# data[].attributes.headline
who should i be following on social media?

# data[].attributes.subject
who should i be following on social media?

# data[].attributes.headline
This is what’s to sad about immigration 

# data[].attributes.subject
This is what’s to sad about immigration 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Woman Calls Police on Worker Speaking Spanish || ViralHog

# data[].attributes.headline
Some countries feel different about immigration and have different laws about it.

# data[].attributes.subject
Some countries feel different about immigration and have different laws about it.

# data[].attributes.body
There are even state laws like In 2018, enacted legislation related to immigration decreased by 15 percent to 175 laws compared with 206 laws in 2017. Trends in 2018 included occupational licensing, sanctuary policies, refugees and education/civics.

# data[].attributes.headline
Some people will feel different about immigration but that shouldn't change what you think about it.

# data[].attributes.subject
Some people will feel different about immigration but that shouldn't change what you think about it.

# data[].attributes.body
Some people would say
"Immigration became an increasingly polarized issue over the last few years". then again others who like they movement of immigration would say "Immigrants bring new perspectives, experiences, and ideas to their local communities. With this added diversification, there is more strength to be found within the community".

# data[].attributes.headline
Some people will understand how important immigration is

# data[].attributes.subject
Some people will understand how important immigration is

# data[].attributes.body
Flourish: (of a person, animal, or other living organism) grow or develop in a healthy or vigorous way, especially as the result of a particularly favorable environment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Political cartoon on what immigration does to families 

# data[].attributes.subject
Political cartoon on what immigration does to families 

# data[].attributes.headline
This political cartoon shows basically how trump feels about immigrants.

# data[].attributes.subject
This political cartoon shows basically how trump feels about immigrants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Trump sabotaged the health-care system. Separately, he's sabotaged the immigration system.

And now, in a presidential twofer, on Friday night the administration found a way to sabotage both simultaneously.

Unable to repeal Obamacare, the Trump administration has worked to make it less functional and more expensive. It has done this by zeroing out the individual mandate, expanding the availability of cheap but worthless junk insurance and curtailing the annual open-enrollment period, among other actions.

The cumulative effect of these policies has been to reduce the share of people who have (real, non-junk) insurance; those still motivated to seek comprehensive insurance tend to be sicker and more expensive to cover. The predictable result? Premiums hundreds of dollars higher than they would otherwise be, according to estimates from health-care analyst Charles Gaba.

And, unsurprisingly, those who don't qualify for the subsidies that shield enrollees from these price hikes are dropping out of the individual market altogether because they can't afford the insurance.

But no worries. For years, administration officials and fellow Republican lawmakers have argued this is merely an expansion of a fundamental American freedom - the freedom to go uninsured.

Simultaneously, of course, the administration has also been undermining our legal immigration system. Emphasis on "legal" here: For all of Trump's vitriol for undocumented immigrants, he's also been targeting people who are trying to come to this country lawfully.

Among the creative, non-legislative ways the administration has sabotaged the legal immigration system: huge and arbitrary delays in visa and citizenship application processing; cruel and inhumane treatment of families seeking asylum; reductions in the refugee admissions cap to its lowest level on record; and, of course, the travel ban placed on several majority-Muslim countries.

And then there are all of the policies intended to penalize legal immigrants whom the Trump administration claims are a financial burden.

To be clear: Immigrants are in fact a net fiscal boon to the United States, according to a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, and their children are " among the strongest economic and fiscal contributors in the U.S. population." But Trump and his aides are convinced that immigrants are, and will forever be, a drain on society.

Or, as Trump's acting U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services director Ken Cuccinelli put it: "Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet."

Cuccinelli was talking about a new administration rule - currently being challenged in eight lawsuits - that makes it harder for immigrants to receive green cards if they have ever used or might someday need safety-net benefits such as food stamps or Medicaid. But it's actually one of several policies the administration has devised to drive down immigration numbers under the guise of fiscal prudence.

The latest such development was rolled out Friday night. This new policy, issued via presidential proclamation, bars issuance of visas to immigrants unless they can prove they will obtain health insurance within 30 days of their arrival in the United States, or otherwise demonstrate that they can pay medical expenses out of pocket.

That's right, the Trump administration has brought back the individual mandate, but for immigrants only - the GOP's supposed commitment to "freedom" notwithstanding. The Migration Policy Institute estimates the change could end up excluding about two-thirds of future immigrants.

The new policy is vague about how would-be immigrants would even be able to prove they meet the new requirement. Maybe they'd need to somehow buy insurance before they leave their home countries, while still waiting in that interminable visa queue; maybe not.

What's more, if they get subsidized insurance through the individual exchanges, Trump's proclamation says it won't count. This is yet another way the administration is sabotaging Obamacare, which explicitly allows immigrants to purchase subsidized exchange insurance. It also places low- and moderate-income immigrants in an impossible position, since they're now stuck buying insurance at the sticker prices that the Trump administration has helped jack up through its earlier rounds of Obamacare sabotage.

Under the proclamation, immigrants could instead buy junk insurance. But, as the administration also surely knows, these Trumpcare plans cover almost nothing. So forcing immigrants to buy such policies seems unlikely to shield taxpayers (or hospitals) from immigrants' emergency medical costs - which is allegedly the goal here.

Of course there is also a fundamental tension between arguing that uninsured immigrants impose huge costs on the country but uninsured native-born Americans don't cost anyone anything. But no one said consistency was this administration's strong suit - aside from its consistent desire to find new ways to destroy as many institutions as possible.
Read more: Alex M. Azar II: Obamacare forgot about you. But Trump didn't. Avik Roy: Trump could revolutionize the private health insurance market The Post's View: Trump's approach to screening immigrants only leaves the U.S. worse off Henry Olsen: Don't like Trump's new 'public charge' rule? Blame Congress for shirking its duty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Trump found a way to simultaneously sabotage our health-care and immigration systems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump sabotaged the health-care system. Separately, he's sabotaged the immigration system. And now, in a presidential twofer, on Friday night the administration found a way to sabotage both simultaneously. Unable to repeal Obamacare, the Trump administration has worked to make it less functional and more expensive.

# data[].attributes.headline
This talks about how trump mostly feels about immigration and his opinion about it

# data[].attributes.subject
This talks about how trump mostly feels about immigration and his opinion about it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
nonfiction

Image

The United States-Mexico border fence from the Tijuana side, Sept. 28, 2019. Credit Credit John Moore/Getty Images

When you purchase an independently reviewed book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.

BORDER WARS
Inside Trump's Assault on Immigration
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear
On the morning of Jan. 11, 2018, Senator Richard Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, received a phone call from the president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, summoning him to the White House. Durbin had been working for months with Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, on a deal to grant legal status to the so-called "Dreamers" - children who had been brought illegally into the country by their parents when they were very young, had grown up here and knew only the United States as home. The news from Trump was encouraging. "Wow," Durbin told an aide. "I think we may actually have a deal."

Durbin and Graham - who received a similar call that morning - expected a private meeting with the president, but as they waited in the West Wing lobby a phalanx of hard-liners arrived, led by Stephen Miller, the young mastermind of Trump's draconian immigration policies. Were they being ambushed? Durbin wondered. Indeed, they were. The meeting lapsed into a notorious Trump rant - about accepting immigrants from "shithole countries." The president seemed amazed by the Durbin-Graham proposal: "Wait a minute - why do we want people from Haiti here?" Why not more people from Norway? Graham was flabbergasted: What had happened between 10 a.m., when the president called offering the deal, and noon, when the historic Oval Office tirade had taken place? "I don't know where that guy" - the more amenable Trump - "went," Graham told the homeland security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen days later. "I want him back."

Trump's bigoted eruption was instant news. But the context provided by the New York Times journalists Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear in their exquisitely reported "Border Wars" reveals the shattering horror of the moment, the mercurial unreliability and instability of the president. Davis and Shear perform this contextual service time and again throughout their book, which is essential reading for those searching for the "beating heart" of the Trump administration. The authors argue it is immigration policy, and who can dispute that? From his very first news conference as a presidential candidate, when he denounced Mexican border-crossers as rapists and criminals, a rancid nativism - aimed at people who have darker skins than Norwegians - has been Trump's tribalist weapon of choice, his scalpel prodding the worst impulses of the American spirit.

Nativism isn't as American as apple pie - indeed, it is the very opposite of our country's heterogeneous intention - but it has been with us since the Irish began arriving in droves in the mid-19th century. It has almost always been a minor chord in American politics, but it has flared from time to time - with the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, the harsh restrictions on southern and eastern Europeans in 1924, and again today, 50 years after Lyndon Johnson liberalized immigration policy in 1965.

Davis and Shear are scrupulously fair reporters. They give Trump's minions a respectful hearing. The current immigration system is, indeed, a mess. The Dreamers are, technically, here illegally, as are many others who overstay their visas or apply for refugee status and simply disappear into the population. There are reasonable reforms on offer, like favoring immigrants with skills over the current system based on family ties ("chain migration"), non-nativist reforms that countries like Canada and Australia have adopted.

But the Trump administration's "remedies" have been flagrantly - and purposefully - punitive. The astonishing policy of separating children from their parents at the border was imposed as a deterrent: An experiment at the El Paso portal showed that illegal crossing declined 64 percent when word got out that children would be taken from their parents at the border. Stephen Miller took it national. An internal Department of Homeland Security memo noted "harm to children is being deliberately used for its deterrent effect."

Davis and Shear are at their best describing the chaotic inner processes of the administration. They are less successful when they attempt to describe the effects of the crackdown on actual human beings - or give insight into the perpetrators of the Trump policies. They wait 280 pages to offer a biographical sketch of Miller, which raises more questions than it answers. He is the descendant of Jewish refugees, it turns out. His family owns a chain of grocery stores. He grew up in ultra-blue Santa Monica, Calif., but distinguished himself from the crowd as a right-wing provocateur in high school. He rose through congressional staff ranks and became a top aide to the immigrant-phobic Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama. His co-workers think he's a nice guy. But his policies - and his pursuit of them - are stunningly heartless. We need to know more about him.

In this account, Trump is as he ever was: craven, feckless, moody, narcissistic, mendacious, forgetful. He is sympathetic to the Dreamers he meets in private, but is willing to place their lives and futures in jeopardy to feed the passions of his supporters. He is addicted to inflaming the basest instincts of his base. And it is all a show.

"This is why people loved me on 'The Apprentice,'" Trump told House Speaker Paul Ryan, after bragging about nonexistent "ratings" for yet another ballistic meeting in the Oval Office. There is no distinction between reality and reality TV for this president. In 2016, it was a distinction that escaped the American public as well. Davis and Shear are right: Immigration demagogy is at the "heart" of the Trump show - and the Trump show is at the heart of our tragic decline as a civil and humane society.

Joe Klein is the author of seven books, including "Primary Colors," "Woody Guthrie: A Life" and "Charlie Mike."

BORDER WARS
Inside Trump's Assault on Immigration
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear
Illustrated. 466 pp. Simon & Schuster. $28.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
nonfiction When you purchase an independently reviewed book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission. BORDER WARS Inside Trump's Assault on Immigration By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear On the morning of Jan. 11, 2018, Senator Richard Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, received a phone call from the president of the United States, Donald J.

# data[].attributes.headline
Protester disrupt a meeting to show how they feel kind of like how they did for the black lives matter campaign leaders did.

# data[].attributes.subject
Protester disrupt a meeting to show how they feel kind of like how they did for the black lives matter campaign leaders did.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WATCH: Immigration protesters disrupt speech from acting DHS head McAleenan

# data[].attributes.headline
Pop Singer Selena Gomez talk about how she feels about immigration.

# data[].attributes.subject
Pop Singer Selena Gomez talk about how she feels about immigration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Selena Gomez Talks Immigration Ahead of 'Living Undocumented' Release | RS News 10/2/19

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New NYC anti-discrimination measure levies fines of up to $250,000 for saying 'illegal alien'

# data[].attributes.headline
Beto O'Rourke is confronted by  woman on illegal immigration while he is talking about taking away guns 

# data[].attributes.subject
Beto O'Rourke is confronted by  woman on illegal immigration while he is talking about taking away guns 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A woman took 2020 presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke to task over illegal immigration and his push for the government to confiscate some guns, at a Phoenix town hall Sunday.

"Hands off our guns, Beto," the woman said at The Churchill open-air food court. "You're not getting our guns. The AR-15 is no more deadly than my Ruger .45."

The woman referred to a statement O'Rourke made during the Democrats' third primary debate on Sept. 12 when asked if he would support a mandatory buyback of assault-style weapons.

"Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. We're not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore," the former congressman from El Paso, Texas, said.

His viral "hell yes' statement prompted one woman to speak up at a Colorado campaign event later.

"Hell, no, you're not," Lauren Boebert told O'Rourke.

"Shame on him for coming to Colorado to expound upon our tragedies," Boebert said at the time, reportedly referring to a 2012 shooting that killed 12 people and injured more than 50. "Those are our victims, and he came here to paint a picture for his own campaign trail and really, shame on you, sir, for doing that."

On Sunday, the unidentified Arizona woman also took aim at O'Rourke's stance on illegal immigration.

"I notice that you pander a lot to the illegal aliens and encouraging illegal immigration," she said. The crowd started to boo, and O'Rourke told them to "let her speak."

"We are a nation of laws, and I just think it's a slap in the face to every legal immigrant who has waited and paid and played by the rules to immigrate to this country, and who have respected our country, our land, our citizens, our laws," the woman continued, "and who have gone through the process."

She continued, "To just say 'everybody is welcome here, you all get free stuff and just come on over the border' is, again, a slap in the face to every legal immigrant like my mother who has come here legally."

The crowd started shouting at the woman before O'Rouke responded, taking the opportunity to address immigration rather than gun confiscation.
WOMAN WHO CONFRONTED BETO O'ROURKE ON GUN CONFISCATION PLANS: 'SHAME ON HIM' FOR EXPLOITING 'OUR TRAGEDIES'
"Listen, on this much we can agree: There should be a safe, legal, orderly, quick path to come here to join family, to work a job, to be able to go to school, to flee persecution or, in some countries, death," he said. "I want to work with you to make sure our immigration and asylum laws achieve that purpose."

"But, what is a slap in the face to my conscience and the best traditions of this country is taking kids from their parents and putting them in cages," O'Rourke continued.
O'ROURKE QUICKLY PROFITS OFF 'HELL YES' DEBATE MOMENT ON GUN SEIZURES
"We in this country have lost the lives of seven children in our custody and in our care. There are tens of thousands waiting on the other side of the border in an Orwellian-named migrant protection protocol [...] -- vulnerable, penniless, frightened," he said. "They're being preyed upon [by] those who exploit [people] who have no defense left."

O'Rourke added, "If immigration is a problem, it is the best possible problem this country could have. I want those asylum seekers here in this country. I want us to live according to our conscience, to our laws, to our commitments and to the best, boldest, brightest future we could possibly have."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
He concluded, "Those immigrants pose no threat to you or me. Stop trafficking in these lies."
Fox News' Madeleine Rivera in Phoenix and Sam Dorman contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beto O'Rourke confronted by woman on illegal immigration, Second Amendment: 'Hands off our guns'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A woman took 2020 presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke to task over illegal immigration and his push for the government to confiscate some guns, at a Phoenix town hall Sunday. "Hands off our guns, Beto," the woman said at The Churchill open-air food court. "You're not getting our guns.

# data[].attributes.headline
What are your rights when recording police? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What are your rights when recording police? 

# data[].attributes.body
The ACLU has published information to help educate citizens about citizen journalism.

# data[].attributes.body
After you have read this article, you will be able to articulate what citizen journalism is? Can you see it replacing mainstream media? How accurate is this type of journalism? How is new journalism changing power?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Citizen journalism refers to any type of news gathering and reporting -- writing and publishing articles about a newsworthy topic, or posting photographs or video of a newsworthy event -- that is done by members of the general public rather than the professional news agencies commonly referred to as "mainstream media." Citizen journalism has been in existence at least since Thomas Paine wrote self-published pamphlets like Common Sense that stoked the fires of independence in 1776 [source: Glaser]. But any conversation about citizen journalism in the modern age is mostly a conversation about the transformative effect of the Internet on the democratization of information.

Before the Internet, only professional journalists had access to the technology and organizational infrastructure to publish their work to a large audience. If the average citizen wanted to contribute to the news cycle, he or she could write a letter to the editor or circulate a homemade newspaper or "zine" through the mail. But today, armed with a PC and a high-speed Internet connection, absolutely anyone can share newsworthy information and opinions with a worldwide audience.

New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen offers this definition of citizen journalism: "When the people formerly known as the audience employ the press tools they have in their possession to inform one another, that's citizen journalism [source: Rosen]." Thanks to technological innovations, these "press tools" now include desktop publishing software, digital cameras and video camcorders, and blogging software and social media Web sites for publishing material online.

Amateur journalists have been responsible for a number of notable "scoops" in the past decade. In 2004, a team of conservative bloggers exposed fraudulent documents used in a "60 Minutes" story about President George W. Bush's military service. The controversy, known as Rathergate, led to the firing of several CBS employees and tarnished the reputation of respected journalist Dan Rather, who left the network in 2006. Photos and videos shot by eyewitnesses during the the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, 2005 London Tube bombings and the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings also provided vivid imagery that brought those stories home [source: Mediabistro].

The rise of citizen journalism has been controversial, because it raises the question: what does it mean to be a "professional" journalist if everyone is a journalist? Critics of citizen journalism argue that real journalists, professional or amateur, adhere to certain standards like fact checking, naming sources, searching out opinions on both sides of an issue and avoiding libelous statements [source: Hogg]. You don't need to have a degree in journalism or carry press credentials to practice these principles, but publishing a personal opinion about a politician or posting a grainy cell phone video of a celebrity does not necessarily make you a journalist.

Interestingly, in the wake of mass budget cuts to U.S. newspapers, largely due to the rise of the Internet as a communications tool, mainstream media outlets have quickly (and somewhat ironically) moved to incorporate elements of citizen journalism into their news programs and publications. Cable news networks solicit viewer photos and videos of breaking news stories. Newspaper reporters write blogs and update Twitter accounts, inviting reader interaction and participation. After all, if the local paper doesn't have the staff to cover City Hall, then bloggers will step in to publicize issues that matter to local readers [source: Stverak].

To learn more about media, journalism and the impact of the Internet, see the related links below.

Related Articles

Sources

Glaser, Mark. Mediashift. "Your Guide to Citizen Journalism." September 27, 2006 http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/09/your-guide-to-citizen-journalism270.html

Hogg, Chris. Digital Journal. "Is there credibility in citizen journalism?" March 13, 2009 http://digitaljournal.com/article/271657#ixzz1fsggj086

Mediabistro. 10,000 Words. "Landmark Moments in Citizen Journalism." March 30, 2009 http://www.mediabistro.com/10000words/landmark-moments-in-citizen-journalism_b313

Rosen, Jay. PressThink. "A Most Useful Definition of Citizen Journalism." July 14, 2008 http://archive.pressthink.org/2008/07/14/a_most_useful_d.html

Stverak, Jason. The Online Journalism Review. "The pros and pros of 'citizen journalism.'" March 12, 2010 http://www.ojr.org/ojr/people/stverak/201003/1830/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Citizen journalism refers to any type of news gathering and reporting -- writing and publishing articles about a newsworthy topic, or posting photographs or video of a newsworthy event -- that is done by members of the general public rather than the professional news agencies commonly referred to as "mainstream media."

# data[].attributes.body
You will use the attached document to create a padlet on a current issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How has the Internet revolution impacted journalism, and what are its effects on the coverage of public affairs and current issues