Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Here’s a twitter thread
from a journalist explaining the conditions people who cross the border are kept in. It’s horrifying.
And here’s
an article from January of this year about border patrol destroying water jugs.
New report on Russian disinformation, prepared for the Senate, shows the operation’s scale and sweep
:
The report, a draft of which was obtained by The Washington Post, is the first to study the millions of posts provided by major technology firms to the Senate Intelligence Committee, led by Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), its chairman, and Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), its ranking Democrat. The bipartisan panel hasn’t said whether it endorses the findings. It plans to release it publicly along with another study later this week.
The research — by Oxford University’s Computational Propaganda Project and Graphika, a network analysis firm — offers new details of how Russians working at the Internet Research Agency, which U.S. officials have charged with criminal offenses for interfering in the 2016 campaign, sliced Americans into key interest groups for targeted messaging. These efforts shifted over time, peaking at key political moments, such as presidential debates or party conventions, the report found.
The data sets used by the researchers were provided by Facebook, Twitter and Google and covered several years up to mid-2017, when the social media companies cracked down on the known Russian accounts. The report, which also analyzed data separately provided to House Intelligence Committee members, contains no information on more recent political moments, such as November’s midterm elections.
“What is clear is that all of the messaging clearly sought to benefit the Republican Party — and specifically Donald Trump,” the report says. “Trump is mentioned most in campaigns targeting conservatives and right-wing voters, where the messaging encouraged these groups to support his campaign. The main groups that could challenge Trump were then provided messaging that sought to confuse, distract and ultimately discourage members from voting.”
Representatives for Burr and Warner declined to comment.
![]()
That article quotes the same report, it dates back to 2010. I highly doubt that practice survived the Obama-era reforms to CBP.
Most LE Os, agencies like CBP included, are not bad people. While there are certainly a few, by and large individual malice isn’t the issue. It’s the structural things, like the way they’re trained and deployed, or their agency policies that cause issues.
They should have sent a poet.Pardon my skepticism that border patrol has magically become less vicious since 2015. And yes, policies are more important than individual acts, but the individual acts may well be part of unofficial policies. If you have a couple higher ups who are vicious, and they encourage bad behavior or look the other way... not to mention law enforcement in the US has a history of tolerating
white supremacist officers.
Edited by wisewillow on Dec 16th 2018 at 10:20:17 AM
See the “Obama-era reforms” I mentioned above. The Obama admin cracked down on a lot of nonsense in DHS. I’ll also point out that report identifies several other possible culprits for the vandalism.
And again, we’re talking fairly small groups of officers here. Dozens, out of departments with tens of thousands of employees. Attributing the large majority of issues to individual cruelty on the part of officers isn’t a helpful stereotype.
They should have sent a poet.Since 2015.
Latest reports of this were in 2015. DURING Obama’s time. And you don’t think it’s possibly happened since? Really?
I’m also going to point out that the conditions in the hieleras in the twitter thread I linked ARE policy. Not sure why you chose to focus on the other part.
Edited by wisewillow on Dec 16th 2018 at 10:32:00 AM
The report tracks a period from 2011 to 2015, not since 2015. That fits squarely into the period where the Obama administration was reviewing stuff like this going on in DHS. And while I’m sure stuff like this does still happen occaisionally, I can’t imagine it’s as bad as it used to be. You’d never guess from the tone of the reporting, but DHS is a lot less vicious on the border than they have been in the past. They were able to put a lid on a lot of stuff there during the Obama years.
You were the one who brought up the water destruction, we weren’t discussing the conditions in holding facilities. I agree they’re despicable, though I don’t necessarily agree that it’s like that because of malice. Rather, it’s an systemic issue in the way these things are handled. CBP policy isn’t adequate for long-term detention of illegal immigrants.
Edited by archonspeaks on Dec 16th 2018 at 7:44:53 AM
They should have sent a poet.I literally linked to a discussion of the conditions in holding. And given that you’re the one who said we should focus on policy, not individuals, the very bad policies here should be a massive issue for you, not a “eh we aren’t prepared for long term holding.”
No one should be held in those conditions, period. Not for 2 weeks, not for 2 days, not for 2 hours. It’s absolutely reprehensible. And you used the term “illegal immigrants.” Most of the people in detention have not yet been DETERMINED to be lawful immigrants or not; they’re awaiting hearings. AND the very concept of long term “detention” is despicable. It’s literally imprisoning people for weeks or months on end. Not “detaining” them. Detain is a term of art for lawyers, fine, but using the term detention when discussing these practices whitewashes what’s actually happening.
“CBP policy isn’t adequate for long-term detention” WE SHOULDN’T BE DETAINING PEOPLE LONG TERM. It’s racism, xenophobia, and the profits of private prison companies, not an accidental oops.
People desperate for safety seek asylum. They cross deserts and risk death, only to arrive and be locked in concrete cages with filthy water and little food.
Don’t you dare try to minimize that.
Edited by wisewillow on Dec 16th 2018 at 11:03:41 AM
The initial post I replied to was your post at the top of the page. You only brought conditions in holding facilities into the conversation much further down. This seems like some shuffling of the goalposts to me.
I also think you’re mischaracterizing the content of that post just a little. That’s an assessment of the issue, not a dismissal of the issue. If fixing it was simple it would have been done already. There are limited options for holding, and the funding to build more facilities doesn’t exist. The pressure to hold these people comes from outside the agency, both from the upper echelons of the executive branch and from our broader immigration policy. That we even have a policy of deportation means detention is required, which I feel would be a good place to start as far as a solution. Limiting deportation to cases of serious crime or other outliers would eliminate the main reason for detention on the border.
I’ll also point out that “detain” is literally the exact word to describe what’s happening here. Imprisonment means you’re being punished for a crime, these people haven’t done anything. Just because it doesn’t feel severe enough to you doesn’t mean it’s not a 100% accurate description of the situation.
It’s really not as simple as saying that the cops are just racist. It would be fantastic if the problem was that easy.
Edited by archonspeaks on Dec 16th 2018 at 8:14:26 AM
They should have sent a poet.The entire system is racist, as are many of its cogs, if that’s more explicit for you.
After I posted the link about hieleras, you only addressed my link on the water issue; sorry for any confusion but I was annoyed that it didn’t get a response. My main concern is the overall inhumanity at the border, not just the water destroying jerks, so I think we were talking past each other there. I’m going to focus on one part of what you just said.
Uh... what? We’ve been building more private prisons and holding facilities, especially near the border.
Okay? Weird thing to comment on but okay. Do you have a relative who works for CBP or something??? They aren’t setting overall policies, but they have a lot of control over how they implement policies. I doubt there’s an official federal law saying hieleras are great and totally the right set up.
You’re actually completely wrong. Having hearings and deportation doesn’t require detention. In fact, the Obama admin tested a program
which had a 99% success rate:
“It was really, really cost efficient compared to family detention or family separation,” Katharina Obser, a senior policy adviser for the Women's Refugee Commission's Migrant Rights and Justice program, said.
According to The Associated Press, cost the government $36 per day per family.
...
According to the Inspector General report, overall compliance in the five cities where the pilot was launched was 99 percent for ICE check-ins and appointments, and 100 percent for attendance in court hearings. Just 2 percent of participants absconded during the process.
As for detain versus imprison... I’m a law student. Typically, “detain” implies a short time period, such as when the cops pull you over and you’re not allowed to leave. Yes, our immigration system officially uses the word “detention” to refer to holding people for weeks or months (or even years). I personally take great offense to the use of the term, as I think it is far too neutral for common use, especially given the many, many reports of horrific conditions. Yes, imprison is also a term of art referring to the period after conviction. But I think it conveys the seriousness of the issue and more accurately reflects the conditions.
Edited by wisewillow on Dec 16th 2018 at 11:31:02 AM
Money for additional facilities rarely goes where it should. If you notice, one of the main issues with these detention facilities is that they are just that, detention facilities. They look like a drunk tank, not a prison. They’re massively overcrowded and don’t have the utilities you’d expect for long periods of incarceration. The whole reason money has been moving to private prisons is because the government had found itself reluctant to build new facilities itself. Why do you think they tried housing people on military bases?
Most of the people being held in these facilities are awaiting a hearing and deportation. If deportation wasn’t on the table do you really think as many people would be held as there are now?
I also don’t see how pointing out that CBP doesn’t set the nation’s immigration policy is weird.
You’re incorrect about the word “detain”. A time limit is not implied. Though it would be illegal, you could be detained indefinitely if you were being held by the state without having been convicted of a crime. Any time your freedom of movement is restricted by a state authority you’re technically being detained, it doesn’t matter whether it’s for a minute or a decade. You may think imprisonmemt sounds better but it’s just not an accurate way to describe what’s going on. It also creates the implication that these people have been found guilty of a crime and are being legally punished, which is certainly not what’s going on.
They should have sent a poet.Nope.
Nope.
And building more facilities is bad. I really hope I don’t need to explain why.
Getting rid of deportation/allowing border crossers to enter freely is, while in my opinion the moral thing to do, about equally likely to pigs flying.
Logistically, whether or not we deport people is a massive change. How we treat people awaiting hearings is a much more immediate problem which could easily be solved. And you didn’t respond at all to the article I linked about how a case worker + monitoring was super effective. You’re just repeating that we should get rid of deportation.
It’s weird because we’re not discussing overall policy, we’re discussing issues and abuses within CBP’s control.
I’m trying to keep my temper here but I’m really bothered by all this hairsplitting over technicalities in the face of massive abuses. Children are literally in cages. That’s a literal thing happening in 2018, and you’re fussing at me for being angry at how we describe locking children in cages. I never disputed the legal or dictionary definition of the term, I just pointed out why I take offense to “detain” as the word being used to refer to locking children in cages for months in unsanitary conditions with bad or little food and water.
Edited by wisewillow on Dec 16th 2018 at 12:19:10 PM
It’s not hairsplitting. I don’t believe simply improving conditions is a good solution here, we need to address the root cause of the issue. Poor conditions are a symptom. You seem perfectly happy to just blame the whole thing on racism in CBP when it’s a much more serious and systemic issue.
And frankly I take more offense at the word imprisonment. These people have not committed a crime and are not being lawfully held. Saying they’re imprisioned is not only incorrect but creates a perception that what’s going on is lawful.
They should have sent a poet.The problem with calling these people prisoners in a legal sense is that it implies they are convicted criminals serving a sentence.
Detain is the correct term for what is happening to these people. Maybe it's not harsh enough to describe it, since it's the same word used to describe what happens to kids who misbehave in school and stay after class.
Disgusted, but not surprised![]()
![]()
![]()
I’m sorry, are you trying to imply I don’t have any issue with children dying in custody? Because if so I’d encourage you to rethink that statement.
“Indefinite detainment” is the exact phrase to describe what’s going on. These people have not been sentenced or even charged with a crime (or even really done anything wrong) but are being held against their will by the state for an undefined period of time.
Edited by archonspeaks on Dec 16th 2018 at 9:54:59 AM
They should have sent a poet.

The father says she had enough food, but from what I get she was only in border patrol custody for 8 hours, which isn’t enough time to starve to death unless you’ve already been starved.
It’s entierly possible that she could have been saved if border patrol had had enough manpower and medical knowledge to realise what was going on and get her treatment, but my understanding is that they didn’t.
To save her they’d have likely needed a trained medic as part of the patrol that picked the group up, not untrained patrol agents who eventually realised she needed medical attention and took her to the town several hours away, where the one medic in town realised that she needed the hospital several more hours away.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran