Quantcast
Connect with us

How to win every argument with your Republican uncle at this year’s July 4 picnic

Published

on

Tomorrow is the United States of America’s birthday.

And just like our own birthdays, it gets celebrated whether or not the past year was a success.

America doesn’t have much to celebrate as it turns 242 years old, but celebrate we shall.

For most Americans, the holiday means getting together with friends and family, including that one racist uncle who will spend the day talking fawningly about Trump’s big, beautiful border wall.

ADVERTISEMENT

When that happens, you’re going to want to debate him. And you’re going to want to win.

Here is a guide to what the wingnuts are currently obsessed with, from someone who is professionally obligated to watch more Fox News than any sane person should.

Everyone crossing the border without authorization is acting illegally and that’s why we lock them up.

People from both sides of the aisle tend to casually refer to unauthorized border crossings as though they’re all illegal. They’re not, because the United States is obligated by international law to grant asylum to qualified people. The requirements to qualify for asylum are complex, but asylum should be granted to someone who fears persecution in their home country based on political opinion or being part of a particular social group when their home country’s government is either involved in the persecution or unable to stop it.

ADVERTISEMENT

So there’s a good argument for the prototypical family of indigenous people from a rural Guatemalan village who is being targeted by Narcos who view indigenous people as subhuman and/or want to force them to participate in a violent criminal enterprise. That means those people are legally allowed to come to the United States. They don’t have to “wait their turn” or any of that.

Trump and his agents are acting illegally by automatically detaining asylum seekers, a judge just ruled.

Trump and his supporters make a big deal about these folks needing to go to an officially designated port of entry to qualify for asylum. You can’t request asylum until you’re on American soil, so if the Trumpistas can block them from getting to American soil then the U.S. has no obligation to grant them asylum.

ADVERTISEMENT

But that’s not the law—asylum seekers can make an unauthorized arrival by sneaking past immigration control and then file their paperwork. They have not necessarily committed a crime by doing so.

Crossing the border without authorization is a serious crime and we need to detain the people who do it. We detain them apart from their children because you can’t bring your kids to jail with you.

Crossing the border without authorization—what Reoublicans call “illegally”—is a Class B misdemeanor. As a crime, this is as serious as drawing with a marker on a dollar bill.

ADVERTISEMENT

We don’t put people in jail for drawing a mustache on a dollar bill, let alone take their kid away and lock them in a cage inside an abandoned Walmart.

Once a migrant is here, being here without proper documentation is a civil infraction—but it’s not an infraction if they turn in paperwork to apply for asylum.

Obama was also locking up migrant kids and all the photos you see are of kids locked up during Obama’s administration.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Obama administration did detain migrant children, and deported a lot of people. Despite what the right claims about amnesty, the former president was extremely aggressive in policing immigration.

But those children you see locked up under Obama were not forcibly separated from their parents at the border. They were “unaccompanied minors” who made their way north on their own and got caught at the border.

The difference is that Trump intentionally and cruelly took kids from their parents—including very small children and babies.

The girl in that famous photo later used on the cover of Time was not separated from her mother.

ADVERTISEMENT

This is true—it’s also true that lots of little girls just like her were.

Democrats are destroying the country with a lack of civility—such as by refusing to serve fried chicken to Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

“Civility” is the right’s latest obsession. Essentially, everyone on Fox New seems worried that if people stop treating collaborators nicely in public, it will be miserable for current collaborators and harder to recruit new ones.

Without resorting to whataboutism, it’s worth remembering that the root of Donald Trump’s appeal is his undermining of our culture’s norms. He’s said things that other politicians won’t say and done things that other politicians won’t do. The list is too long to even start into.

ADVERTISEMENT

People have responded by resisting Trump and his collaborators in ways both big and small. That includes confronting them in restaurants.

When Obama was president, Republicans cheered when a bakery refused to serve Joe Biden.

Republicans also cheered when religious bakeries refused to make cakes for gay weddings.

Cake is not a sacred part of a wedding ceremony or the subject of any religious rituals. To say it’s OK for someone to refuse to serve a regular gay couple because you don’t like their personal choices but that it’s wrong to refuse to serve someone who constantly tells lies and took kids away from their parents and locked them in cages seems hypocritical.

Trump succeeded in North Korea and the media won’t give him credit.

ADVERTISEMENT

People on the right are obsessed with the fact that North Korea destroyed its nuclear test site with great fanfare. What they don’t understand is that happened because North Korea no longer needs to test nuclear weapons—it knows they work, it built them, it has the missiles to fire them at us.

North Korea destroying its missile test site was a celebration of its successful tests, not of acquiesce to Trump.

What did happen is that Trump legitimized a dictator by negotiating with him as an equal.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

John Bolton lawyer tells judge his interests do not align with WH chief of staff Mick Mulvaney

Published

on

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton told a federal judge on Monday that his interests do not align with those of acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

"A long-simmering feud within the White House broke into the open on Monday as a lawyer for John R. Bolton, President Trump’s former national security adviser, filed a motion trying to keep Mick Mulvaney, the president’s acting chief of staff, from joining a lawsuit over impeachment testimony," New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker reported Monday.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump’s lie about ‘doctored’ impeachment transcripts debunked by impeachment witnesses’ lawyers

Published

on

President Donald Trump on Monday falsely accused Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) of releasing "doctored" transcripts of impeachment inquiry witnesses and then bizarrely suggested that Republicans release their own versions of the transcripts.

"Shifty Adam Schiff will only release doctored transcripts," the president wrote on Twitter. "We haven’t even seen the documents and are restricted from (get this) having a lawyer."

Trump presented no evidence to back up his claim that Schiff had done something to alter the transcripts, which show that multiple administration officials testified that the Trump administration was withholding aid to Ukraine until its government agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Trump-appointed judge delivers major blow to president’s efforts to keep his taxes secret

Published

on

President Donald Trump on Monday suffered yet another legal defeat in his quest to keep his tax returns a secret -- and it came at the hands of one of the president's own appointees.

CNN reports that Trump-appointed Judge Carl Nichols the of United States District Court for the District of Columbia has ruled that the president cannot sue the state of New York in his court to prevent the release of his taxes.

In his ruling, Nichols found that Trump's attorneys failed to establish a so-called "conspiracy jurisdiction" based on his accusations that New York Attorney General Letitia James is a co-conspirator with House Democrats in a plot to improperly reveal the president's personal financial information.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image