A Google Staffer Helped Sell Trump's Family Separation Policy, Despite The Company's Denials (buzzfeednews.com) 223
Google executives misled their own employees last week when they said a former top Department of Homeland Security official who had recently joined the company was "not involved in the family separation policy," government emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act reveal. From a report: In fact, Miles Taylor, who served as deputy chief of staff and then chief of staff to former Homeland Security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, was involved in high-level discussions about immigration enforcement, helping to shape the department's narratives and talking points as one of Nielsen's trusted lieutenants. As Nielsen's deputy chief of staff, Taylor was included on some of the DHS secretary's emails and privy to her events schedule, often prepping his boss with reports and talking points ahead of public appearances between April and June 2018, when the family separation policy was in effect.
In one email obtained by BuzzFeed News, Taylor assisted Nielsen in preparing what he described as the "Protecting Children Narrative" -- the department's spin on a policy that horrified Americans when images of abandoned, caged migrant children in squalid camps emerged. Other emails from Nielsen's events planner show that he had been scheduled to participate in at least two weekly calls to "discuss Border Security and Immigration Enforcement" in June 2018. Two former DHS officials dismissed Google's claim that Taylor -- who last month joined the company as a government affairs and public policy manager advising on national security issues -- could have kept his hands clean from the policy.
In one email obtained by BuzzFeed News, Taylor assisted Nielsen in preparing what he described as the "Protecting Children Narrative" -- the department's spin on a policy that horrified Americans when images of abandoned, caged migrant children in squalid camps emerged. Other emails from Nielsen's events planner show that he had been scheduled to participate in at least two weekly calls to "discuss Border Security and Immigration Enforcement" in June 2018. Two former DHS officials dismissed Google's claim that Taylor -- who last month joined the company as a government affairs and public policy manager advising on national security issues -- could have kept his hands clean from the policy.
This article. (Score:3, Insightful)
Welcome to modern McCarthyism.
Isn't this the Free Market (TM) at work? (Score:5, Insightful)
It just so happens that many of those Google employees are valuable enough for Google to sit up and take notice.
Re: (Score:2)
> Isn't this the Free Market (TM) at work?
What kind market share does google have and do they use that position in illegitimate ways?
> many of those Google employees are valuable enough for Google to sit up and take notice.
They sound entitled and bigoted.
I never said anything about Google's market share (Score:2)
Now, if you'd skipped the last line or put a bit more effort into it you'd have had yourself a troll post. But you got greedy son. Try harder next time.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this the Free Market (TM) at work?
No, why would you think that? Even if it was, the free market is not something to be worshiped.
Re: (Score:2)
> Isn't this the Free Market (TM) at work?
What kind market share does google have and do they use that position in illegitimate ways?
> many of those Google employees are valuable enough for Google to sit up and take notice.
They sound entitled and bigoted.
Entitled, perhaps. Bigoted? Pretty much the opposite.
Re: (Score:2)
They are acting prejudicial and intolerant to someone they disagree with. I disagree with plenty of people and it's plain to see when someone prejudges.
When you're presenting bad ideas (Score:2)
Bigotry is judging you on features that have nothing to do with your ideas. But again, you know this. You're trolling. And yes, I am judging you a troll, as is my prerogative.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Bigotry is judging you on features that have nothing to do with your ideas.
I think you have your definitions wrong. Bigotry [thefreedictionary.com] is mainly about ideas:
bigotry
n.
1. extreme intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
So, yes, if you're so incapable of being around someone who has a different opinion of border control politics than you that you will not work with them and demand they be fired, you are definitely a bigot.
Re: (Score:2)
Works both ways. I would never want to work at Google because it sounds like the people who work there are nutjobs more interested in politics than technology. I just want to write code.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
He's in your closet. In your head!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This article. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea! Everyone is a nazi. Nazi's are everywhere. See that guy with the yamaka. He's a nazi too! If you disagree that just means ur a nazi and nazi supporter. I did nazi the problem.
Just a though, how many do you think that work at google are actual communists? If only we had the same stigma associated with communists. They killed more people than the nazi's so they are worse yet they get a pass.
Re: (Score:2)
See that guy with the yamaka.
You misspelled "Yamaha".
HTH. HAND.
Re: (Score:2)
Yea! Everyone is a nazi. Nazi's are everywhere. See that guy with the yamaka. He's a nazi too! If you disagree that just means ur a nazi and nazi supporter. I did nazi the problem.
Just a though, how many do you think that work at google are actual communists? If only we had the same stigma associated with communists. They killed more people than the nazi's so they are worse yet they get a pass.
You seem to be pretty obsessed with the National Socialist party.
And just where in the unholy stinking hot taint of Beelzabub did you ever come up with the idea that communists get this pass you speak of?
Dude! we only had a cold war with those fuckers most of my adult life, and Ol' Comrade Joe's mass murders are well known and condemned.
Or do you just pull the same stunt as those people calling everyone Nazi's, but you call anyone that disagrees with you a communist?
Pot meet kettle. Back to Infow
Re:This article. (Score:5, Insightful)
Every country promotes immigrants who can support themselves instead of being a drain on social services.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried to use the US immigration system? Or the UK one, for that matter?
They do not promote people supporting themselves, or attract the best and brightest. They aren't even designed to do that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Every country promotes immigrants who can support themselves instead of being a drain on social services.
Have you ever asked yourself why ICE raid factories when they want to catch a bunch of immigrants?
Here's a clue: It's because they are working hard, trying to get ahead. Also, the factory owners employ them because it is cheaper.
The problem is not the immigrants.
Re: This article. (Score:2)
"Mr. Sutton, why do you Rob so many banks ?"
Re: (Score:2)
On average, that's all of them, given the slightest opportunity. Even illegal immigrants are a net positive to the US, on average, let alone the legal ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Exactly! If we didn't want that there would be some kind of sign saying "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. [howtallist...iberty.org]" on the Statue of Liberty, not "Give us your rich charlatans who don't give a fuck about freedom, only care about themselves, and long for the days of slavery" like it does and always has! #TrumpSpeak #1984
Re: This article. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> Donald is flaming bigot
And you are not for calling everyone a nazi. You are intolerant toward others yet others are the bigot.
> he doesn't want legal immigrants from "shit-hole" countries
So what? We can't be selective in our immigration process?
>why we couldn't have more European immigrants instead.
Do they assimilate easier? Do they rely on the government more when they arrive? I don't know. Do you have any breakdown in immigration crime, assimilation, government assistance, etc to make a
Re:This article. (Score:5, Insightful)
> If you want the filtering based on ethnic groups or race, then you are essentially a bigot.
Lol, between the two, I am not intolerant to ideas and people that are not like me and who disagree. You call everyone a nazi. Who's the bigot?
If you notice I didn't ask about race or ethnic groups. You are making that assumption on your own. Are you going to address my questions about those different groups or is it safe to assume that you will intolerantly be devoted to your own opinions and prejudices?
> Even those "shit-hole" countries have brilliant and entrepreneurial people with IQ's
And a meritocratic points based immigration system will consider that. Unless IQ is racist. Is it? I don't know what the progressive position on IQ is now with your comment.
Considering how many people we allow to immigrate to the country, I don't think it's a bad thing to be a little more selective and make that selection based on what will help the country. We don't need more people on welfare and we need more entrepreneurial types. Sounds like a bit of selectivity if you ask me.
"Shit-hole countries" is NOT about personal merit (Score:2)
You appear to be backing Donald's views, which are clearly race or ethnic based per evidence I gave. I can give more if necessary. He's produced more dog whistles than a Chinese whistle factory.
That's not what Donald asked for, per statements paraphrased. The context is Donald's administration, not yours.
But the fact you appear to be defending Donald's views is troublesome, regardles
Re: (Score:2)
> You appear to be backing Donald's views
No, I asked some very simple questions and represented the meritocratic point based system that has been proposed by Trump that was crafted after Australia's.
> which are clearly race or ethnic based per evidence I gave
You didn't give evidence. You gave an example of him talking shit. If you want to talk about the immigration system that Trump wants, why not look at the one he proposed and not the bombastic language he uses in a meeting?
> That's not what Dona
Re: (Score:2)
All you lefties care about the words... never the actions... its why you still support Bernie, Hillary, etc, in spite of their actions never matching their words.
Its all superficial for you fucks.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And a meritocratic points based immigration system will consider that. Unless IQ is racist.
IQ isn't meritocratic at all. It's a pseudo-science. That's the problem with you pseudo-science dog whistlers. You want to pretend that you're not prejudiced, but your choice of "meritocratic" scoring says more about you than you think. Are you going to use the same system to demote CEOs with average IQs?
Show me any scientific studies that look at immigrants (and children of immigrants) that start new businesses and find that they are all in a similar high range.
Any person wanting to bring pseudo-scie
Re: (Score:2)
The proposed system didn't mention IQ. It was for things like having an education, can speak English, would have to rely on government aid, etc. It really wasn't a bad immigration system proposal again because it was based off of the Australian system.
Rereading what I wrote I realize I made mistake with grammar and didn't clarify that the "that" of "a meritocratic points based immigration system will consider that." was in reference for "entrepreneurial". The IQ bit was a trolly jab. Sorry for confusion.
Re: (Score:2)
We can give you a test, and your score on this test strongly correlates with school performance, SAT scores, job performance, income, etc.
This is not pseudoscience. This is science. You call it pseudoscience because it doesn't agree with your politics. Maybe you should change your politics instead of trying to pretend science doesn't work?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You clearly do not understand statistics, or what a "distribution" is, or what "correlation" means.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:and you think everyone to the left of hitler is (Score:4, Funny)
Q: Why is communism better than capitalism?
A: Because it heroically overcomes problems that do not exist in any other system.
Eh.. I should have known a joke about communism would fail.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
perpetuate actual crimes against humanity
That's a very strong charge. Are you able to substantiate it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, I must have missed the collapse of the US legal system. Surely if the US were breaking the law in the manner that article suggests there would be countless court cases going right up to the Supreme Court, who do indeed have the power to censure the actions of the Executive.
People illegally entering the US from Mexico are not refugees, they are not fleeing a conflict and they are almost certainly not actual asylum seekers. Indeed there are known and obvious routes by which asylum can be sought wit
Re: (Score:2)
Hollywood is full of Republicans, that's the problem with it!
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
What? (Score:2, Insightful)
So Google is like a government agency or OH MY GOD WE FOUND A REPUBLICAN AT A TECH COMPANY!! Is the author implying that If Google employees engage in political activism for Trump or whatever that that's some sort of illegal political corruption? What exactly is the outrage angel here? Those horrifying pictures were from the Obama era, btw.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd probably get about the same thing if you tried to hire an Obama staffer into a company full of employ
Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not about being Republican, many of whom are fine people, I assume.
It's about constructing a policy to kidnap children from people committing a misdemeanor, and put those children in for-profit concentration camps.
Re: (Score:2)
Literally the first sentence of the summary explains that the problem is they lied to staff.
You may recall that a couple of years ago they settled a lawsuit over an illegal agreement with other tech companies but to poach staff. Seems like they are quite concerned about staff retention and lying to them probably doesn't encourage loyalty.
Re: (Score:2)
So Google is like a government agency or OH MY GOD WE FOUND A REPUBLICAN AT A TECH COMPANY!
I know plenty of Republicans who work for Google. None, however, who thought, or think, that putting kids in cages was okay.
Re: (Score:2)
So Google is like a government agency or OH MY GOD WE FOUND A REPUBLICAN AT A TECH COMPANY!
I know plenty of Republicans who work for Google. None, however, who thought, or think, that putting kids in cages was okay.
But dragging kids across the desert to illegally enter another country is OK? Your entire party is dedicated to that proposition; that we want lots (millions) of people who will do just that.
Re: (Score:2)
So Google is like a government agency or OH MY GOD WE FOUND A REPUBLICAN AT A TECH COMPANY!! Is the author implying that If Google employees engage in political activism for Trump or whatever that that's some sort of illegal political corruption? What exactly is the outrage angel here? Those horrifying pictures were from the Obama era, btw.
Hey, ideological purity does not come cheap, my friend. Are you a reactionary? Now review your little red book please.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they worried about being turned into newts? (Score:5, Funny)
Is he a witch? We should see if he floats.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, Newt Gingrich. There's no cure.
USA doesn't pass laws to discourage immigration (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also it sounds like the guy wasn't working for Google at the time, which means it wasn't a Google Staffer that did it.
Re: (Score:2)
is fake news to call it Trump's Policy as its Policy that was happening Under the Obama admin before him so to claim its his policy is lie since it was previous admin that started it.
Shh, that goes against the Democrat-Approved narrative msmash is so enamored of.
Re: (Score:3)
If Trump continued it, it becomes Trump's policy.
It doesn't mean it was OK when Obama was doing it either.
the policy is not the same (Score:4, Informative)
the number of child deaths is not the same.
it's not the same.
I opposed Obama's policies about immigration, more deportation, continuing allowing road blocks like 100 miles from the border on roads that don't even go to the border (like east west routes in Arizona).... but this is different.
As usualy their idiots that believe their moron lie-masters because they're CON men, having been conned and wanting to be part of the con.
The new policy was to separate as many kids as possible, not just when there was no other choice (like the adult has a warrant and is being arrested). Applying for refuge status is not a crime... TRUMP is the one that wants to pretend it's a crime, and say, "this is what we always do".
Also, they are the one that give the contractors hundreds of dollars a night per child, and the children don't have beds or running water, were not (probably still are not) being allowed to bathe regularly etc.
Fascists never want to take credit for their lovely policies.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree with any of that. Just the fact that a former administration has little or no bearing on the current state of things if it's all 100% executive-directed activity. It's literally all EOs and policy - no legislation is involved here so there is no need to blame anyone else.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Fascists never want to take credit for their lovely policies.
Let me try to make this simple for you.
Real fascist countries were countries that people wanted to get out of, not into.
Millions of people keep trying to get in here. Not out. Got it?
Meanwhile, not one of you $%^& has left for Canada like you've been promising all my life ... think about that; we're so "fascist" that you prefer us over even Canada. WTH?
Re: (Score:2)
the number of child deaths is not the same.
It is, though. It turns out dragging children through the desert in summertime in dangerous. Complete assholes do this, we catch them, but sadly sometimes their child victims die despite our efforts at treating them. This happened at about the same rate under Obama, too. We should strongly discourage people from doing this by building a wall and vigorously enforcing the border so the word gets out that people should not attempt to enter the country illegally, because it will not work and they will not be re
Sure it does (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't mean it was OK when Obama was doing it either.
Oh really, then where were the people complaining then? Where are YOUR posts from when Obama was doing this? None? I guess it was OK after all then since none of you said anything.
Or, if you were not aware back then (because our stupid press wanted nothing to do with questioning anything Obama did), then why should Trump have been aware about exact details of border operations? He did stop the practice as soon as it was pointed out, so how is this
Re: (Score:2)
Obama must have known and so was evil, but Trump can't be expected to know the precise details of his flagship policy so should get a pass?
I know he's not detail oriented but he is the POTUS. There is a responsibility to know what is going on that comes with the job.
Re: (Score:2)
You had asked why Trump should be immediately. But he spent months blaming Democrats rather than doing something about it. The date does not line up with your story.
Re:lets get the facts right here...... (Score:4, Informative)
Where did you get that lie? Fox News?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0... [nytimes.com]
https://www.apnews.com/fdfbafe... [apnews.com]
https://www.vox.com/2019/6/21/... [vox.com]
Should I continue to post links? It's not hard to find support for the claim that you are lying.
I'll probably get another "Troll" mod for once again pointing out documented lies spread by Republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
Please take some lessons in comprehension, or pull your nose out of Trump's ass. From the apnews link:
"THE FACTS: Trump is not telling the truth. The separation of thousands of migrant children from their parents resulted from his "zero tolerance" policy. Obama had no such policy. "
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because we all know that Trump would never change a policy that Obama had, and there has been no policy change made by Trump. After all, how could he?. News Flash: Trump is the President. He doesn't get to say "sure, I'm the President, but policies I make worse and then openly defend are not my policies. Also all successes are mine and all failures are Obamas!" Nice try with the whataboutism though. Your only problem is
Re: (Score:2)
Re:bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
> republicans said he wanted open borders
Because of DACA and DAPA.
> deporting people at record rates,
More than one thing can be true at the same time and we are talking about an 8 year period. DACA and DAPA came in his second term.
> they deny it
Record rates != proper enforcement that just means that we have a lot of people coming across the border. See DACA and DAPA.
> This isn't Obama's policy.
That's why the first pictures of children in cages that started circulating came from Obama years.
Re: (Score:2)
> lot more kids have died
This is dishonest. Many kids died because they were dragged across the desert subjected to the elements without proper food, water, and shelter. Our system is under strain from the number of people coming.
Why are so many making that journey? What incentives did the government announce with DACA and DAPA?
> if we treat refuge kids humanely, well I do.
That is why I know that the child separation was a court agreement that was made with the intent of giving children proper care
The pics are of Obama's cages in 2014 (Score:4, Informative)
> This isn't Obama's policy.
The photos mentioned in the summary were taken during the Obama administration, of cages built in a warehouse for this purpose by the Obama administration.
Here is Obamaâ(TM)s Homeland Security Secretary, Jeh Johnson, touring the facility right after it opened (obviously ncoe and clean for the photo op):
https://azcapitoltimes.com/fil... [azcapitoltimes.com]
I get it that you're an Obama fanboi, but doesn't it bug you to know you have zero intectual honesty at all? You've surely seen the pics before, so you know that what you're spewing is lies. It doesn't bother bother you to lie to yourself 24/7?
.
Re: (Score:2)
It both excuses their own bigotry and inflates their sense of superiority by accusing others of of what they themselves are already guilty of.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
SJWs Always Project.
Re: (Score:2)
is that whats going on?
Not exactly, but yes.
More exactly, its being Machiavellian.
Thats you. Fucking Machiavelli's wet dream.
Re: (Score:2)
You: Oh yeah! Well here is a picture of the prison when it was clean, the prisoner's were well fed, the showers worked, and rape wasn't allowed! See, same thing!
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me, how many kids have died in custody under Trump vs Obama
Not sure, that's actually a good question. Is the number substantially higher under Trump? It was certainly nonzero under Obama, but the media never publicized it. How do the numbers compare relative to the number of people crossing the border?
Here's the answer (Score:2)
> Not sure, that's actually a good question.
Here's the answer:
https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Slower lower under trump than Obama (Score:2)
> Tell me, how many kids have died in custody under Trump vs Obama.
The number of people who have died in ICE custody has been a bit lower since Trump took office.
https://www.ice.gov/doclib/foi... [ice.gov]
The major change was the big drop during the Bush years. Conditions were improved during the Bush administration and have remained significantly better than they were under Clinton.
Re: (Score:2)
There's plenty of leftists who think Obama was an asshole, to say nothing of being a war criminal. But Trump is more of all the bad things that Obama was. Obama promised the most transparent administration in history, but ran the least transparent. But he did institute a guideline requiring informing the public as to the number of drone strikes. That's how we know he made more of them than Bush. And it's also how we know that Trump made even more of them than Obama, right up until he cancelled that rule...
Re: (Score:2)
ICE wasn't separating families
Separate children from adults: "separating families"
Leave children with adults: "facilitating child abuse", "supporting human trafficking", actually incentivising migrants to bring children with them.
Yeah, which option would you choose?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So which would you do? Separate families or leave children with suspected traffickers?
It's not a false dichotomy, it's the choice ICE officials have to make.
Do please bless us with your wisdom on this difficult choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure thing. They wouldn't be in the custody of traffickers, they would be in the custody of the government. The children can tell the government if the adults are not their parents dumbshit.
Re: (Score:2)
The children can tell the government if the adults are not their parents dumbshit.
Oh you naive fucking idiot.
Do you really think that children are not susceptible to threats, lies and other factors that might influence how they answer that question?
Here's a hint: Children lie. Not all the time, but enough that it's not just reasonable but also desirable to validate their identity and who is or isn't a family member.
In the meantime it's also not just reasonable to also desirable to assure that they aren't abused by people traffickers.
Get that into your thick stupid skull.
Re: Fake News (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck me, how sheltered was your upbringing? Of course there are reasons for a trafficker to retain a child even in detention.
The child is a resource to such people. It can be rented out, bartered for trade or sent on errands. It can be abused for a sense of power or for sex. It can change the legal outcomes for the trafficker, whether deported or not.
Whyever the fuck would you think these people would just go, "Oh well, I was only trafficking it anyway."
Re: (Score:2)
If I thought there was a chance you had any children I would ask you when you plan on handing your chil
Re: (Score:2)
You make an excellent point.
Thank you. It's a shame you are mentally ill-equipped to understand it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then they can either sit there pretending that illegal immigrants still have it worse, or admit that they want illegal immigrants to have it better than both citizens as well as legal immigrants.
Re:Don't want to be separated from your child? (Score:5, Interesting)
"Don't bring it to the USA. You know the rules. Break them, suffer the consequences."
Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor. Do you realize what you're advocating? Kidnapping children and putting them in for-profit concentration camps for profit? With no records so they can be returned to their parents? When treaties we're party to require us to let people cross the border anywhere if they are asylum seekers? You know treaties are law, right?
If only someone had taken you away from your parents for some trivial victimless offense, maybe you would have been adopted by people with hearts, and raised to care about other people. Or barring that, the law that you claim to care so much about.
Re: (Score:2)
Congress or whatever body creates legislation in the US could solve the whole problem with the kids by getting rid of that law.
I don't think that throwing kids in these camps and having them live like animals in their own feces and drinking out of toilets, not keeping records so they can't be reunified later, is the right way to go at all. In fact I think it's disgusting.That part is 100% on the Trump admin. But l
Re: (Score:2)
"That part is 100% on the Trump admin. But lets not pretend that congress has its hands tied."
Obviously the Republicans controlling the Senate don't want to fix the situation. Probably some of the Dems don't want to either, but everyone in Congress clamoring for a solution is one.
Mod parent up (Score:2)
This x 1,000. That this hasn't been modded up through the stratosphere is mystifying to me.