Does it matter to you if Trump fails?

[L'Emmerdeur]

But, let's not pretend that Obama really was deporting more. The numbers, as was often the case with the Obama administration, were masterfully manipulated to show what they needed politically. A close examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S.were less likely to be deported under Obama than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data. Expulsions of illegal aliens who were living in in the United States fell steadily since his first year in office, and were down more than 40% from 2009 to 2014.

So, how did the Obama Administration make it look like he was tough on illegal immigrants? The number of people deported at or near the border went up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's deportation statistics. The vast majority of those border crossers would not have been treated as formal deportations under most previous administrations. If all removals were tallied, the total sent back to Mexico each year would have been far higher under those previous administrations than it is now. In past administrations, most people caught illegally crossing the southern border were simply bused back into Mexico in what officials called "voluntary returns," and were not counted as deportations. Those removals, which during the 1990s reached more 1 million a year, were not counted in Immigration and Customs Enforcement's deportation statistics. Under Obama, those catch-and-release folks were counted as removals and deportations.

See the sleight of hand? Reduce deportations in actual fact, while fudging the numbers up by redefining the terms and including people who were not previously considered deportations in the numbers regarding deportations! That way, we can be soft on illegal immigration and claim to be tough on illegal immigration at the same time!

That's classic Obama Administration.

You didn't cite any sources for your accusations, Forty Two. It appears as if you think you're your own authority on this topic, but it's more likely that you're just parroting something that Lou Dobbs said.

I refer you to a source that takes the time to examine this accusation in detail:

Dobbs said the federal government "manipulated deportation data to make it appear that the Border Patrol was deporting more illegal immigrants than the Bush administration."

Deportations or "removals" under Obama are tracking higher than during the Bush years using the most literal deportation statistics, as well as those solely from ICE. Dobbs’ contention that the Obama administration is inflating its number is an interpretation of a change in federal policy to process and remove people trying to enter the country illegally rather than just turn them around. Whether you agree with the policy, those formal removals are occurring.

That strategy is rooted in previous administrations but was accelerated by Obama so that people trying to cross the border illegally face more significant consequences and receive formal deportation orders.

We rate the claim False.

[Brian Peacock]

FAKE DEPORTATIONS SHOCKER!! The number of illegal entries fell under Obama, but the justificatory narrative of the alt-right relies on the accumulative effects of low-fear appeals, so casting that success as a de facto failure is obligatory. The narrative is that all the numbers are wrong because some of the numbers have been counted differently, and that as some numbers have been differently counted all the numbers are wrong (including the differently counted numbers). This may be circular, but it's handy. The view that the numbers are produced by malign intent is strongly implied and forms the basis of a self-reinforcing assumption set to undermine evidences. No counter-evidence is needed beyond citing that something 'troubling' or 'problematic' has occurred. We see this sort of thing a lot from ideologues of every stripe.

[Tero]

[youtube]http://youtu.be/FdBF6h7oH5I[/youtube]

[Forty Two]

But, let's not pretend that Obama really was deporting more. The numbers, as was often the case with the Obama administration, were masterfully manipulated to show what they needed politically. A close examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S.were less likely to be deported under Obama than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data. Expulsions of illegal aliens who were living in in the United States fell steadily since his first year in office, and were down more than 40% from 2009 to 2014.

So, how did the Obama Administration make it look like he was tough on illegal immigrants? The number of people deported at or near the border went up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's deportation statistics. The vast majority of those border crossers would not have been treated as formal deportations under most previous administrations. If all removals were tallied, the total sent back to Mexico each year would have been far higher under those previous administrations than it is now. In past administrations, most people caught illegally crossing the southern border were simply bused back into Mexico in what officials called "voluntary returns," and were not counted as deportations. Those removals, which during the 1990s reached more 1 million a year, were not counted in Immigration and Customs Enforcement's deportation statistics. Under Obama, those catch-and-release folks were counted as removals and deportations.

See the sleight of hand? Reduce deportations in actual fact, while fudging the numbers up by redefining the terms and including people who were not previously considered deportations in the numbers regarding deportations! That way, we can be soft on illegal immigration and claim to be tough on illegal immigration at the same time!

That's classic Obama Administration.

You didn't cite any sources for your accusations, Forty Two. It appears as if you think you're your own authority on this topic, but it's more likely that you're just parroting something that Lou Dobbs said.

I refer you to a source that takes the time to examine this accusation in detail:

Dobbs said the federal government "manipulated deportation data to make it appear that the Border Patrol was deporting more illegal immigrants than the Bush administration."

Deportations or "removals" under Obama are tracking higher than during the Bush years using the most literal deportation statistics, as well as those solely from ICE. Dobbs’ contention that the Obama administration is inflating its number is an interpretation of a change in federal policy to process and remove people trying to enter the country illegally rather than just turn them around. Whether you agree with the policy, those formal removals are occurring.

That strategy is rooted in previous administrations but was accelerated by Obama so that people trying to cross the border illegally face more significant consequences and receive formal deportation orders.

We rate the claim False.

LOL - that's classic - they rate the claim "False" while at the same time acknowledging that the claim is true. "Whether you agree with the policy, those formal removals are occurring." Yes, but they are occurring because the administration took actions that were previously not considered or labeled deportations and started calling them deportations. If the same definitions applied under Bush, the deportations would have been much higher. That's the point. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-oba ... story.html and http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... rew-stiles

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... chief-say/

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson acknowledged Tuesday that his department’s deportation numbers are now mostly made up of illegal immigrants caught at the border, not just those from the interior, which means they can’t be compared one-to-one with deportations under President Bush or other prior administrations.
The administration has argued it is tougher on illegal immigration than previous presidents, and immigrant-rights groups have excoriated President Obama, calling him the “deporter-in-chief” for having kicked out nearly 2 million immigrants during his five-year tenure.
But Republican critics have argued those deportation numbers are artificially inflated because more than half of those being deported were new arrivals, caught at the border by the U.S. Border Patrol. Previous administrations primarily counted only those caught in the interior of the U.S. by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
“Under the Obama administration, more than half of those removals that were attributed to ICE are actually a result of Border Patrol arrests that wouldn’t have been counted in prior administrations,” said Rep. John Culberson, Texas Republican.
“Correct,” Mr. Johnson confirmed.
That would mean that in a one-to-one comparison with the final years of the Bush administration, deportations of those same people under Mr. Obama had actually fallen, according to immigration analysts...

[Forty Two]

FAKE DEPORTATIONS SHOCKER!! The number of illegal entries fell under Obama, but the justificatory narrative of the alt-right relies on the accumulative effects of low-fear appeals, so casting that success as a de facto failure is obligatory. The narrative is that all the numbers are wrong because some of the numbers have been counted differently, and that as some numbers have been differently counted all the numbers are wrong (including the differently counted numbers). This may be circular, but it's handy. The view that the numbers are produced by malign intent is strongly implied and forms the basis of a self-reinforcing assumption set to undermine evidences. No counter-evidence is needed beyond citing that something 'troubling' or 'problematic' has occurred. We see this sort of thing a lot from ideologues of every stripe.

If he really is the "deporter in chief", why in the hell didn't you speak out against him? His xenophobia is running rampant. I mean, immigrants are the life blood of our nation, and they work and pay taxes and are just coming here for a better life. How dare he deport more of them than the evil George W. Bush whose level of deportations, albeit lower than Obama's, was evidence of his xenophobia and racism....

I know I know...Obama's policy was far more nuanced and careful, and a much more rational and sensible scheme than that used by Bush, and now by Trump. Things were harmonious and reasonable on the immigration front, and the deporter in chief did deport more people than anyone else, but he only deported the ones that deserved deporting.

[L'Emmerdeur]

LOL - that's classic - they rate the claim "False" while at the same time acknowledging that the claim is true.

As you yourself acknowledged earlier, previously most of those who crossed the border illegally were simply bussed back across. In other words, they suffered no legal repercussions for what they did. The policy was changed so that these people went through the process of being formally deported ("removed"). There is no dishonest inflation of statistics because the new policy did without question result in more deportations. The accusation you've made is false.

One distinct feature of the record number of deportations is the increasing share of deportations by U.S. Customs and Border Protection after border apprehension. In 2013, 25% of all deportations were carried out by the agency, up from 17% in 2012. Meanwhile, the number of deportations carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which deports people caught both at the border and the interior of the country, fell in 2013 compared with 2012.

Another change is that in 2013, a record 363,000 (83%) of deportations were carried out without appearing before a judge – either through an order issued by an enforcement agent (called expedited removal) or by using a previous order of deportation (called reinstatement of final orders). This is due to a 2005 shift in policy that has increased the likelihood of being deported after apprehension.

This rise in the number of deportations also coincides with stalled growth of the U.S. unauthorized immigrant population since 2009, and a more recent rise in the number of apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border. In 2013, there were 414,000 apprehensions at the southwest border, a rise of 27% over 2011 (the most recent low in apprehensions).

[source]

Note that as the fact-check article correctly stated, the new policy was instituted under the previous administration. The Obama administration enforced that policy, resulting in an increase in deportations. Your intellectually dishonest tap-dancing doesn't change the facts. The deportations were not "pretend" and those who pointed to an increase in deportations under Obama were correct.

[Forty Two]

LOL - that's classic - they rate the claim "False" while at the same time acknowledging that the claim is true.

As you yourself acknowledged earlier, previously most of those who crossed the border illegally were simply bussed back across. In other words, they suffered no legal repercussions for what they did. The policy was changed so that these people went through the process of being formally deported ("removed"). There is no dishonest inflation of statistics because the new policy did without question result in more deportations. The accusation you've made is false.

There is, because they claim those folks to be "deportations" now, when before they were not considered deportations. So, Obama was able to claim to be deporting a lot more people. In past administrations, the same thing was done to those folks at the border - they were sent back then, just as they are now. Only then, they were not called deportations. That's how the number is inflated under Obama - they called the "sending back" of those folks "deportations" when they were previously not labeled deportations.

Note that as the fact-check article correctly stated, the new policy was instituted under the previous administration. The Obama administration enforced that policy, resulting in an increase in deportations. Your intellectually dishonest tap-dancing doesn't change the facts. The deportations were not "pretend" and those who pointed to an increase in deportations under Obama were correct.

I cited several authorities to prove my case. The factcheck you cited was dishonest, and the articles I cited explain it.

[L'Emmerdeur]

There is, because they claim those folks to be "deportations" now, when before they were not considered deportations.

They were not "considered" deportations under the previous policy because they were not deportations. No official action was being taken; the people were simply being bussed back across the border. The new policy is that those people go through an official deportation process. This has been clearly stated, and your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't change the facts.

[Forty Two]

There is, because they claim those folks to be "deportations" now, when before they were not considered deportations.

They were not "considered" deportations under the previous policy because they were not deportations. No official action was being taken; the people were simply being bussed back across the border. The new policy is that those people go through an official deportation process. This has been clearly stated, and your refusal to acknowledge it doesn't change the facts.

No, you're wrong. They are simply declaring the process of picking up and bussing people back across the border is now a "deportation." There is bit of data entry added to the mix.

[L'Emmerdeur]

In federal government lingo, official judicial or administrative orders to leave the country are called "removals," and they can happen right at the border or anywhere else on American soil. A removal is what most people would consider a deportation.

But for people caught illegally crossing the border and simply turned around, there’s another term: "return."

Unlike removals, a return does not bar someone from legally entering the country someday, though that is hard for most because they do not have a family or employment connection necessary to get in line for citizenship, said David Martin, a University of Virginia School of Law professor. Martin also worked as Immigration and Naturalization Service general counsel in the Clinton administration and as DHS deputy general counsel from 2009-10 under Obama.

The Border Patrol primarily handles voluntary returns to Mexico, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, equipped with immigration judges and detention center beds, generally handles removals.

Over the past several administrations, the Department of Homeland Security has shifted its immigration focus to undocumented immigrants who commit crimes or are caught at the border. The idea is to get them out, and keep them out. The shift picked up in the George W. Bush administration and intensified under Obama’s watch.

Whereas many immigrants previously caught at the border simply were bused back to Mexico, they now are returned with official deportation orders, prosecuted, or moved to different parts of the border so they cannot reconnect with their smuggler, Martin said.

In short, these people previously would have been classified as a "return," but the policy has been to put them through removal proceedings. As such, they are classified as a "removal."

[My emphasis]

[source]

Deportations, or "removals" as the Department of Homeland Security calls them, increased in each of the first four years President Obama was in office, topping 400,000 in fiscal year 2012. Obama oversaw more deportations than George W. Bush did, just as Bush oversaw more than Bill Clinton did. The trend toward increased deportations began with the 1996 passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, with growing budgets for the DHS agencies that enforce immigration law. Formal removal has largely replaced informal "return" for those caught in the country illegally. Removal carries stiffer consequences and it's increasingly carried out without judicial review.

[My emphasis]

[source]

Another change is that in 2013, a record 363,000 (83%) of deportations were carried out without appearing before a judge – either through an order issued by an enforcement agent (called expedited removal) or by using a previous order of deportation (called reinstatement of final orders). This is due to a 2005 shift in policy that has increased the likelihood of being deported after apprehension.

[My emphasis]

[source]

[Forty Two]

In federal government lingo, official judicial or administrative orders to leave the country are called "removals," and they can happen right at the border or anywhere else on American soil. A removal is what most people would consider a deportation.

But for people caught illegally crossing the border and simply turned around, there’s another term: "return."

Unlike removals, a return does not bar someone from legally entering the country someday, though that is hard for most because they do not have a family or employment connection necessary to get in line for citizenship, said David Martin, a University of Virginia School of Law professor. Martin also worked as Immigration and Naturalization Service general counsel in the Clinton administration and as DHS deputy general counsel from 2009-10 under Obama.

The Border Patrol primarily handles voluntary returns to Mexico, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, equipped with immigration judges and detention center beds, generally handles removals.

Over the past several administrations, the Department of Homeland Security has shifted its immigration focus to undocumented immigrants who commit crimes or are caught at the border. The idea is to get them out, and keep them out. The shift picked up in the George W. Bush administration and intensified under Obama’s watch.

Whereas many immigrants previously caught at the border simply were bused back to Mexico, they now are returned with official deportation orders, prosecuted, or moved to different parts of the border so they cannot reconnect with their smuggler, Martin said.

In short, these people previously would have been classified as a "return," but the policy has been to put them through removal proceedings. As such, they are classified as a "removal."

[My emphasis]

[source]

Right - we're in agreement here, but it's obvious we are viewing it differently. This is exactly what I've been saying and exactly what you've been telling me is wrong. My assertion was that the numbers of "deportations" (aka removals) by Obama seem high, because the Obama numbers include persons who previously were not considered deportations/removals. Now that they are, it means that to compare the number of deportations/removals under Obama to Bush, one would have to add in the "returns" under Bush. Otherwise, it's comparing different statistics.

[L'Emmerdeur]

If a change in policy has resulted in a greater number of deportations, then there is no dishonesty in stating that the number of deportations has gone up.

There is a difference between a "return" and a "removal." A "return" is not an official deportation, while a "removal" is.

[Brian Peacock]

It seems to me that a deportation or 'removal' is of a different order to a 'return'. It's not just a counting difference, it's a procedural difference. It suggests that the immigration rules are being applied in a far stricter manner to effect a different outcome than simply turning people around.

[Forty Two]

If a change in policy has resulted in a greater number of deportations, then there is no dishonesty in stating that the number of deportations has gone up.

There is a difference between a "return" and a "removal." A "return" is not an official deportation, while a "removal" is.

LOL - right, the difference is that the return was the same as a removal in fact (they're removed, sent back home) -- but, they were not "officially" counted as a removal/deportation. Now they are. it's a change in terminology, and recording of previously unrecorded things.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Pigeon chess, with Forty Two as the winged "winner."