# data[].attributes.body
I think that Trump's tweets about immigration are hurting instead of helping the situation. Trump seems like he is set on building a wall, and he is not open to considering any other option. Trump is very close-minded and is not open to new ideas. Because of this, I agree that this is causing a divide because people on the other side of the issue are not even being recognized, so it seems like these people do not have a say in what goes on in the country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Eight kids left.

Interested in Immigration?

Add Immigration as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Immigration news, video, and analysis from ABC News.

That's how many children the government says are waiting to be reunited with family members as a direct result of then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions ' decision last April to prosecute every adult who crossed illegally at America's southern border.

" Zero tolerance " triggered an international outcry at the U.S.-Mexico border as more than 2,634 migrant children were separated from their parents in a matter of weeks and compounding an existing crisis involving several thousand "unaccompanied minors" already in U.S. custody.

President Donald Trump eventually relented, issuing an executive order in June ending the practice. Days later, a federal judge ordered the administration to reunite the families.

In the end, the vast majority of the kids -- 2,494 -- have been reunited with parents or sponsors, according to data provided by the Health and Human Services Department.

Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images

Another 102 cases involved parents who said they didn't want to be reunited. Another 30 kids separated at the border have parents deemed "unfit" or presenting a "danger" to the child.

That leaves eight kids who are eligible to be returned to their family after being separated at the border, the government told a federal judge in a Nov. 29 court filing.

The final efforts marks an end to one of the most controversial policies in modern U.S. immigration history. The debate though is hardly over, as Trump insists on funding border wall and has extended a military deployment at the border.

The Homeland Security Department declined to discuss pending litigation, but spokeswoman Katie Waldman said of general migration apprehensions: "We will enforce our laws to the maximum extent possible. Our country cannot afford unchecked, undemocratic mass migration policies written by activist judges."

Democrats say they plan to take up the issue of migrant detentions come January, when they assume control of the House. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a senior Democrat from Connecticut, called it "immoral" that any child remained separated from their families as a result of "zero tolerance."

"This is a tragedy of the president's own design," she told ABC News.

John Moore/Getty Images

The U.S. still has some 14,000 migrant children in custody, the vast majority of whom are older kids and teens who opted to try to cross the border alone. They are held at facilities managed by the Health and Human Services Department and scattered across the country, including a tent city near Tornillo, Texas, which has come under the scrutiny of House Democrats.

And migrants continue to try to cross the border. On Thursday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported 51,856 people were arrested trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border in November, compared to 51,001 in October.

The average number of adults in custody is at a record-setting 42,000, according to data provided by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

"My frustration is that we haven't been getting to the root causes of migration for families who are looking for security and safety," said Rep.-elect Veronica Escobar, a Democrat who just won in the 16th District in Texas.

"What this administration is doing is trying to create this sense of fear and crisis so the president can feed his obsession of a border wall," she said.

John Moore/Getty Images, FILE

Sessions' "zero-tolerance" policy never explicitly ordered the separation of families. And families had been separated under previous administrations. But most of those cases would have been tied to other serious crimes. Trump's policy was different because his administration considered the act of crossing the border illegally enough of a justification to detain the adult and put the child in protective custody.

Eight kids left.

That's how many children the government says are waiting to be reunited with family members as a direct result of then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions' decision last April to prosecute every adult who crossed illegally at America's southern border.

"Zero tolerance" triggered an international outcry at the U.S.-Mexico border as more than 2,634 migrant children were separated from their parents in a matter of weeks and compounding an existing crisis involving several thousand "unaccompanied minors" already in U.S. custody.

President Donald Trump eventually relented, issuing an executive order in June ending the practice. Days later, a federal judge ordered the administration to reunite the families.

In the end, the vast majority of the kids -- 2,494 -- have been reunited with parents or sponsors, according to data provided by the Health and Human Services Department.

Another 102 cases involved parents who said they didn't want to be reunited. Another 30 kids separated at the border have parents deemed "unfit" or presenting a "danger" to the child.

That leaves eight kids who are eligible to be returned to their family after being separated at the border, the government told a federal judge in a Nov. 29 court filing.

The final efforts marks an end to one of the most controversial policies in modern U.S. immigration history. The debate though is hardly over, as Trump insists on funding border wall and has extended a military deployment at the border.

The Homeland Security Department declined to discuss pending litigation, but spokeswoman Katie Waldman said of general migration apprehensions: "We will enforce our laws to the maximum extent possible. Our country cannot afford unchecked, undemocratic mass migration policies written by activist judges."

Democrats say they plan to take up the issue of migrant detentions come January, when they assume control of the House. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a senior Democrat from Connecticut, called it "immoral" that any child remained separated from their families as a result of "zero tolerance."

"This is a tragedy of the president's own design," she told ABC News.

The U.S. still has some 14,000 migrant children in custody, the vast majority of whom are older kids and teens who opted to try to cross the border alone. They are held at facilities managed by the Health and Human Services Department and scattered across the country, including a tent city near Tornillo, Texas, which has come under the scrutiny of House Democrats.

And migrants continue to try to cross the border illegally. On Thursday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported 51,856 people were arrested between ports of entry on the southwest border in November, compared to 51,001 in October. Overall in November, CBP denied entry or arrested to 62,456 people on the U.S.-Mexico border.

The average number of adults in custody is at a record-setting 42,000, according to data provided by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The average number of adults in custody is at a record-setting 42,000, according to data provided by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

"My frustration is that we haven't been getting to the root causes of migration for families who are looking for security and safety," said Rep.-elect Veronica Escobar, a Democrat who just won in the 16th District in Texas.

"What this administration is doing is trying to create this sense of fear and crisis so the president can feed his obsession of a border wall," she said.

Sessions' "zero-tolerance" policy never explicitly ordered the separation of families. And families had been separated under previous administrations. But most of those cases would have been tied to other serious crimes. Trump's policy was different because his administration considered the act of crossing the border illegally enough of a justification to detain the adult and put the child in protective custody.

Since zero-tolerance ended, the Trump administration has separated another 81 migrant children from their families at the border. But those cases appear primarily to be the result of specific circumstances, including the parent having a criminal history or known gang affiliation, putting that practice in line with previous administrations.

According to the Nov. 29 court filing, one of the eight children can't be reunited immediately because the parent is in custody inside the U.S. Another child is on track to be deported and reunited with family in his or her home country, although that reunion has been delayed due to "unique circumstances." In five cases, the government is waiting for official statements from the parents on whether they want to be reunited with their child. The remaining child is on track to be reunited with a parent who is inside the U.S.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which led the lawsuit against the government, is helping to orchestrate the reunifications.

ABC News' Quinn Owen contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
u.s. immigration and customs enforcement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 kids left: The lingering aftermath of Trump's 'zero-tolerance' policy at the border

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Eight kids left. Add Immigration as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Immigration news, video, and analysis from ABC News. That's how many children the government says are waiting to be reunited with family members as a direct result of then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions ' decision last April to prosecute every adult who crossed illegally at America's southern border.

# data[].attributes.body
"A proposed rule from the White House would make it harder for legal immigrants to get green cards if they have received certain kinds of public assistance" Trump is making it more and more difficult for any immigrants, legal or illegal, to live the American Dream and live a successful life in America as an American citizen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This story is from Kaiser Health News

Interested in Donald Trump?

Add Donald Trump as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Donald Trump news, video, and analysis from ABC News.

A proposed rule from the White House would make it harder for legal immigrants to get green cards if they have received certain kinds of public assistance - including Medicaid, food stamps and housing subsidies. Green cards allow them to live and work permanently in the United States.

"Those seeking to immigrate to the United States must show they can support themselves financially," Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement.

The proposal, announced Saturday night, marks a new frontier in the administration's long-term effort to curb immigration, both legal and illegal. It already has spurred intense criticism from Democrats, anti-poverty activists, health care organizations and immigrants' rights advocates, who call its restrictions unprecedented.

"We are operating in an overall climate of tremendous fear and anxiety as a result of the administration's overall approach to immigration enforcement and immigration policy," said Mark Greenberg, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, which studies migration and refugee policies at local, national and international levels. He is also a former Obama administration official.

But what effect would this proposal have?

It's a complicated question, touching upon vast government programs, with billions of dollars at stake. While the implications aren't all immediately clear, Kaiser Health News breaks down some of the key elements.

Evan Vucci/AP, FILE

1. First Thing First: What Is The White House Proposing?

The Trump administration wants to redefine a status known as "public charge" - a category used to determine whether someone seeking permanent resident status is "likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence."

In the past, people have been at risk of being defined a "public charge" if they took cash welfare - known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Supplemental Security Income - or federal help paying for long-term care. (Immigrants must be in the country legally for five years before being eligible for TANF or SSI.)

And that "public charge" designation could undermine their applications for permanent residence.

The new rule would expand the list to include some health insurance, food and housing programs. Specifically, it would penalize green-card applicants for using Medicaid, a federal-state health plan for low-income people. (Penalties would not apply for using Medicaid in certain emergencies or for some Medicaid services provided through schools and disability programs.)

Using food stamps, Section 8 rental assistance and federal housing vouchers would also count against applicants. Enrollment in a Medicare Part D program subsidy to help low-income people buy prescription drugs would work against them, too.

The proposal "is definitely a dramatic change from how public charge works today," said Kelly Whitener, an associate professor at Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families who specializes in pediatric health benefits and managed-care systems.

A leaked version of the rule from March suggested officials then were also considering penalizing those who receive subsidies to buy health insurance on the Affordable Care Act marketplaces. But that idea was not in the proposal published this weekend. The marketplace subsidies are aimed at people at a generally higher income bracket than the beneficiaries targeted in the Trump plan, Whitener noted.

"They're really homing in on low-income immigrants," she added.

Nielsen said the proposed rule is "intended to promote immigrant self-sufficiency and protect finite resources."

2. Is This As Unprecedented As Critics Say?

Yes.

Public charge is an old idea. In the 1990s, lawmakers expanded it to consider explicitly whether people had received cash-based welfare.

But including programs like Medicaid and food stamps, which are much wider in scope, is a significant change. It would more likely hit working people - the majority of people on Medicaid are themselves employed, and almost 80 percent live in families with at least one working member, according to data compiled by the Kaiser Family Foundation. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)

Children who are American citizens but whose parents are immigrants could be more likely to suffer repercussions, said some experts. When parents opt out of public assistance for fear of their own legal status, their kids are less likely to be enrolled in programs such as the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, for which they would qualify.

To be clear, receiving public aid wouldn't necessarily stop people from getting a green card. But it would tilt the odds against them.

"Another piece is the enormous discretion the administration will have under its proposal in making judgments about who gets admitted to the country and who gets a green card," said the Migration Policy Institute's Greenberg.

3. When Will The Policy Shift Take Effect?

This is an early step in the complex federal rule-making process. And a lot could still change.

Once the proposed rule appears in the Federal Register, a 60-day countdown starts, during which anyone can weigh in with comments.

A final rule likely wouldn't take effect until 2019.

And DHS is still seeking input on some details. For instance, it hasn't decided whether CHIP would be counted as one of the "public charge" eligible programs.

In the interim, people who had received public benefits before the rule took effect would not be penalized for doing so.

4. Already, Though, The Proposal Is Having Effects.

DHS estimates that 2.5 percent of eligible immigrants would drop out of public benefits programs because of this change - which would tally about $1.5 billion worth of federal money per year. But others expect a much larger impact.

"The chilling effects will be vastly greater than the individuals directly affected," Greenberg said. "There's considerable reason to believe that [the White House estimate] may be a significant understatement."

In the proposed rule, DHS notes that the changes could result in "worse health outcomes," "increased use of emergency rooms," "increased prevalence of communicable diseases," "increased rates of poverty" and other concerns.

Given the complexity of these programs and the proposed rule - and the high stakes at play - low-income immigrants would be much more likely to avoid public benefits altogether, immigration experts said. Millions of immigrants are likely to be affected directly or indirectly, according to the Center for Law and Social Policy, a D.C.-based nonprofit organization.

That could have stark health implications.

Take free vaccines, for which children are often eligible and which would not be subject to the public charge rule. Families afraid of jeopardizing a green card could still be more likely to opt out of that service, Whitener said.

Already, she added, there are reports of people declining federal assistance - even though nothing has yet happened.

"The fear factor cannot be underestimated," she said.

5. Will People Sue?

Legal action is likely.

Officials such as California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who has frequently clashed with the White House, are weighing challenges to the rule.

"The Trump Administration's proposal punishes hard-working immigrant families - even targeting children who are citizens - for utilizing programs that provide basic nutrition and healthcare. This is an assault on our families and our communities," Becerra said in a statement.

But these actions depend on the final shape of the regulation, which could change through the rule-making process.

"They are likely to receive a very large number of sharply critical comments, and there is no way to know what changes they might make as a result," Greenberg said.

KHN's coverage of children's health care issues is supported in part by the Heising-Simons Foundation.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 things to know about Trump's new 'public charge' immigration proposal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This story is from Kaiser Health News Add Donald Trump as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Donald Trump news, video, and analysis from ABC News. A proposed rule from the White House would make it harder for legal immigrants to get green cards if they have received certain kinds of public assistance - including Medicaid, food stamps and housing subsidies.

# data[].attributes.body
These tweets about boarder control are affecting the U.S. because of the language he uses. He is calling these immigrants "violent criminal immigrants" and by doing this he is generalizing every person that crosses the boarder. When he uses this language, he is giving permission for others to say offensive things like that.

# data[].attributes.body
7 September 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Under our horrible immigration laws, the Government is frequently blocked from deporting criminal aliens with violent felony convictions. House GOP just passed a bill to increase our ability to deport violent felons (Crazy Dems opposed). Need to get this bill to my desk fast!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 7, 2018

# data[].attributes.body
4 May 2018

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 4, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Our Southern Border is under siege. Congress must act now to change our weak and ineffective immigration laws. Must build a Wall. Mexico, which has a massive crime problem, is doing little to help!

# data[].attributes.body
Even in the news people aren't happy with Trump just saying, oh this need to be changed, but doesn't give any suggestions on what should be changed and how, as well as just shifting the blame on to congress when the decisions were made by executive order.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Image

Melania Trump at the White House last month. In a statement, she said she "hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together to achieve successful immigration reform." Credit Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

WASHINGTON - Leading figures of both parties demanded on Sunday that President Trump halt his administration's practice of separating children from their parents when apprehended at the border, as the issue further polarized the already divisive immigration debate in Washington.

Republican lawmakers, the former first lady Laura Bush, a conservative newspaper and a onetime adviser to Mr. Trump joined Democrats in condemning family separations that have removed nearly 2,000 children from their parents in just six weeks. The administration argued that it was just enforcing the law, a false assertion that Mr. Trump has made repeatedly.

The issue took on special resonance on Father's Day as Democratic lawmakers visited detention facilities in Texas and New Jersey to protest the separations and the House prepared to take up immigration legislation this week. Pictures of children warehoused without their parents in facilities, including a converted Walmart store, have inflamed passions and put the administration on the defensive.

Mr. Trump did not directly address the family separations on Sunday, saying only that Democrats should work with Republicans on border security legislation. "Don't wait until after the election because you are going to lose!" he wrote on Twitter.

But Melania Trump weighed in, saying she "hates to see children separated from their families and hopes both sides of the aisle can finally come together." Mrs. Trump "believes we need to be a country that follows all laws, but also a country that governs with a heart," the first lady's office said in a statement.

By laying responsibility for the situation on "both sides," Mrs. Trump effectively echoed her husband's assertion that it was the result of a law written by Democrats. In fact, the administration announced a "zero tolerance" approach this spring, leading to the separations.

Mrs. Bush, the last Republican first lady, spoke out forcefully against the practice on Sunday in a rare foray into domestic politics, comparing it to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. "I live in a border state," she wrote in a guest column in The Washington Post. "I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our international boundaries, but this zero tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart."

She attributed the situation entirely to the administration. "The reason for these separations is a zero tolerance policy for their parents, who are accused of illegally crossing our borders," she wrote.

Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, deplored separations on Sunday, except in cases where there is evidence of abuse or another good reason.

"What the administration has decided to do is to separate children from their parents to try to send a message that, if you cross the border with children, your children are going to be ripped away from you," she said on "Face the Nation" on CBS. "That is traumatizing to the children, who are innocent victims. And it is contrary to our values in this country."

Former President Bill Clinton likewise spoke out, suggesting that Mr. Trump was using the widely denounced practice to leverage Democrats into accepting immigration limits in legislation they would otherwise oppose.

"These children should not be a negotiating tool," he wrote on Twitter. "And reuniting them with their families would reaffirm America's belief in & support for all parents who love their children."

Hillary Clinton retweeted that message, adding, "YES!"

Contrary to the president's public statements, no law requires families to necessarily be separated at the border. Attorney General Jeff Sessions's "zero tolerance" announcement this spring that the government will prosecute all unlawful immigrants as criminals set up a situation in which children are removed when their parents are taken into federal custody.

Previous administrations made exceptions to such prosecutions for adults traveling with minor children, but the Trump administration has said it will not do so. While the president has blamed Democrats, his senior adviser, Stephen Miller, told The New York Times last week that it was "a simple decision by the administration to have a zero tolerance policy for illegal entry, period."

But Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of homeland security, rejected responsibility for the separations in a series of tweets on Sunday. "We do not have a policy of separating families at the border," she wrote. "Period."

She distinguished between asylum seekers who try to enter the country at designated points of entry and those who arrive at other parts of the border. "For those seeking asylum at ports of entry, we have continued the policy from previous Administrations and will only separate if the child is in danger, there is no custodial relationship between 'family' members, or if the adult has broken a law," she wrote.

But there have been reports of people arriving at the ports of entry asking for asylum and being taken into custody, and some of the designated ports are not accepting asylum claims. In those cases, migrants sometimes cross wherever they can and, because it is not an official border station, are detained even though they are making a claim of asylum. Many would-be asylum applicants do not know where official ports of entry are.

The administration approach has drawn a cascade of criticism in recent days. Michael V. Hayden, who was C.I.A. director for President George W. Bush, posted a picture of a Nazi concentration camp on Saturday and wrote, "Other governments have separated mothers and children." The Rev. Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham and a defender of Mr. Trump, called the family separations "disgraceful."

The furor over the separation policy seemed to grow even as the president planned to meet with House Republicans on Tuesday in advance of votes on immigration legislation that has divided his party. Two competing bills are headed to the floor, a hard-line immigration measure that is expected to go down, and a compromise version crafted by the House Republican leadership.

Mr. Trump has confused his allies in the House with conflicting signals about his preferences. At one point on Friday, he said he would not sign the "moderate" bill embraced by the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan, only to have the White House later contradict that by saying the president had been confused.

With the fate of the legislation uncertain, Democrats are trying to focus attention on the separation policy as an example of what they call Mr. Trump's extremist approach to immigration. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has collected 43 Democratic sponsors for legislation to limit family separations.

Senators Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland led a group of Democratic lawmakers to a detention facility in Brownsville, Tex., on Sunday but were not allowed to talk with children held there. Seven House Democrats visited a detention facility in Elizabeth, N.J., and said they were blocked for nearly two hours before being allowed to see parents separated from their children.

Some Republican lawmakers in recent days have pushed Mr. Trump to reverse or modify the family separation policy by giving new instructions to the Department of Homeland Security.

"President Trump could stop this policy with a phone call," Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and often an ally and golfing partner of the president's, said on CNN on Friday. "I'll go tell him. If you don't like families' being separated, you can tell D.H.S. stop doing it."

Anthony Scaramucci, who served briefly as White House communications director last year, said separating children from their families is not "the Christian way" or "the American way," and made clear he thinks Mr. Trump can end it on his own. "The President can reverse it and I hope he does," he wrote on Twitter.

The conservative editorial page of The New York Post, owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, agreed on Sunday. "It's not just that this looks terrible in the eyes of the world," it wrote. "It is terrible."

Mr. Trump has said in recent days that Democrats should agree to his panoply of immigration measures, including full financing for a border wall and revamping the system of legal entry to the country, in effect making clear that any legislation addressing family separation must also include his priorities.

A top adviser to Mr. Trump said on Sunday that the president was not using the family separation as leverage to force Democrats to come to the table on other policy disputes, rebutting an unnamed White House official quoted by The Washington Post.

"As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience, and wouldn't say the junk that somebody said, apparently, allegedly, I will tell you that nobody likes this policy," Kellyanne Conway, the White House counselor, said on "Meet the Press" on NBC. "You saw the president on camera that he wants this to end, but everybody has, Congress has to act."

Follow Peter Baker on Twitter: @peterbakernyt

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Bipartisan Cry Over Families Split at Border. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leading Republicans Join Democrats in Pushing Trump to Halt Family Separations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON - Leading figures of both parties demanded on Sunday that President Trump halt his administration's practice of separating children from their parents when apprehended at the border, as the issue further polarized the already divisive immigration debate in Washington.

# data[].attributes.body
Trumps tweets about immigration are dividing our country. They are putting blame on groups of people, like the Mexicans and the Democrats, instead of trying to come up with a way to fix the problem. These tweets are a way of pushing the responsibility of fixing this problem onto other people so it doesn't seem like it is his fault for things not getting done.

# data[].attributes.body
15 June 2018

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 15, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!