Border Patrol Disasters

[fraurosena]

15 minutes ago, Palimpsest said:

But I can see what @fraurosena is getting at from her seat on the other side of the pond.  She's been following this very closely.  Perhaps her frustration got away from her temporarily.  Mine does that sometimes too.

To say that my frustration got away from me is putting it mildly. I am outraged, angry, sad, and frightened at what's happening in America right now. And it's hard when there isn't an easy answer, and it looks like nobody cares enough. (Of course I know that's not true, and there are plenty of people that do care. It's just that it seemed that way.) So I was feeling pretty overwhelmed to be honest. My posts reflect that.

@Dreadcrumbs, I don't agree with your reaction to my pun. I don't have to answer to you, a stranger on the internet, at all. I can, and will, comment in any way I choose. Just like you, and every other member of this forum can. If I choose to give a punny answer, then that is what I will do. It doesn't matter where I am. That said, I have never made a secret of where I live (the punny location under my avatar is hint enough where that is). Also, I don't think that my position outside of the US disqualifies my opinion about putting children in concentration camps and submitting them to torturous circumstances. You (general you) don't have the exclusive rights to call out or opine on any subject just because they occur where you happen to be, to the exclusion of those that aren't. I call out these horrors as I see them, wherever in the world they are committed. And when I personally can't because I'm not on location to do so myself, I will try and persuade people who are to do something, anything that they can, to address the situation. Although, like I said above, my earlier posts weren't well thought out and very much influenced by my emotions. 

@hoipolloi, I agree that the 2020 elections are vital, and I share your concerns with SCOTUS rulings on gerrymandering and voter suppression. I'm puzzled about the influence the census has on elections though. We don't have a census with questionnaires over here (all the necessary information is gleaned from registers so there is no need to personally interview people), and I don't quite understand how the citizenship question will influence elections. If I understand correctly, all American citizens are eligible voters, and non-citizens aren't. If you can only register to vote if you are a citizen, then why does the question matter? To be clear, I'm not saying it doesn't, I just don't understand how.

 

[hoipolloi]

4 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

I'm puzzled about the influence the census has on elections though.

First, here's a good outline on the ways a census count, accurate or inaccurate, affects a broad swath of US society, government, culture & economy. 

Second, the reason the census results affect voting is because the states' congressional (federal) and state voting districts are redrawn after every census because the voting districts are supposed to reflect population sizes. Although the republicans have already distorted the boundaries of voting districts in order to give themselves majorities in various state legislatures, including the citizenship question allows them to further refine their gerrymanders so as to boost republican chances and diminish the voting power of (potential) Democratic voters who end up, through gerrymandering, in more widely dispersed districts where they can never achieve a majority, no matter how large the turn out.  This article from Vox gives more information:

Quote

 

The census doesn’t determine who gets to vote. But it does determine how votes count. And voting rights advocates fear that generating citizenship data from the “actual enumeration” of the census would give the federal government the information it needed to apportion congressional seats based on how many citizens lived in each state, rather than how many people — something that would likely hurt Texas and California.

It could also encourage state efforts to draw congressional districts based on citizen population. The Supreme Court has routinely ruled that states are allowed to use total population when drawing districts — including in a 2016 decision where the Court sided 8-0 with Texas’s use of total population — but it hasn’t explicitly said that they have to.

A conservative state government that wanted to allocate its representatives based only on people who could vote would already be able to do that using American Community Survey data (because redistricting, unlike reapportionment, is allowed to use sampled data). But it would be that much easier if that data were part of the essential census package.

 

 

[fraurosena]

15 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

First, here's a good outline on the ways a census count, accurate or inaccurate, affects a broad swath of US society, government, culture & economy. 

Second, the reason the census results affect voting is because the states' congressional (federal) and state voting districts are redrawn after every census because the voting districts are supposed to reflect population sizes. Although the republicans have already distorted the boundaries of voting districts in order to give themselves majorities in various state legislatures, including the citizenship question allows them to further refine their gerrymanders so as to boost republican chances and diminish the voting power of (potential) Democratic voters who end up, through gerrymandering, in more widely dispersed districts where they can never achieve a majority, no matter how large the turn out.  This article from Vox gives more information:

 

Good grief, I thought I had a good grasp on the intrinsic malignity of gerrymandering, but it turns out I've  underestimated it quite a bit. Thanks for the information, @hoipolloi, although it serves as yet another sad and sorry example of how America is decidedly not a democracy. 

[Ozlsn]

One of the things that really surprised me during my first trip to the US (Oct-Nov 2000 - an interesting time to be there) was that there was no equivalent body to the Australian Electoral Commission. I knew that the US had first past the post non-compulsory voting, I knew that the college of electors existed and had a vague idea how it worked - but I still had no idea how differently organised things like electoral rolls and electorate boundary definition were. It was a very informative trip.

The political situation here is also frustrating and depressing. I am continuing to support the organisations who can do more than I can alone, and in trying to put pressure on the elected officials who have more power (and who I think still have a conscience) to keep the questions going to the givernment ministers - they may be in power but they still have to justify their decisions.

 

[Dreadcrumbs]

Quote

 To say that my frustration got away from me is putting it mildly. I am outraged, angry, sad, and frightened at what's happening in America right now. And it's hard when there isn't an easy answer, and it looks like nobody cares enough. (Of course I know that's not true, and there are plenty of people that do care. It's just that it seemed that way.) So I was feeling pretty overwhelmed to be honest. My posts reflect that. 

@fraurosena Clearly.

Here's the thing, though: I don't think you understand the culture. We are, as my mom puts it, "millimeters away from martial law."

I didn't demand for you to tell me exactly where it is that you live. I didn't say you couldn't voice an opinion. My thing is that maybe you ought to think harder about calling us "defeatist" without a very good understanding of the culture (and history that @Cleopatra7 does a great job laying out).

That's it. I can't be any less blunt and still get to the point.

[GreyhoundFan]

You couldn't make this up:

[WiseGirl]

So can Michael Burgess explain how come Congressional representatives that want to see the detention camps/concentration camps are only allowed to see certain sections or have carefully controlled tours?

Also if he has children can they go live with someone else them his family?  Because clearly if it is okay for other people's children to live with some family rather than his parents, then he should be willing to let the same happen to his kids.

[AmazonGrace]

FYI i'm also outside of the USA.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

On 6/26/2019 at 3:52 PM, apple1 said:

ETA: If the rest of the world has the fix - Somebody tell me why every dang nation that used to be American allies aren't sanctioning the heck out of their relationships with the US? Apparently it's not so easy.

It would be Putin's wet dream. We are trying to stay friends remember? That NATO thing and all that jazz?

Btw I agree with @fraurosena. Trump (and his whole administration) is not just your problem, he is our problem.

He has shredded the Iran agreement and done his best to put the Middle East on fire. He weakened NATO. Thanks to his utter idiocy, war with Iran was literally 10 minutes away, and those 10 minutes can vaporise any moment. We risked a nuclear war with North Korea. After howling stupid insults against Kim Jong In he became his best mate and legitimised his dictatorship. He constantly trashes democratic countries leaders and praises and actively supports dictators. He keeps trashing the EU and promoting that folly that is Brexit. He aides the Saudis, the ones who are causing thousands of people to die in Yemen and sawing journalists into pieces. He has fought against any attempt to efficiently address climate changes. He has taken the US out of the UN's commission on Human rights. He trashes the UN. He defunded family planning programs that would help people come out of poverty in developing countries. His stupid trade wars are going to cost us all a lot. I could go on.

He is our problem too. But unfortunately he is your sole responsibility. We can do next to nothing against a legitimately (even if not democratically) elected president of a foreign country. You are the only ones who can do something. And you can do it now.

If/when he becomes a dictator it will be late, it will be infinitely more difficult and costly. Personally I don't think he will ever be a dictator Kim Jong Un style. It would be a uniquely American way to dictatorship. SCOTUS today said gerrymandering is legal so you can bet that the GOP will gerrymander the impossible, they may manage to keep enough power in their hands (the presidency and the Senate are more than enough) to nominally give you more freedom than ever and to actually curtail your rights more and more, bit by bit. Your elections will become even less democratic. And one day you will wake up and find that you have been living under a dictatorship for a while, hostages of a minority of the population brainwashed into worshipping tRump's farts. At that point people are going to die to regain your freedom.

And what should we foreigners do? Unleash the WWIII? Against the country with the most nukes and headed by a tiny fingered mercurial dictator? No way. We would have to be the adults in the room and do damage control.

So, please, do something and do it while you still can. I know that my words can sound harsh and heartless, after all I doubt anyone of the people on this board voted for the Trumpanzee. And yes he lost the popular vote, I know and I find it scary, because it can easily happen again.

If you are looking for inspiration, Hong Kong citizens may give you an idea or two. The women's march in 2017 was a very good start.

[GreyhoundFan]

I've posted many negative articles about Ken Cuccinelli. This one shows why I despise him: "Ken Cuccinelli, head of citizenship service, blames migrant father for drowning deaths captured in photo"

Spoiler

Ken Cuccinelli, the acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said on CNN Thursday night that a widely circulated photograph of a migrant father and his 23-month-old daughter who drowned on the banks of the Rio Grande was tragic, but that it was the father’s fault they died — and not the fault of U.S. asylum policy requiring migrants to wait in Mexico.

Cuccinelli, an immigration hard-liner nominated this month by President Trump to lead the federal agency that oversees legal immigration, including asylum, made the case while speaking on “Erin Burnett OutFront.” The news anchor asked if Cuccinelli believed the graphic photo could be compared to the 2015 of the 3-year-old Syrian boy who had washed up on a beach, an image that had turned the world’s attention to the anguish confronting refugees trying to reach Europe. Would the photo of this father and daughter become a symbol of the Trump administration’s policies on the border? Burnett asked.

Cuccinelli said no, “in fact the opposite.”

“The reason we have tragedies like that on the border is because that father didn’t wait to go through the asylum process in the legal fashion and decided to cross the river and not only died but his daughter died tragically as well,” said Cuccinelli, 50. “Until we fix the attractions in our asylum system, people like that father and that child are going to continue to come through a dangerous trip.”

Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia, has long peddled far-right fare, supporting immigration causes that ultimately would land him in the president’s good graces. But his extreme positions have turned off some moderate Republicans. As a state lawmaker in Virginia, Cuccinelli once sponsored a bill that would strip undocumented immigrants’ U.S.-born children of their citizenship. He supported a bill banning undocumented immigrants from attending any state colleges. He has said a D.C. ordinance that doesn’t let animal control workers kill rats is worse than U.S. immigration policy because, “You can’t break up rat families.”

Before joining the Trump administration, he appeared frequently on cable news to trumpet the president’s policies, as he did on Thursday.

The photo of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, 25, and his 23-month-old daughter, Valeria, lying facedown in the river drew global condemnation, helping to jolt lawmakers into passing a $4.6 billion emergency spending bill Thursday. Questions emerged immediately about how the tragedy could have been prevented. Contrary to Cuccinelli’s view, some have blamed U.S. policy for their deaths, pointing to a Trump administration policy known as “metering."

The policy restricts the number of migrants allowed to cross an international bridge and claim asylum at a U.S. port of entry per day. Instead, they must remain in Mexico at shelters or elsewhere until they are allowed through. Critics say Mexico is unsafe and forcing migrants to stay there puts them at risk of being victims of crime — an argument echoed by unionized U.S. asylum officers.

Some have argued that may have been why Martinez and his daughter attempted to cross the river instead, although there is nothing to indicate that they presented at an official border crossing and were turned away because of metering.

“This metering policy is basically what prompted Óscar and Valeria to make that risky swim across the river,” Julián Castro, a former secretary of housing and urban development, said during Wednesday’s Democratic presidential debate.

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) also said on CNN Wednesday that the deaths were the product of this policy, the point of which is to “make conditions cruel enough to deter migration, cruel enough to get Congress to build this wall, and the results are tragic.” And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), while maintaining that the Óscar and Valeria’s deaths should not “be a question of blame,” said it was a matter of understanding “the consequences of policy.”

Trump, by contrast, had blamed the Democrats. He pointed to a lack of action to fix immigration and asylum “loopholes."

“The Democrats refuse to change the loopholes. They refuse to change the asylum,” Trump told reporters from the White House lawn Wednesday. “In one hour we can have it done. They want to have open borders, and open borders mean crime, and open borders mean people drowning in the rivers, and it’s a very dangerous thing.”

Republicans have often pointed to “loopholes” while seeking to enact more restrictive immigration laws, and on Thursday night Cuccinelli did too. Cuccinelli, Trump and other administration officials have claimed that many migrants come to “fraudulently” claim asylum to freely enter the country while waiting months or years for immigration hearings, which asylum attorneys have long disputed. Administration officials have used that argument to support the “Remain in Mexico” policy, formally known as the Migrant Protection Protocols program, which is being challenged in federal court.

Earlier on Thursday, U.S. asylum officers argued that the policy is illegal and endangers the lives and well-being of migrants. In an amicus brief filed through their labor union, the officers urged the federal court to strike the policy down, as The Washington Post reported Thursday.

The officers said the policy is “fundamentally contrary to the moral fabric of our Nation and our international and domestic legal obligations."

The Migrant Protection Protocols allow the government to return asylum seekers back to Mexico as they await immigration hearings. The policy has sent 12,000 asylum seekers to wait in Mexico since January; it’s intended to deter them from coming to the country and to ease burdens on what officials describe as an overwhelmed asylum system.

But through their labor union, the asylum officers claimed this policy violated laws preventing the government from sending migrants back to countries where they fear persecution. The officers said the asylum system was already designed to absorb an influx of migrants, to suss out legitimate and illegitimate asylum claims, and that Trump’s policy was unnecessary.

Cuccinelli accused the asylum officers of being “in denial of reality.” He said the policy was badly needed, citing alleged false claims of asylum by migrants.

“The reality is, until we fix the asylum loopholes that encourage people to come here fraudulently, we will keep seeing these tragedies,” Cuccinelli said.

A federal judge struck down the Migrant Protection Protocols policy in April, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit allowed it to continue in May while the case remains under review.

 

[Dreadcrumbs]

16 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I've posted many negative articles about Ken Cuccinelli. This one shows why I despise him: "Ken Cuccinelli, head of citizenship service, blames migrant father for drowning deaths captured in photo"

  Hide contents

Ken Cuccinelli, the acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said on CNN Thursday night that a widely circulated photograph of a migrant father and his 23-month-old daughter who drowned on the banks of the Rio Grande was tragic, but that it was the father’s fault they died — and not the fault of U.S. asylum policy requiring migrants to wait in Mexico.

Cuccinelli, an immigration hard-liner nominated this month by President Trump to lead the federal agency that oversees legal immigration, including asylum, made the case while speaking on “Erin Burnett OutFront.” The news anchor asked if Cuccinelli believed the graphic photo could be compared to the 2015 of the 3-year-old Syrian boy who had washed up on a beach, an image that had turned the world’s attention to the anguish confronting refugees trying to reach Europe. Would the photo of this father and daughter become a symbol of the Trump administration’s policies on the border? Burnett asked.

Cuccinelli said no, “in fact the opposite.”

“The reason we have tragedies like that on the border is because that father didn’t wait to go through the asylum process in the legal fashion and decided to cross the river and not only died but his daughter died tragically as well,” said Cuccinelli, 50. “Until we fix the attractions in our asylum system, people like that father and that child are going to continue to come through a dangerous trip.”

Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia, has long peddled far-right fare, supporting immigration causes that ultimately would land him in the president’s good graces. But his extreme positions have turned off some moderate Republicans. As a state lawmaker in Virginia, Cuccinelli once sponsored a bill that would strip undocumented immigrants’ U.S.-born children of their citizenship. He supported a bill banning undocumented immigrants from attending any state colleges. He has said a D.C. ordinance that doesn’t let animal control workers kill rats is worse than U.S. immigration policy because, “You can’t break up rat families.”

Before joining the Trump administration, he appeared frequently on cable news to trumpet the president’s policies, as he did on Thursday.

The photo of Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, 25, and his 23-month-old daughter, Valeria, lying facedown in the river drew global condemnation, helping to jolt lawmakers into passing a $4.6 billion emergency spending bill Thursday. Questions emerged immediately about how the tragedy could have been prevented. Contrary to Cuccinelli’s view, some have blamed U.S. policy for their deaths, pointing to a Trump administration policy known as “metering."

The policy restricts the number of migrants allowed to cross an international bridge and claim asylum at a U.S. port of entry per day. Instead, they must remain in Mexico at shelters or elsewhere until they are allowed through. Critics say Mexico is unsafe and forcing migrants to stay there puts them at risk of being victims of crime — an argument echoed by unionized U.S. asylum officers.

Some have argued that may have been why Martinez and his daughter attempted to cross the river instead, although there is nothing to indicate that they presented at an official border crossing and were turned away because of metering.

“This metering policy is basically what prompted Óscar and Valeria to make that risky swim across the river,” Julián Castro, a former secretary of housing and urban development, said during Wednesday’s Democratic presidential debate.

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) also said on CNN Wednesday that the deaths were the product of this policy, the point of which is to “make conditions cruel enough to deter migration, cruel enough to get Congress to build this wall, and the results are tragic.” And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), while maintaining that the Óscar and Valeria’s deaths should not “be a question of blame,” said it was a matter of understanding “the consequences of policy.”

Trump, by contrast, had blamed the Democrats. He pointed to a lack of action to fix immigration and asylum “loopholes."

“The Democrats refuse to change the loopholes. They refuse to change the asylum,” Trump told reporters from the White House lawn Wednesday. “In one hour we can have it done. They want to have open borders, and open borders mean crime, and open borders mean people drowning in the rivers, and it’s a very dangerous thing.”

Republicans have often pointed to “loopholes” while seeking to enact more restrictive immigration laws, and on Thursday night Cuccinelli did too. Cuccinelli, Trump and other administration officials have claimed that many migrants come to “fraudulently” claim asylum to freely enter the country while waiting months or years for immigration hearings, which asylum attorneys have long disputed. Administration officials have used that argument to support the “Remain in Mexico” policy, formally known as the Migrant Protection Protocols program, which is being challenged in federal court.

Earlier on Thursday, U.S. asylum officers argued that the policy is illegal and endangers the lives and well-being of migrants. In an amicus brief filed through their labor union, the officers urged the federal court to strike the policy down, as The Washington Post reported Thursday.

The officers said the policy is “fundamentally contrary to the moral fabric of our Nation and our international and domestic legal obligations."

The Migrant Protection Protocols allow the government to return asylum seekers back to Mexico as they await immigration hearings. The policy has sent 12,000 asylum seekers to wait in Mexico since January; it’s intended to deter them from coming to the country and to ease burdens on what officials describe as an overwhelmed asylum system.

But through their labor union, the asylum officers claimed this policy violated laws preventing the government from sending migrants back to countries where they fear persecution. The officers said the asylum system was already designed to absorb an influx of migrants, to suss out legitimate and illegitimate asylum claims, and that Trump’s policy was unnecessary.

Cuccinelli accused the asylum officers of being “in denial of reality.” He said the policy was badly needed, citing alleged false claims of asylum by migrants.

“The reality is, until we fix the asylum loopholes that encourage people to come here fraudulently, we will keep seeing these tragedies,” Cuccinelli said.

A federal judge struck down the Migrant Protection Protocols policy in April, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit allowed it to continue in May while the case remains under review.

 

I'm reminded of Warsan Shire's poem, Home:

Quote

no one leaves home unless
home is the mouth of a shark
you only run for the border
when you see the whole city running as well

...

you have to understand,
that no one puts their children in a boat
unless the water is safer than the land

.

[Cleopatra7]

For those in the US, a number of simultaneous protests are being organized this Tuesday at noon local time. Check and see if there is one near you if you are available:

https://act.moveon.org/event/close-camps-now_attend/search/

[Cleopatra7]

There’s a secret Facebook group consisting of border patrol agents sharing sexist memes, celebrating violence/torture, and mocking Latina lawmakers:

https://www.propublica.org/article/secret-border-patrol-facebook-group-agents-joke-about-migrant-deaths-post-sexist-memes

This group is about three years old, so it predates Trump. This problem isn’t going to be solved by swapping Trump out with a milquetoast Democrat; the whole system is rotten from top to bottom. I only wish that we here in the US had an ounce of the courage that the protestors in Hong Kong who stormed their legislature building have, because carrying around snarky signs in single file lines isn’t enough.

[GreyhoundFan]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

[Cleopatra7]

The same company that owns mainstream porn sites like YouPorn, Pornhub, and Xtube is launching a web series that shows migrant women being raped by border patrol before being deported:

https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/border-patrol-porn-sexual-assault/

[fraurosena]

He does not care that everybody knows why he is abusing basic human rights. Instead, he’s so proud of it that he’s tweeting it out for the whole world to see. 

 

[AliceInFundyland]

5 hours ago, Cleopatra7 said:

The same company that owns mainstream porn sites like YouPorn, Pornhub, and Xtube is launching a web series that shows migrant women being raped by border patrol before being deported:

https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/border-patrol-porn-sexual-assault/

I have a few doubts about what's happening here.

100% I believe that border patrol agents abuse migrant women. That is a thing that makes sad sense.

The Statistic in that article was 80% are raped and cited a 2010 study. I'd like to know a little more about that.

Now, tmi, but I am familiar with Pornhub and that brand of porn. A brief glimpse into border patrol porn pulls up very clearly fake shit. Gross that it's a fetish, but fake.

Speculation. Eastern European countries have some unpleasant and questionable things going on within the porn industry.

I would not be shocked if there are some videos out there of border agents raping migrants. But... I suspect that one would need to do some deep digging into the network of darker porn to get them.

Just my two cents.

[Destiny]

I don’t think it’s actual video of migrant women being raped, and never did. The very idea that this is something that the companies think is a good idea and will sell? That horrifies me. I literally gagged reading the story. This is so disturbing. 

[AliceInFundyland]

2 minutes ago, Destiny said:

I don’t think it’s actual video of migrant women being raped, and never did. The very idea that this is something that the companies think is a good idea and will sell? That horrifies me. I literally gagged reading the story. This is so disturbing. 

I am seriously disturbed by the concept of it as a fetish. Because while the actual content of the porn is nothing new or particularly interesting. It is racist as hell. The titles were horrifying.

I shouldn't be shocked. There's plenty of other racist exploitative porn pandering to particular ethnic power dynamics. But I guess it's because this one's current.

[Destiny]

1 minute ago, AliceInFundyland said:

I am seriously disturbed by the concept of it as a fetish. Because while the actual content of the porn is nothing new or particularly interesting. It is racist as hell. The titles were horrifying.

Exactly. that was what I was trying to say badly. No, it’s not particularly new, but the gross racist and such undertones make me nauseous. 

[fraurosena]

My sentiments exactly.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

I like AOC smacking down K-Con:

 

[Howl]

This is ICE rather than Border Patrol, and let me just say that Art Acevedo is an amazing guy.  He was Chief of Police in my city before he moved to Houston last year.  He keeps saying, over and over, if you let the police become extensions of ICE, undocumented people will be too terrified to report crime and he hates, hates, hates people being too scared to report crime, so he doesn't let his officers become de facto agents of ICE. 

From HuffPo, not behind a paywall:

Houston Police Chief Torches Donald Trump Over ICE Raids: Chase Crooks, Not Cooks   “It’s creating havoc in our community,” Chief Art Acevedo told CNN’s Don Lemon.

Another thing he hates are families being torn apart through deportation, when some family members are documented and others are not. 

 

Edited July 12, 2019 by Howl

[apple1]

35 minutes ago, Howl said:

This is ICE rather than Border Patrol, and let me just say that Art Acevedo is an amazing guy.  He was Chief of Police in my city before he moved to Houston last year.  He keeps saying, over and over, if you let the police become extensions of ICE, undocumented people will be too terrified to report crime and he hates, hates, hates people being too scared to report crime, so he doesn't let his officers become de facto agents of ICE. 

From HuffPo, not behind a paywall:

Houston Police Chief Torches Donald Trump Over ICE Raids: Chase Crooks, Not Cooks   “It’s creating havoc in our community,” Chief Art Acevedo told CNN’s Don Lemon.

Another thing he hates are families being torn apart through deportation, when some family members are documented and others are not. 

 

Acevedo was a guest on CNN last night - and he was very impressive.