A comprehensive new @HouseJudiciary report on family separation puts to bed any suggestion that the Trump administration intended to reunite families.

One damning new revelation? Former CBP head Kevin McAleenan tried to keep separations going after a court ordered them to stop. https://t.co/ORVnsA6fKi

Just jumped into listening to the Tipton status hearing in the Texas case and the Texas AG just said something wildly incorrect, that all 14,000 people held in ICE detention would be released—but that's just completely wrong. It only applies to those with final orders!

Tipton, admitting his lack of knowledge on immigration law, asks a series of questions about detention that suggests he completely buys into Texas's argument that anyone with a criminal record is per se dangerous. But they served their time! If they were a citizen they'd be out.

Kirschner pushing back on Tipton and the AG's focus on detention, making clear that the case is about "removal," not detention. He asks Tipton to lay out his questions fully so they can answer them.

Texas's AG office completely botches Zadvydas, claiming that if removable is not foreseeable the government has no authority to detain them.

That is simply false (DHS can always continue to detain on public safety grounds), and @CodyWofsy jumps in to correct that issue.

Pushing back, @CodyWofsy makes clear that "as a practical matter, people who have final removal orders are often detained for years," including in circumstances where there are practical issues with their removal (diplomatic issues, e.g.) and Texas's claim was just wrong.

🚨 The June "Death to Asylum" regulation has been finalized. It is set to go into effect on Monday, January 11, just nine days before inauguration.

https://t.co/tQGwoRrjjW

Under this new rule, one of Trump's last parting body blows to the United States' system of humanitarian protection, none but the lucky few will be able to win asylum.

The regulation creates near-total bans on asylum for wide swathes of people and herculean procedural barriers.

Before I get into just how horrific this new anti-asylum regulation is, a picture of Petra I took this morning to soften the blow of what is a terrible thing to read through—even though the Biden administration will be working to end it ASAP and court challenges are certain.

Back to the new regulation, which I wrote about in June when it was first proposed.

Today, the Trump administration says that they have "generally adopt[ed] the [Notice of Proposed Rulemaking] with few substantive changes." Meaning it's just as bad.

The Trump administration's anti-refugee policies show right at the start.

To them, refugee protections are first about "protecting [our] own resources and citizens" and only secondarily about protecting people from persecution.

That's what led us to turn away Jews in the 1930s.

There is a LOT to like about this bill. I want to highlight some of the proposed changes beyond just legalization, including:

- Ending the 3 & 10 year bars
- Curbing the "Muslim ban" authority
- Preventing "aging out" of children on nonimmigrant

Today's press release says the new bill will revoke the 1996 immigration bill's creation of 3 and 10 year bars to getting a visa for those who have been present unlawfully in the US for 6 months or over a year.

Here's @immcouncil's fact sheet on the bars:

The new bill has multiple provisions designed to reduce the current green card backlogs, which for nationals of some countries like India, China, Mexico, and the Philippines, can mean the process of obtaining a green card can take 20+ years (or even longer in some cases).

The bill would also create similar reforms for the employment-based immigration system, where backlogs are even worse. Under the current system, some Indian nationals seeking a green card are predicted to have a 100+ year wait for a visa! The new bill would do a lot to fix that.

This particular provision would be a welcome change for thousands of people who grow up in the United States as a "derivative" on their parents' nonimmigrant work visas.

Under current laws, they have to leave the US when they turn 21 (if they can't get another visa).

Met a Brazilian-American Lyft driver from San Diego who passionately attacked the racism of Republicans, then switched to passionately defending Bolsonaro.

If I were Thomas Friedman, I could tell you what this means.

Met a Haitian-American in a restaurant who said he'd always vote for Democrats because of the immigration issue, but that he has conservative beliefs too. "I don't want to pay for someone's abortion!", he declared.

Met a Latino Lyft driver from San Jose who said that while he was liberal, California was getting too liberal for him and he was considering moving to San Antonio.

Again, not being Tom Friedman, I am unable to offer any commentary on the political and policy implications of these conversations.

I guess my only thought is that political opinions are pretty complex and multidimensional, out there in the real world.

(end)

Trump is a Russian asset, a mob money launderer installed by his mob whoremasters to sow chaos and weaken the US & our allies.

EVERY SINGLE THING HE’S DONE since taking office is to achieve those purposes—that and to enrich himself personally.

[THREAD]

1/ His entire family is part of this. Melania is a fucking crook. Ivanka is a fucking crook. Junior and Gums are fucking crooks. They will all die in prison, except for Kushner, who, if he really *did* trade US intel for money, should be executed for espionage.

2/ Why do you think Trump installs uniquely corrupt & awful people to Cabinet positions? Pruitt, Zinke, Betsy, Rex/Pompeo, Wilbur "Melting Nazi Face" Ross. They are not there to serve us. They are not there to drain the swamp. They are there to BURN THE REPUBLIC DOWN.

3/ Trump steals. He takes taxpayer money—your money and mine—and lines his pockets with it. He exploits his office to make himself richer. This is all he cares about. Why are Republican citizens, you “fiscal conservatives,” not more angry about this? Riddle me THAT, #MAGA.

4/ Matt Whitaker, the human dildo and “acting AG,” was illegally installed to throw a monkey wrench in the Mueller investigation. That’s why they won’t release his financials. He’s fucking bought and sold. He’s going to prison for obstruction.

1. For people mad at Dems. Can we try to understand how politics (not justice) works? Here are some things: the Dems simply wanted the phone call information to be added to the record. They threatened to call witnesses as a negotiation tactic - thus getting the Republicans to

2. do what the Dems originally wanted - enter the phone call on the record. If witnesses were called - the trial would have gone on for weeks - in the middle of a pandemic when relief HAS to be sent out now. And Merrick Garland has to be confirmed so the DOJ can get to work.

3. However, I WANT WITNESSES CALLED. I want them to have such explosive testimony that the whole world once again knows what it knows - that Trump is guilty. I want more Republican Senators to change their mind and vote to convict. The problem is? We would NEVER GET 17 to do so.

4. It fucking SUCKS. It SUCKS that the Democrats can't just call witnesses and make the Republican Senators appear to the world even more cowardly than they were - hearing that testimony and STILL voting to acquit. BUT that's the fantasy version where the media doesn't once again

5. start blaming Dems during this fantasy-witness-calling-trial for not getting Covid relief out, etc. The issue here is that NO MATTER WHAT - if Trump himself with Jesus back from the dead as his witness says, "I did it" the Republicans will acquit. The issue is that the GOP

1/Zach has the history right (again). I doubt the current political leadership read the book where Summers et al explained what they did, unless they look at borrowed copies. Here it is: https://t.co/4gyFiagaj3

2/ But the summary is that Summers, Geithner, Orszag, Emanuel agreed on telling Obama and Biden in December 2008 that about $800b was an adequate stimulus. Would lower unemployment just below 8% by late 2010. Romer thought $2.1T or $1.7T was needed to achieve full employment.

3/ They wouldn't let her make the case in writing for $1.2T because her number could leak. The reasons for $800b were: they wanted the bill passed by February, so they could move on to health care reform and cap and trade; they had no ways to spend more;

4/ spending more might kick off inflation or cause markets to fall for fear of inflation; that might lead to more bank runs; more bank runs might require a second TARP so they couldn't ask Congress for too much for recovery; Pelosi would give them whatever they asked

5/ for but they didn't think they could get the needed 1 or 2 R Senators quickly if they asked for more; they wanted 60 but had only 58 D Senators; popular "moonshots" or signature items in the package would take too long (Biden asked for that);