ended every show thusly “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool MOM” !!!

      • Ken Kukec
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

        Yeah, pretty sure that’s where I first heard some version of that saying. I remember Jungle Larry and Safari Jane, too. And don’t get me started about Barnaby and Woodrow on Channel 3. 🙂

  6. darrelle
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    The most disturbing thing I’ve come across related to this issue is that per this PBS Frontline article, HHS Official Says Agency Lost Track of Nearly 1,500 Unaccompanied Minors, it looks like some of the children that HHS “processes” are known to have been given into the custody of human traffickers.

    From the article . . .

    “The agency has faced increased scrutiny following a scathing 2016 report from the committee (US Sentate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations) that found it failed to protect unaccompanied minors from traffickers and other abuses.”

    “In 2014, at least 10 trafficking victims, including eight minors, were discovered during a raid by federal and local law enforcement in Portman’s home state of Ohio. As FRONTLINE examined in the recent documentary Trafficked in America, HHS had released several minors to the traffickers. The committee said the case was due to policies and procedures that were “inadequate to protect the children in the agency’s care.””

    “Wagner told the committee that since February 2016, HHS has gone to greater lengths to verify the identity of potential sponsors of unaccompanied minors, and worked to crack down on the ability of sponsors to use fraudulent documents during the placement process.”

    Apparently human traffickers have taken advantage of the system for placing these kids with sponsor families and posed as sponsors.

  7. Adam M.
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    From what I’ve read, the reason children are separated from their parents is to counter a ruling/loophole that requires families with children to be released into the United States pending the results of their asylum cases. The immigrants knew and exploited this, coming openly with children instead of just the father sneaking in and working clandestinely. After being released they would almost invariably disappear (abandoning their asylum claims). Only by separating them can they actually get through the asylum process – in detention, since they can’t be trusted to show up to later appearances, the asylum claims usually being a ploy.

    • Adam M.
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:19 am | Permalink

      Further digging shows the ruling to be the Flores decision (and Judge Dolly Gee’s ruling that the Obama administration was in violation of it and must release families with children). By establishing other legal guardians for the children – the sponsors – they can release only the children into the US rather than the whole family.

  8. Saul Sorrell-Till
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    Linda Sarsour really is a ghastly opportunistic ghoul. If people on the left knew about her dodgy beliefs I’m convinced she’d be effectively blacklisted, but it’s the lack of self-criticism in left-wing media orgs like Huffpost and others that mean she’ll get plastered everywhere when she’s fronting a march for women but won’t get mentioned at all when she posts something revoltingly misogynistic about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, or tweets a panegyric to a known black supremacist anti-Semite. With the result that a lot of people genuinely don’t know about that stuff, and think she’s brilliant and feisty, rather than a vicious, attention-seeking zealot.
    It’s getting worse too, on both sides, with the right an order of magnitude worse in terms of the ability to look at itself critically.

    I just saw the Jordan Peterson/Stephen Fry/Michael Dyson/Michelle Goldberg debate on YouTube and it’s striking how the only person who came out of it well was the essentially centrist, genuine liberal Stephen Fry.

    The other three are so ossified in their political stances, and thus so committed to their own often idiotic tribalist positions, that they talked past one another and left themselves open to easy refutation from the other side. But it was clear that Fry has not been pulled into the political polarisation of the last couple of years. He was thus able to move nimbly around the court, unencumbered by dogma, and emerged as the only participant who seemed completely open and reasonable.

    I think people like Stephen are the best way for genuine liberalism to win the PR battle – it’s the first time I’ve seen anyone who identifies as ‘of the left'(even if it’s the “soft-left”) really engage in a mainstream debate with the illiberals and regressives on their own side.
    In the process he outshone them, as you’d expect, but crucially he also outshone, and demonstrated the alternative to, Jordan Peterson and his regressive mindset. There are a lot of hearts and minds out there to be won, and we really haven’t even started trying to win them yet. More power to Stephen, because he shows that genuine liberalism became the default in modern societies for very good reasons, and as long as we hold to its universal ideals people will still flock to it. Of course it helps if you’re as charming and witty as Stephen Fry.

    Apologies for the rambling length – it’s the Ambien.

    • darrelle
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:41 am | Permalink

      Stephen Fry is one of the better examples of a decent human being that I’ve come across. I’ll have to find that debate and watch it.

      • Diana MacPherson
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

        He has a new book coming out where he retells some Ancient Greek myths and it seems quite good. He is doing a series of one man plays at the Shaw Festival at Niagara-on-the-Lake but I’m too cheap to go.

        • darrelle
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

          Treat yourself! You’re worth it and besides, what’s the purpose of life if not to maximize good times?

        • Saul Sorrell-Till
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

          My mum met him when she worked for the Radio Times in the eighties. She said he was “absolutely lovely”, as was Hugh Laurie. And that’s a genuine compliment, because she wasn’t shy about naming the celebs who were rude or conceited.

          • Diana MacPherson
            Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

            Yes he does seem to be an honestly nice person who is very smart to boot.

      • Saul Sorrell-Till
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

        I wouldn’t say it’s a particularly high quality debate, it was just interesting in a political sense, for the reasons I laid out. The left side was alternately evasive, splenetic and waffly, while Jordan Peterson was reserved, offended(with reason at times) but unoriginal and uncharismatic.
        Stephen Fry just stepped in and swanned off with the whole thing, and it felt to me like a bit of a ‘yes! that’s how you do it’ moment for people like me, who belong to neither the illiberal-left nor the right, and who are heartily sick of both sides. I don’t know though, other people might have seen it differently.

        • darrelle
          Posted May 31, 2018 at 7:35 am | Permalink

          Sounds interesting to me. I’ve found it on youtube, now all I have to do is find the time to watch it.

    • darrelle
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:50 am | Permalink

      And on a somewhat, sort of, related topic (classic liberalism assaulted from the left and right), I finally had the time to watch the Steven Pinker TED talk Jerry posted about the other day. I’m flabbergasted at all the upset critics all over again. Here in just a few minutes Pinker clearly demonstrates, as he clearly does at much greater length in his books, that virtually all of the charges of his critics are pure bunk. They are either lying or so blinded by ideological beliefs that they can’t see that they are badly mischaracterizing Pinker. Whatever the case may be these critics need to be opposed and I’ll try to do my part and do so whenever confronted by them.

      • Saul Sorrell-Till
        Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

        Stick it to the man/woman/gender-neutral individual, Darrelle.

        I just finished Pinker’s latest book. The new one has some genuinely good ideas for how to reduce ideological dogmatism – apparently by far one of the most effective approaches is the simple college-debate model of having two sides confront one another and making each speaker swap arguments half way through, so that they have to argue in favour of something they might strongly disagree with.

        I’m not sure how you’d extrapolate that approach into society as a whole but I’d be hugely in favour of at least bringing it in to all colleges and universities. I don’t get the impression that it happens a lot. Of course, it’d mean two opposing sides actually having a debate on campus in the first place, and even that seems like a stretch at the moment.

        • Angel
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

          ++

  9. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    It’s becoming increasingly clear that the Trump admin is psychologically bringing out the worst in both the American Right and American Left.

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:21 am | Permalink

      A little off topic but same president. Everyone has heard about the Rosanne show on ABC being cancelled and her being fired. The good old president says nothing until just a short time ago he talks about how badly ABC treating him. All I can say is WOW.

      • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:48 am | Permalink

        Here’s a link to that reprehensible tweet. What a narcissist!

        • Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:54 am | Permalink

          JK Rowlings summed it up best in a tweet to the Asshole in Chief after he shoved someone (? I don’t recall who) out of the way for a photo op;

          “You tiny, tiny, tiny little man.”

          There really is nothing more that can be said about him.

        • Ken Kukec
          Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

          The Donald, once again demonstrating his trademark magnanimity.

          • Randall Schenck
            Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

            I think the lesson for ABC in this is – You shall reap what you sow. We see that money does not overcome everything.

            • Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

              Unfortunately that old aphorism is almost never true. If one really did reap what they sowed, Trump would be living on the streets not at 1600 Penn Ave.

              ABC made a politically and economically expedient decision. They should be given props for canceling her show, but don’t be fooled into thinking it was a moral or ethical one.

              • Randall Schenck
                Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

                I was also thinking – why did they take her on in the first place, knowing what she was? But then, that was common sense overtaken by money.

  10. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    One item I got on the news this morning on the immigration issue – from the Trump admin. If the parent will come forward and be figure printed they can get their kid back. If not, then you are unfit to be considered for immigration.

  11. Gareth
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    This is the problem I have with Twitter (and similar platform) activists. Their activism tends to revolve around staying in the limelight, justified on the basis of keeping people informed/pushing issues to the forefront. Which is all very well in theory, but in practice it often revolves around curating their own on-line ‘brands’. Whether they are 100% accurate doesn’t matter because they are promoting good causes, and as long as their brand is seen as a good one, misinformation can be defended, they don’t even have to defend it themselves. The more ‘successful’ they become, the more they can get away with bullshit.

    The end result must surely be mass cynicism and distrust, and a cabal of intolerable on-line egos.

  12. nicky
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    I’m very confused here. There are no 1500 children missing, but there is a new policy to separate parents from children? An unspeakably evil policy, implemented by Mr Sessions, but blamed on the previous admin? And these ‘new’ children are not going ‘missing’?
    And then the devious Sarsour tweet. From 2014. What is going on? It’s very confusing,, but the gist of it is that children are used as political ‘currency'(not even mentioning the human trafficking angle).

  13. Posted May 30, 2018 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    Something definitely seemed fishy about the 1500 missing children narrative. I had to withhold judgment pending more information. Thanks for that.

  14. Posted May 30, 2018 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

    I think that the problem is deeper, and there must be a government radar also on children born in the country. I was shocked by the Hart family annihilation case, with its backstory – how the children were pulled out from schools and homeschooled after a teacher reported abuse, and how the abuse continued for a decade while the adoptive mothers were paid public money to care for the children… and this wouldn’t be known at all if the abusers hadn’t decided to play Thelma & Louise with all the children in the car.

    On the other hand, I am against too much government intrusion into parenting (imagine CPS taking children away because of parents’ political activities), so I cannot suggest a good solution.

  15. Diane G
    Posted May 31, 2018 at 12:22 am | Permalink

    sub


%d bloggers like this: