Did Trump back down?

LV426 said:
Why? It works. The ISAP program had a 99.8% retention rate for making court appearances.
Click to expand...

The ISAP program involved a relatively small group who were closely monitored and weren't considered a flight risk to begin with, yet thousands reportedly absconded anyway, and immigration advocates protested against the program, as I have already informed you.
 
Legion said:
You may attempt to establish relevance, if you can.
Click to expand...

You were trying to represent that the 5,000 people that either absconded their court date (44 people) or committed vague, undefined crimes that you can't be bothered to know the details of, is somehow an indictment that the ISAP program doesn't work. It's important for you to establish that because it's the only thing you can even try to use in your argument for Nazi indefinite detention policies.

So I'm denying that to you because it's entirely relevant that you know and understand what you're posting here on these boards.

You admit yourself you don't know the details behind what you're posting. So why should anyone take anything you say seriously?

By the way, this is the exact ground I want this debate to be on; your credibility and confidence in what you're presenting. Since I can undermine both, then I can undermine your entire argument, which undermines your entire belief system, which undermines your entire mental state.

All I have to do is pull at one thread and the whole freakin' sweater unravels.
 
Legion said:
The ISAP program involved a relatively small group who were closely monitored and weren't considered a flight risk to begin with
Click to expand...

When Obama took office in 2008, the program had what - 5,000 people? By 2014, it went up to 22,000 people, a ~450%+ increase while still maintaining a retention rate for court of 99.8%. If it was better funded, it could have covered even more.

So how is it determined if someone is a flight risk? Oh wait - you can't be expected to know the details of what you're saying here. Silly me, you already told me you can't be expected to know that, so I must manage my expectations downward to accommodate your laziness and sloppiness.
 
LV426 said:
If it was better funded, it could have covered even more.
Click to expand...

So you say.

Since you already know that the program has been described as less than effective,very labor intensive, and was viewed as intrusive by advocates, how can you possibly state such a projection with any confidence?
 
LV426 said:
You were trying to represent that the 5,000 people that either absconded their court date (44 people) or committed vague, undefined crimes that you can't be bothered to know the details of, is somehow an indictment that the ISAP program doesn't work. It's important for you to establish that because it's the only thing you can even try to use in your argument for Nazi indefinite detention policies.
Click to expand...

You can't establish the relevance of the nature of the crimes that were reportedly committed by the particpants in ISAP, apparently.

"An estimated 5,000 immigrants absconded from ISAP or committed other crimes over the three-year period from 2010 to 2012."

http://www.landerholmimmigration.com/intensive-supervision-appearance-program/
 
Legion said:
So you say.
Click to expand...

Nazi code for: "you're right, but I don't want to admit it".


Legion said:
Since you already know that the program has been described as less than effective,very labor intensive, and was viewed as intrusive by advocates, how can you possibly state such a projection with any confidence?
Click to expand...

It's only been described as "less effective" by one unsourced link you provided from a right-wing advocacy anti-immigration firm.

Try harder. Put in more effort. Stop being so lazy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top