4

31 comments

[–] [Deleted] 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

You simply won't recognize sources.

Members of Congress pass laws to stop child trafficking -- and then the ACLU comes in and creates a gigantic incentive to engage in child trafficking.

The parents are so broken up about being separated from "their" children that hundreds of them have gone home without them. Reams of articles hysterically claimed that the evil Trump administration tricked these super-involved parents into signing forms they couldn't understand!

-- "Migrant parents were misled into waiving rights to family reunification, ACLU tells court" -- The Washington Post, July 26 2018

-- "Immigrant Parents Unwittingly Signed Away Right to Reunite With Children, Lawyers Say" -- Huffington Post, 07/25/2018

You support pedophilia or something? You clearly support trafficking children.

-- "'Why Did You Leave Me?' The Migrant Children Left Behind as Parents Are Deported'" -- The New York Times, July 27, 2018

[–] Mattvision 1 points (+1|-0)

You aren't reading the context to those 'sources'.

The parents are so broken up about being separated from "their" children that hundreds of them have gone home without them. Reams of articles hysterically claimed that the evil Trump administration tricked these super-involved parents into signing forms they couldn't understand!

And the protext:

Nowhere will you read that the form the parents signed was written by the ACLU.

If those are sources, why is she disputing them?

[–] [Deleted] 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

Nowhere will you read that the form the parents signed was written by the ACLU.

Have you ever dared think the ACLU isn't what it's promoted as? The ACLU is largely political nonsense. If you think they give a shit about black people... well that's just funny these days.

[–] Mattvision 3 points (+3|-0)

I don't care, that's not the point I am trying to make.

She is clearly disputing the articles that you claim are her sources. If she is disputing what they say, they are not sources. They aren't backing up what she is claiming. She is literally telling us not to trust them, because they are obscuring information.

If they were sources, she wouldn't be disputing them. She'd be using them as evidence to back up what she is trying to say. They are not sources.