Thread: Opinions on the shut down?

nebish - 1/3/2019 at 04:01 AM

What I take from every shut down is frustration at the fact they have to pass continuing resolutions iat all. Do their damn job and get a budget, pass the appropriations and get it done by October 1st rather than all these CRs they are faced with. That is what makes me mad about the whole thing.


BrerRabbit - 1/3/2019 at 07:26 AM


It's blackmail.


2112 - 1/3/2019 at 07:54 AM

These shutdown really piss me off. There has to be a better way to do things, especially since congress has always offered back pay to affected workers, so no money is saved.

My dad passed away on December 21st, the first day of the shutdown. It has been really difficult to get everything that needs to get done accomplished. I took the day off work to take my mom around only to find the social security office closed and the VA short staffed. Luckily the VA cemetary was open, but only because during previous budgets they funded the VA for 2 years. Anyone who thinks these "non-essential" workers are not essential haven't had to deal with a death of a veteran during a shutdown (and holidays).

Oh, and the national parks are getting trashed (literally) during the shutdown. I hate for people to not be able to visit a national park on a long planned vacation because of a government shutdown, but you can't operate a park without restrooms, trash pickup (since people obviously don't have enough sense to take trash out with them), and rangers on patrol to keep idiots from vandalizing the place. These are essential workers.


BoytonBrother - 1/3/2019 at 02:18 PM

Sorry for your loss 2112. May his memory be a blessing.


MartinD28 - 1/3/2019 at 10:43 PM

quote:
Sorry for your loss 2112. May his memory be a blessing.


X2

Yes - thoughts with you & your family.


StratDal - 1/4/2019 at 12:26 AM

My condolences 2112. May you and your loved ones find peace.


WaitinForRain - 1/4/2019 at 04:57 AM

Trump voters: I hope you get even more of what you asked for.
This is SO good for you!

have MORE!

bwahahaha.



BoytonBrother - 1/4/2019 at 01:56 PM

My opinion is that all politicians in Washington are legends in their own minds only, and enjoy having all eyes on them instead of an entertainer.


crazyjoe - 1/4/2019 at 03:59 PM

Why not leave it down for the next 2 years? Limit the damage this jerk and his disgusting criminal family, and both Republicans and Democrats could get to work saving and restoring values and respect to our nation. Why can't Congress and Senate do some kind of emergency action or something to arrange for any Federal workers still working to be paid? If It got vetoed by the "president ", that would be on him.... The Folks out of work, might just be casualties of Donald Dump''s way of doing business.........Peace........joe


BrerRabbit - 1/4/2019 at 04:01 PM

Sorry to hear your dad died 2112. plus Insult to injury dealing with the failed bureaucracy.


crazyjoe - 1/4/2019 at 04:06 PM

Indeed Much Peace to You and Your Family 2112, I don't understand life, probably best that way........joe


2112 - 1/4/2019 at 09:34 PM

Thanks for the kind words everyone, although I didn't mean for my experience to hijack this thread. I just wanted to share that this little game between the president and congress has more consequences than many people realize.


StratDal - 1/4/2019 at 11:24 PM

It's never a good idea to shut the government down for any reason.


MartinD28 - 1/4/2019 at 11:54 PM

"Trump Claims Most Furloughed Federal Workers Are Rooting For Him On Wall Funding"

Let's get real. He makes this $hit up at a podium with no evidence to support his statements. I'd be curious of those who are not getting paid are buying into his rhetoric. So...someone can go w/out their paycheck & agree with Trump for who knows how long only to support a wall that Mexico is supposed to pay for. Makes perfectly good sense and logical...right? Only in the world of Trump's little mind.

Trump is now saying he could shutdown for years. Yes, Donald. We believe everything you say.

In the meantime his cabinet members are slated for $10,000 raises.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-shutdown-furloughed-workers_us_5 c2fc50ce4b0bcb4c25bab28


OriginalGoober - 1/5/2019 at 01:07 AM

If you pulled 100 Americans 80% would approve of national security investments. 30% like Trump. Right now politics matters more.


StratDal - 1/5/2019 at 01:17 AM

quote:
If you pulled 100 Americans 80% would approve of national security investments. 30% like Trump. Right now politics matters more.


"Pulled" and "100 Americans"? Yep. You truly epitomize our president's base supporters.

Some advice OG. "A smart person knows what to say. A wise person knows when to say it."


StratDal - 1/5/2019 at 01:25 AM

Wasn't Mexico supposed to pay for the wall?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/04/politics/trump-border-wall-national-emergenc y-declaration/index.html


MartinD28 - 1/5/2019 at 01:50 AM

quote:
If you pulled 100 Americans 80% would approve of national security investments. 30% like Trump. Right now politics matters more.


"pulled" vs "polled" but we get the gist.

Curious why you used the term "national security investments"? Most people don't have a problem with that. But what you're referring to & what Trump insists upon are two different things. Why didn't you use use the word "wall"? That would be too easy, right? Because if you follow polls, you would know that the American people don't want a wall.

But we get it. President Limbaugh & VP Coulter insist upon that beautiful wall even though lackey Trump had previously agreed to a budget deal before the real prez & vice prez scared little Don.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-americans-support-border-wall_us _5c2e9aaae4b05c88b70798d1


OriginalGoober - 1/5/2019 at 02:23 AM


Immigration reform should of happened decades ago. Trump understands this. Its time to get a deal once and for all for our own good. Both sides will need to compromise but the wall will be erected where its needed as its a matter of national security. Hoping some bad guys wont cross is the democrats plan. Someone smart said hope is not a strategy.




2112 - 1/5/2019 at 03:28 AM

National security investments and a wall are two completely different things. Not sure what your point is?


nebish - 1/5/2019 at 06:06 PM

I do think that immigration policy can be placed among national security. National security doesn't only deal with threats and challenges abroad, it also can cover negative and damaging aspects of illegal immigration.

I think Trump isn't drawing the parallel very well and it is clear he is trying to appeal and convince more people why the wall is needed, which as this point it is such a lightening rod even those who do not follow politics likely have an opinion on it.

My position, as it always has been, is more physical barriers where DHS and ICE say they are needed should be put in place adding more hurdles and difficulty to those trying to enter illegally. Trump has his position, I have mine. They are similar, but not the same. I would've been happy had they followed the Secure Fence Act of 2006 as originally passed.

And, no hijack seen 2112. I hope you and your family are doing as well as you can given the circumstances. Check your PMs.


OriginalGoober - 1/5/2019 at 08:34 PM

quote:
National security investments and a wall are two completely different things. Not sure what your point is?


The wall resistance is more of a liberal idea that a big scary wall will clash with the American concept living in a liberals head. They dont like the wall similar to not liking an assult rifle. The image is scary bad for them.


gina - 1/5/2019 at 09:03 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-threatens-shutdown-of-%E2%80% 98months-or-even-years%E2%80%99-over-border-wall-says-he-could-declare-nati onal-emergency-to-get-it-built/ar-BBROqDg?li=BBnb7Kz


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/millions-face-delayed-tax-refunds-cuts-to -food-stamps-as-white-house-scrambles-to-deal-with-shutdown%E2%80%99s-conse quences/ar-BBROykA?li


https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424022-pence-white-house-offici als-meet-congressional-staffers-amid-effort


Comments:

1) Months, years of shutdown will impact the 880,000 federal workers who will not be paid till the shutdown ends. Many will not be able to meet rent/mortgage, car loan and other obligations They can become poor, homeless and hungry. Think of a TSA worker becoming poor, homeless and hungry. if you think the abuse at the airport is bad, imagine them marching on Washington to get their retro-active pay.

2) Tax refunds will be delayed. Imagine millions of people who need that money like teachers who only get paid for 10 months per year and use their tax refunds to pay their bills for the other two months.

3) Deep cuts to food stamps. How many millions of people are poor enough and collecting? Imaging millions of hungry people. After about a week of NO food, they will be angry. Week two they will be organized, and guess where they will be heading by week 3 after they have looted some stores to get food. On busses to Washington? I think so. Who will pay for that? The same people who helped pay for the busses for that caravan of Central Americans, I'll just say democratic sympathizers, that way I am not accusing a political party.

4) Who else is effected by the shutdown, look at the agencies. NASA, HUD (Section 8 payments), etc. and no new social security claims will be processed. So people waiting years to get that check, will have to wait longer. How happy will they be?

Opinions on the shut down?

1. It must end soon.

2. The Wall? It must be built, can we borrow money from Russia or Saudi Arabia to pay for it? They both have money and are allies to us. WHY NOT? Saudi could build some luxury resorts on OUR side of the wall as an incentive to them to help.

3. Labor - manpower to build the wall.

a) early work release for prisoners who are in prison on non violent offenses, let them do some time building the wall, and live in man-cave tents/trailers set up for the workers.

b) volunteer army corp of engineer workers.

c) volunteer any ex military who want to help out.

d) any unemployed people who would like a paycheck , they too can live in tents and/or trailers. Those with wives, children could have their wives and kids stay in a trailer with them. I know you are thinking what about sewage from these remote locations. The army corp of engineers can set up some solar powered wells for water and cesspool functions.


Trump has always said THINK BIG. If we don't this country can quickly become a third world country.





[Edited on 1/5/2019 by gina]


nebish - 1/6/2019 at 04:03 PM

quote:
2. The Wall? It must be built, can we borrow money from Russia or Saudi Arabia to pay for it? They both have money and are allies to us. WHY NOT? Saudi could build some luxury resorts on OUR side of the wall as an incentive to them to help.


Sometimes I think you are totally oblivious to what your statements sound like to others!

First of all, we have a borrowing problem already, more is not the answer! Second of all, the two countries you named aren't exactly viewed in the best of light right now, so the US becoming more aligned, or indebted to those countries wouldn't go over well with just about everyone. Bad suggestion.

Nobody can escape what Trump said hundreds of times (or more?) that Mexico was going to pay for it. USMCA has no direct mechanism to pay for the wall as Trump is asserting, and it hasn't been passed yet. If Trump wants to try and make that case, he is not connecting the dots at all - because it would be impossible to actually show or prove where USMCA money (savings or taxes or whatever) are directly going towards the wall in the vein of Mexico paying for it.

I have long supported additional barriers and have a different idea on what or how more border security can be done than Trump does. So I never felt connected to his wall claim and never believed or understood how he could explain Mexico would pay for it. It worked at campaign rallies by someone who didn't expect to get elected. When the rubber meets the road it goes nowhere.

So all these attempts at how the wall can be funded in the shadow of Mexico is supposed to be paying for it easily falls on deaf ears and allows his opponents to continually ask "why isn't Mexico paying for it?"


nebish - 1/6/2019 at 04:07 PM

We will find out Monday, but I hope the people that got together over the weekend can find a way forward. Trump saying he could keep the government shut down months or years is quite reckless. He needs to compromise and the Democrats should compromise. That is how things are supposed to work. Trump just doesn't get how it works yet (2 years in). Both sides lose a little face, get a little what you want and move on to the next issue(s).


Muleman1994 - 1/6/2019 at 07:41 PM

The assaults, robberies, rapes and murders of American citizens by illegal alien criminals in addition to the free flow of deadly drugs, far outweighs this current minor shutdown.

The wall will be built.


gina - 1/6/2019 at 07:53 PM

quote:
quote:
2. The Wall? It must be built, can we borrow money from Russia or Saudi Arabia to pay for it? They both have money and are allies to us. WHY NOT? Saudi could build some luxury resorts on OUR side of the wall as an incentive to them to help.


Sometimes I think you are totally oblivious to what your statements sound like to others!

First of all, we have a borrowing problem already, more is not the answer! Second of all, the two countries you named aren't exactly viewed in the best of light right now, so the US becoming more aligned, or indebted to those countries wouldn't go over well with just about everyone. Bad suggestion.


Nobody can escape what Trump said hundreds of times (or more?) that Mexico was going to pay for it. USMCA has no direct mechanism to pay for the wall as Trump is asserting, and it hasn't been passed yet. If Trump wants to try and make that case, he is not connecting the dots at all - because it would be impossible to actually show or prove where USMCA money (savings or taxes or whatever) are directly going towards the wall in the vein of Mexico paying for it.

I have long supported additional barriers and have a different idea on what or how more border security can be done than Trump does. So I never felt connected to his wall claim and never believed or understood how he could explain Mexico would pay for it. It worked at campaign rallies by someone who didn't expect to get elected. When the rubber meets the road it goes nowhere.

So all these attempts at how the wall can be funded in the shadow of Mexico is supposed to be paying for it easily falls on deaf ears and allows his opponents to continually ask "why isn't Mexico paying for it?"




Yes we do have a borrowing problem and since all we can do in regard to the debt we owe China is make payments on the interest, we need to look at other big financiers who could help. We cannot balance our budget at this time, everybody knows that. I just found out recently that there is no money in the social security trust fund, it is backed by US Treasury notes, but there is no gold or cash to back the fund up.

Saudi has tons of money. They help us out with oil, and in return we provide security for their country, doing major arms deals with them. We even overlooked the consensus that Prince Salman was allegedly involved in the murder of a US journalist. (Jamal Kashoggi) and they are strategic partners with us. There is no reason we could not secure 5 Billion from them.


As to Russia, we are on good footing with them. Others tried and still do, to taint the good-will relationship we have with them. Putin is a good, fair, moral man and would consider helping us out. They are a world power who has money, why can't we do a deal with them?

Indonesia also has tons of money, we need to look at nations that have money to invest, and get some from them.

If Mexico will not pay for it, then we need to look at other sources because most agree that the wall is needed for border security and national security.



[Edited on 1/6/2019 by gina]


2112 - 1/6/2019 at 08:00 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
2. The Wall? It must be built, can we borrow money from Russia or Saudi Arabia to pay for it? They both have money and are allies to us. WHY NOT? Saudi could build some luxury resorts on OUR side of the wall as an incentive to them to help.


Sometimes I think you are totally oblivious to what your statements sound like to others!

First of all, we have a borrowing problem already, more is not the answer! Second of all, the two countries you named aren't exactly viewed in the best of light right now, so the US becoming more aligned, or indebted to those countries wouldn't go over well with just about everyone. Bad suggestion.


Nobody can escape what Trump said hundreds of times (or more?) that Mexico was going to pay for it. USMCA has no direct mechanism to pay for the wall as Trump is asserting, and it hasn't been passed yet. If Trump wants to try and make that case, he is not connecting the dots at all - because it would be impossible to actually show or prove where USMCA money (savings or taxes or whatever) are directly going towards the wall in the vein of Mexico paying for it.

I have long supported additional barriers and have a different idea on what or how more border security can be done than Trump does. So I never felt connected to his wall claim and never believed or understood how he could explain Mexico would pay for it. It worked at campaign rallies by someone who didn't expect to get elected. When the rubber meets the road it goes nowhere.

So all these attempts at how the wall can be funded in the shadow of Mexico is supposed to be paying for it easily falls on deaf ears and allows his opponents to continually ask "why isn't Mexico paying for it?"




Yes we do have a borrowing problem and since all we can do in regard to the debt we owe China is make payments on the interest, we need to look at other big financiers who could help. We cannot balance our budget at this time, everybody knows that. I just found out recently that there is no money in the social security trust fund, it is backed by US Treasury notes, but there is no gold or cash to back the fund up.

Saudi has tons of money. They help us out with oil, and in return we provide security for their country, doing major arms deals with them. We even overlooked the consensus that Prince Salman was allegedly involved in the murder of a US journalist. (Jamal Kashoggi) and they are strategic partners with us. There is no reason we could not secure 5 Billion from them.


As to Russia, we are on good footing with them. Others tried and still do, to taint the good-will relationship we have with them. Putin is a good, fair, moral man and would consider helping us out. They are a world power who has money, why can't we do a deal with them?

Indonesia also has tons of money, we need to look at nations that have money to invest, and get some from them.

If Mexico will not pay for it, then we need to look at other sources because most agree that the wall is needed for border security and national security.



[Edited on 1/6/2019 by gina]


Wow, did I miss that it was opposite day today or something?


Muleman1994 - 1/6/2019 at 08:24 PM

Obama supported border security:

“'We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked...'” Barrack Obama, 2005"

Obama's full quote at the time: "We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States, undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants in this country."

"We all agree on the need to better secure the border and to punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants," Obama added. "We are a generous and welcoming people, here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law."

Obama went on to advocate for imposing a "hefty fine" on those already in the country illegally, as well as tighter border security measures.

BTW – Obama has a wall around his mansion in DC.


Hillary supported border security:

At a campaign stop in November 2015, Clinton told a crowd: "I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders."


Schumer supported border security:

Here's what he said in 2009:

"The first of these seven principles is that illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple," Schumer said. "When we use phrases like 'undocumented workers,' we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose."

"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally," Schumer continued. "Any immigration solution must recognize that we must do as much as we can to gain operational control of our borders as soon as possible."


Pelosi has a wall around her home in California.


2112 - 1/6/2019 at 09:03 PM

There you go making it sound like the only way to keep illegals out is using a wall. That is nonsense.

Oh, and Obama does not have a wall around his house (other than a small privacy wall around a patio). Take a look at this photo from the street.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-compares-border-wall-wa ll-around-obama-home-n953166


2112 - 1/6/2019 at 09:08 PM

And there isn't a wall around Nancy Pelosi's house either:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-this-a-wall-around-nancy-pelosis-home/


Muleman1994 - 1/6/2019 at 09:25 PM

quote:
There you go making it sound like the only way to keep illegals out is using a wall. That is nonsense.

Oh, and Obama does not have a wall around his house (other than a small privacy wall around a patio). Take a look at this photo from the street.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-compares-border-wall-wa ll-around-obama-home-n953166



Wrong again son.

If you had read the article, which uses an old picture:

TMZ first reported in 2017 that the couple was building a fence-like wall and published photos showing what appeared to be the construction of a few brick columns. The project has since been completed.

The wall around Obama's mansion is now completed.


gina - 1/7/2019 at 02:08 AM

Trump went to Camp David. It is believed that he will declare a National Emergency within days. Most of you who have been around here long enough know the powers a President has when a National Emergency is granted.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/06/donald-trump-government-shu tdown-border-wall-concrete-steel

part of why not getting the wall built is a national emergency.

We are working hard at the Border, but we need a WALL! In 2018, 1.7 million pounds of narcotics seized, 17,000 adults arrested with criminal records, and 6000 gang members, including MS-13, apprehended. A big Human Trafficking problem.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1081570073867927557


Potential new wall:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1076239448461987841/photo/1


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/07/trump-government-shutdown-b order-wall-democrats


Others have reported if there is a National Emergency and no budget deal, the food stamp cuts go into effect for February.

[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


BrerRabbit - 1/7/2019 at 02:59 AM

quote:
It is believed that he will declare a National Emergency within days. Most of you who have been around here long enough know the powers a President has when a National Emergency is granted.


Fine - let him try. Flaunting the Constitution. Criminal abuse of power. He will be impeached for sure if he pulls a stunt like that.


2112 - 1/7/2019 at 09:35 AM

I've got an idea on a compromise to get the government open. How about Congress match the money we get from Mexico for the wall at a rate of $10 US taxpayer dollars for every peso Trump can get from Mexico using his incredible negotiation skills. Seems fair. All he has to do is get Mexico to pay for 1% of the wall. Surely a great negotiator can do that, right?


BoytonBrother - 1/7/2019 at 03:54 PM

quote:
Obama supported border security:


Wrong son. Obama never cared about border security, as evidenced by his failed policies. Prove this nonsensical statement with one quote, I dare you to find one, you can’t, haha, I win.

quote:
“'We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked...'” Barrack Obama, 2005"


Bullcrap. This is taken out of context. Nice try troll! Got the full quote genius? If you are trying to prove that Obama understood the significance of LEGAL entry, then prove it with a quote or buzz off!

quote:
Obama's full quote at the time: "We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States, undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants in this country."


Ok fine, you convinced me. Obama was right all along.


BoytonBrother - 1/7/2019 at 03:57 PM

quote:
Hillary supported border security:


Don’t let Goober see you complimenting Hillary Clinton on policy. He’ll be very hurt and angry!


gina - 1/7/2019 at 05:29 PM

quote:
quote:
It is believed that he will declare a National Emergency within days. Most of you who have been around here long enough know the powers a President has when a National Emergency is granted.


Fine - let him try. Flaunting the Constitution. Criminal abuse of power. He will be impeached for sure if he pulls a stunt like that.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1631

50 U.S. Code § 1631 - Declaration of national emergency by Executive order; authority; publication in Federal Register; transmittal to Congress

When the President declares a national emergency, no powers or authorities made available by statute for use in the event of an emergency shall be exercised unless and until the President specifies the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act. Such specification may be made either in the declaration of a national emergency, or by one or more contemporaneous or subsequent Executive orders published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

(Pub. L. 94–412, title III, § 301, Sept. 14, 1976, 90 Stat. 1257.)





[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/7/2019 at 05:35 PM

What can he actually do once a National Emergency has been declared?

https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/emergency-powers


AND he can take on the Deep State too.
https://www.exopolitics.org/trump-executive-order-targets-deep-state-opens- door-to-full-disclosure/


http://www.disastercenter.com/laworder/laworder.htm
Pick your emergency, they have plans for any and all, and EVERYTHING would be under the President's control.


While the current emergency is the border and lack of adequate security, if we are already in a State of National Emergency and anything else happens, he is totally in charge of everything, and guess what, after those elections in Israel, when the Peace Plan is released, there may very well be more emergencies because Muslims in the Middle East will not be welcoming the building of a new temple on Temple Mount. It can lead to war.
I have been telling you about the times we are living in and that the times of the Tribulation are going to happen, that is one of the things that can cause the beginning of it. So yes the idea of creating a state of National Emergency is quite serious.





[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/7/2019 at 06:01 PM

On February 16, 1962, President John Kennedy signed several Executive Orders which would allegedly give certain dictatorial powers to appointed bureaucrats in the event a "National Emergency" should be declared by the President — whichever president is sitting in office at the designated time. At the president's discretion "in any time of increased international tension or economic or financial crisis", the E.O.'s could theoretically be enacted.

These E.O.'s signed by Kennedy would give authority to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to control: communications, energy, food, fuel, farms, transportation, highways, railroads, inland waterways and seaports, health, education and welfare, drafts citizens into work forces under government supervision; relocation of populations, designates areas to be abandoned as 'unsafe'; relocates communities, and controls all public storage facilities.

On February 27, 1962 Kennedy signed E.O. 11051 designating FEMA as the authorized agency to implement the above orders, and which authority can be re-designated by the original authority. President Nixon signed E.O. 11490 combining all the above to be enacted in one fell swoop; on July 20, 1979 Carter added a few minor amendments to them; and, in June, 1994 then president Bill Clinton signed E.O. 12919, which appears to encompass all of the E.O.'s.

We have found no Executive Orders that would nullify any of the above, so it appears they are all considered to be on the books at the time of this posting.

Given there is no Constitutional authority for any president to declare a "National Emergency," we have wondered how the orchestraters of this plan expected to successfully execute the E.O.'s. The plan for total control of every aspect of our lives has been under construction for a long time. As you read these executive orders, bear in mind that they mean nothing by themselves. They are not law, nor can they become law by and of themselves.

However, under legislation that is currently pending in most (if not all) states, they could potentially take on significant meaning. The Emergency Health Powers legislation, pending in state capitols all across America — if passed — would give the governor the power to declare a state of health emergency by executive order. He then would be able to hand the reigns of power to whomever he chooses — including the state's emergency management agency, which could essentially act as an arm of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Apart from — and sometimes combined with — these Emergency Health Powers Acts are varying forms of "anti-terror" bills that are virtually redefining the words "terror," "terrorism," and "terrorist." States are busy right now, creating their own versions of the federal Office of Homeland Security. These state offices will oversee the process and details of the implementation of these orders. That is why it is so critical to get the legislation stopped in the states. For more information, or to read the bills we've compiled, go to the War on Americans is in the States section of this website.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/eo/femalist.htm

And now, the list:

Executive Order #10995: Seizure of all communications media in the United States.


Executive Order #10997: Seizure of all electric power fuels and minerals, public and private.


Executive Order #10999: Seizure of all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control of highways, seaports and waterways.


Executive Order #11000: Seizure of all American people for work forces under federal supervision including the splitting of families if the government finds it necessary.


Executive Order #11001: Seizure of all health, education and welfare facilities, public and private.


Executive Order #11002: Empowered the postmaster general to register all men, women and children in the U.S.


Executive Order #11003: Seizure of all airports and aircraft.


Executive Order #11004: Seizure of all housing and finance authorities to establish Forced Relocation Designated areas to be abandoned as "unsafe."


Executive Order #11005: Seizure of all railroads, inland waterways and storage facilities, public and private.


Executive Order #12919: Signs June 3, 1994, by President Clinton. Encompasses all the above executive orders.







[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/7/2019 at 06:03 PM

For those who do not think it is a big deal.

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-donald-trump-is-still-setting-up-c oncentration-camps-on-american-soil-1.6197513

When news came in recent days of the U.S. separating parents from children at the border and holding minors in a dedicated tent city in Texas, the phrase "concentration camp" began to appear in descriptions of the new facility.
Andrea Pitzer
@andreapitzer
Yes, of course they're concentration camps. They aren't the unique subset of death camps that were invented by the Nazis for genocide, or even Arctic Gulag camps built for hard labor. But they're camps created to punish a whole class of civilians via mass detention without trial.


REMARKS: "a whole class of civilians mass detention without trial".

What should be done with those who cross the border illegally is simply send them back, not detain anyone in a camp of any sort.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/opinion/american-internment-camps.html


FURTHER REMARKS: And these are not the camps designed to hold rowdy Americans in a time of national unrest, the ones for us are like giant prison camps, one way in and no way out.

https://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf



[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]

[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/7/2019 at 06:20 PM

The Civilian Internment Camps FEMA


https://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf

"Additionally, FM 3-39.40 discusses the critical issue of detainee rehabilitation. It describes the doctrinal
foundation, principles, and processes that military police and other elements will employ when dealing with I/R
populations. As part of internment, these populations include U.S. military prisoners, and multiple categories of
detainees (civilian internees [CIs], retained personnel [RP], and enemy "


REMARKS: these are the camps designed to hold prisoners and/or rowdy Americans in a time of national unrest, the ones for us are like giant prison camps, one way in and no way out. Sure they wrote it for prisoners from other countries, but do you think they would not use it in people here in a "national emergency" of civil unrest. They practiced those Jade Helm exercises specifically for that purpose.

For those who think it is just conspiracy theory, it is NOT.

President Regan signed Presidential Director Number 54 in April of 1984 that allowed FEMA to activate a secret national readiness exercise. This exercise was given the code name REX 84. The purpose of the exercise was to test FEMA's ability to assume military authority. REX 84 was so highly guarded that special metal doors were installed on the fifth floor of the FEMA building in Washington, D.C. The only people that were allowed to enter the premises were ones who had a red Christian cross on their shirt. The exercise required the following.....

Suspension of the Constitution of the United States

Turning control of the government over to FEMA

Appointment of military commanders to run state and local governments

Declaration of Martial Law

There over 600 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States.

The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a mass exodus of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention lefts by FEMA. Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed down and to be turned into prisons. They can also be used for domestic disturbances, putting US citizens in there if massive civil unrest breaks out. The camps are already there.

Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government.

People who were effected by the Hurricanes were taken to camps.
https://ktvl.com/news/local/sen-merkley-and-internment-camp-survivor-warn-a bout-history-repeating-itself



REMARKS: That's it, I am done for today and NO I am not saying Trump plans to put us in concentration camps, but I want you to be aware that these camps DO exist, and the Executive Orders granting him the power to do that in civil unrest exist. They existed under Obama, Bush, Clinton, and the others. All I am saying is be aware of prophecy, be aware of political things going on worldwide.


[Edited on 1/7/2019 by gina]


BoytonBrother - 1/7/2019 at 08:08 PM

Let Trump throw his tantrums and declare emergency. It will satisfy his base, but create tensions within his own administration and among the military who will be executing the order. Let him serve his base until he’s gone if that’s what he wants. It will also alienate Republicans in Washington who are currently on his side. Keep it up Don!


JimSheridan - 1/7/2019 at 08:28 PM

Original Goober wrote: "The wall resistance is more of a liberal idea that a big scary wall will clash with the American concept living in a liberals head."

That is an emotional response rather than a factual one. Here are some facts:

1. Our own officials report that most drugs enter our country through our legal points of entry. Thus, a wall will not solve the problem.

2. Stats show that most illegal aliens are people who have overstayed their visas. Thus a wall will not solve the problem.

There are plenty of obvious other considerations:

Do you want to invoke Eminent Domain to take private citizens' land away as needed for the wall?
Have you considered the environmental impact presented by the wall?
Do you understand that all walls require expensive maintenance?
Are you aware of the ways that modern technology has allowed walls or other boundaries to be subverted? It was not too long ago that incredibly advanced tunnels from Mexico to the US were discovered, for example.

To say that "Anyone who does not want a wall does not want border security" is absurd; it is like saying "Anyone who does not own a horse and carriage does not want to travel." We live in 2019, and technology offers plenty of alternatives that would be more effective and less expensive.

Look at the stats for deportations under Obama. Clearly his administration was taking steps to combat the illegals' presence here. Meanwhile, we also know that there have been illegals working at Trump's places.

I know memes offer tidbits of info that are easy talking points, but plenty of people who do their homework know that a wall is not a panacea.


BoytonBrother - 1/7/2019 at 08:39 PM

Great post JimSheridan, but Goober doesn’t engage. He posts and runs.


BoytonBrother - 1/7/2019 at 08:42 PM

quote:
The wall resistance is more of a liberal idea that a big scary wall will clash with the American concept living in a liberals head.


Secondly, just to point out how silly this is.....why would liberals see it as scary if they aren’t afraid of the problem?


nebish - 1/8/2019 at 02:48 PM

quote:
Original Goober wrote: "The wall resistance is more of a liberal idea that a big scary wall will clash with the American concept living in a liberals head."

That is an emotional response rather than a factual one. Here are some facts:

1. Our own officials report that most drugs enter our country through our legal points of entry. Thus, a wall will not solve the problem.

2. Stats show that most illegal aliens are people who have overstayed their visas. Thus a wall will not solve the problem.

There are plenty of obvious other considerations:

Do you want to invoke Eminent Domain to take private citizens' land away as needed for the wall?
Have you considered the environmental impact presented by the wall?
Do you understand that all walls require expensive maintenance?
Are you aware of the ways that modern technology has allowed walls or other boundaries to be subverted? It was not too long ago that incredibly advanced tunnels from Mexico to the US were discovered, for example.

To say that "Anyone who does not want a wall does not want border security" is absurd; it is like saying "Anyone who does not own a horse and carriage does not want to travel." We live in 2019, and technology offers plenty of alternatives that would be more effective and less expensive.

Look at the stats for deportations under Obama. Clearly his administration was taking steps to combat the illegals' presence here. Meanwhile, we also know that there have been illegals working at Trump's places.

I know memes offer tidbits of info that are easy talking points, but plenty of people who do their homework know that a wall is not a panacea.


Hopefully my points of view will never be confused with Goobers, but since I support more wall, or fence, barrier, whatever on the Mexican border I'd like to respond since I assume he will not.

If just a portion of the drugs come across the border between legal points of entry, maybe 20%, that is still a portion that can be restricted or reduced. Thereby making them move more through legal ports, potentially increasing the chance of capture, or making it more difficult on the movement of the drugs to circumvent where the additional barrier is.

I agree, visa overstays is a very large contributor to the illegal immigration problem. Just because a wall doesn't address that, doesn't mean that a wall keeping other illegal aliens from crossing isn't needed also. FY2019 numbers for October and November show that Southern Border Patrol apprehensions were over 51,000 each month. A total of 396,579 were apprehended in FY2018. And how many do they catch, half?

That is a problem and a problem that needs addressed further. I am fine if we do that with additional personnel, detention facilities, technology and yes barriers. They all play a role. A wall should not be built across the entire border, a wall doesn't need build everywhere. But where physical barriers make sense, they should be built and they should be difficult for anyone to try and navigate over, through or under.

Tunnels? We eventually find tunnels. But an example that we have made it harder for them to come. They have to dig tunnels and the work and time it takes to do that. Good, harder for them, takes them longer that is good.

I do not have much concern about environmental impact of additional construction at the border.

Eminent Domain is an issue, but it will have to be dealt with just like any other state or federal project deals with it. There is a procedure.

Maintenance = a maintenance job for someone.

Modern tech is great, and advancing. I like it. It all can and should work together to achieve the ultimate end goal, reducing as many illegal border crossings as possible. It will never get to zero, where there is a will there is a way, but I surely would hope we can substantially cut it from the 50,xxx a month we have seen recently.

Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Bhawk - 1/8/2019 at 04:04 PM

quote:
Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Whether there is or isn't, the only thing being discussed IS a wall, so...

You mention holding Americans accountable, such as penalties for hiring illegals. Does that apply to employers, like, oh, Mar-A-Lago?


nebish - 1/8/2019 at 04:25 PM

quote:
quote:
Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Whether there is or isn't, the only thing being discussed IS a wall, so...

You mention holding Americans accountable, such as penalties for hiring illegals. Does that apply to employers, like, oh, Mar-A-Lago?




I absolutely would support felony charges with mandatory jail time for repeat employers who hire illegal aliens without proper work visas.

I think national emergency is a bit much actually. It is a crisis. Lots of crisis around. If he declares a national emergency for wall construction I would not support that even though I do support devoting more resources to border security. The overall issue needs reformed, which is hard to see happening at this point.


BoytonBrother - 1/8/2019 at 04:35 PM

I’m sorry, but if you speak to Latino immigrants, both legal and illegal, they laugh at the wall. Trump isn’t even trying to hide that the wall is a symbol, and not meant to actually keep out Mexicans. He said this! He actually admitted it, and people still want it. Crazy.

Trump will eventually build his wall, he’ll tweet out a spun statistic that supports his narrative, and all the Goober’s of the world will celebrate a “win” over the lefties, while in reality, illegal immigration hasn’t changed one bit. $5billion to help dysfunctional America “feel better”, rather than be given to veterans.


StratDal - 1/8/2019 at 05:06 PM

quote:
quote:
Original Goober wrote: "The wall resistance is more of a liberal idea that a big scary wall will clash with the American concept living in a liberals head."

That is an emotional response rather than a factual one. Here are some facts:

1. Our own officials report that most drugs enter our country through our legal points of entry. Thus, a wall will not solve the problem.

2. Stats show that most illegal aliens are people who have overstayed their visas. Thus a wall will not solve the problem.

There are plenty of obvious other considerations:

Do you want to invoke Eminent Domain to take private citizens' land away as needed for the wall?
Have you considered the environmental impact presented by the wall?
Do you understand that all walls require expensive maintenance?
Are you aware of the ways that modern technology has allowed walls or other boundaries to be subverted? It was not too long ago that incredibly advanced tunnels from Mexico to the US were discovered, for example.

To say that "Anyone who does not want a wall does not want border security" is absurd; it is like saying "Anyone who does not own a horse and carriage does not want to travel." We live in 2019, and technology offers plenty of alternatives that would be more effective and less expensive.

Look at the stats for deportations under Obama. Clearly his administration was taking steps to combat the illegals' presence here. Meanwhile, we also know that there have been illegals working at Trump's places.

I know memes offer tidbits of info that are easy talking points, but plenty of people who do their homework know that a wall is not a panacea.


Hopefully my points of view will never be confused with Goobers, but since I support more wall, or fence, barrier, whatever on the Mexican border I'd like to respond since I assume he will not.

If just a portion of the drugs come across the border between legal points of entry, maybe 20%, that is still a portion that can be restricted or reduced. Thereby making them move more through legal ports, potentially increasing the chance of capture, or making it more difficult on the movement of the drugs to circumvent where the additional barrier is.

I agree, visa overstays is a very large contributor to the illegal immigration problem. Just because a wall doesn't address that, doesn't mean that a wall keeping other illegal aliens from crossing isn't needed also. FY2019 numbers for October and November show that Southern Border Patrol apprehensions were over 51,000 each month. A total of 396,579 were apprehended in FY2018. And how many do they catch, half?

That is a problem and a problem that needs addressed further. I am fine if we do that with additional personnel, detention facilities, technology and yes barriers. They all play a role. A wall should not be built across the entire border, a wall doesn't need build everywhere. But where physical barriers make sense, they should be built and they should be difficult for anyone to try and navigate over, through or under.

Tunnels? We eventually find tunnels. But an example that we have made it harder for them to come. They have to dig tunnels and the work and time it takes to do that. Good, harder for them, takes them longer that is good.

I do not have much concern about environmental impact of additional construction at the border.

Eminent Domain is an issue, but it will have to be dealt with just like any other state or federal project deals with it. There is a procedure.

Maintenance = a maintenance job for someone.

Modern tech is great, and advancing. I like it. It all can and should work together to achieve the ultimate end goal, reducing as many illegal border crossings as possible. It will never get to zero, where there is a will there is a way, but I surely would hope we can substantially cut it from the 50,xxx a month we have seen recently.

Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Lots of good points nebish and I'm sure most Americans feel similarly. Obviously border security is important but a wall will not be the only fix many think it will.

As for the president, it's just a lightning rod topic for him to rile up his supporters. When he said Mexico was going to pay for it, he lost all credibility with sensible thinking citizens regarding the issue. To hell with him.

Countless times throughout our nation's history, immigrants (legal or not) and immigration policies have been targets for political agendas. Sadly, it will continue.



MartinD28 - 1/8/2019 at 07:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Whether there is or isn't, the only thing being discussed IS a wall, so...

You mention holding Americans accountable, such as penalties for hiring illegals. Does that apply to employers, like, oh, Mar-A-Lago?




I absolutely would support felony charges with mandatory jail time for repeat employers who hire illegal aliens without proper work visas.

I think national emergency is a bit much actually. It is a crisis. Lots of crisis around. If he declares a national emergency for wall construction I would not support that even though I do support devoting more resources to border security. The overall issue needs reformed, which is hard to see happening at this point.


There is a national emergency & crisis, and he sleeps in the White House.


Chain - 1/8/2019 at 09:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Illegal immigration is a national emergency. But the entire issue is the emergency. The VISA overstays, the lack or serious punishment for employers who hire, the lack of e-verity, the 11-22 million illegals that are here (Yale 2018 study said 22million, most have it lower), the identity theft, the financial burden of educating and medical costs.

I do not know if the President is going to declare a national emergency. What I do know, is that it should not be done just to build a wall, but this issue, overall, is indeed a national emergency.


Whether there is or isn't, the only thing being discussed IS a wall, so...

You mention holding Americans accountable, such as penalties for hiring illegals. Does that apply to employers, like, oh, Mar-A-Lago?




I absolutely would support felony charges with mandatory jail time for repeat employers who hire illegal aliens without proper work visas.

I think national emergency is a bit much actually. It is a crisis. Lots of crisis around. If he declares a national emergency for wall construction I would not support that even though I do support devoting more resources to border security. The overall issue needs reformed, which is hard to see happening at this point.


There is a national emergency & crisis, and he sleeps in the White House.


A national emergency made clearer by the day....For instance the Syria withdrawal confusion of just the past 72 hours should make it crystal clear just how incompetent this administration is. Bolton was given the middle finger by the Turks today and our Secretary of State is saying things to very concerned allies within the region completely at odds with Trump....A dangerous situation all created by the idiot occupying the White House.

Meanwhile, Mitch McConnell is AWOL in his responsibility for oversight of the Presidency on the domestic front with this shut down mess....Again, a mess created by Little Idiot.


gina - 1/9/2019 at 01:31 AM

Some good info in here from the BBC.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46792676

US law allows the president to direct military construction projects during war or national emergency, but that money would have to come from defence department funds allocated by Congress for other purposes, the BBC's Anthony Zurcher says.

US media are reporting that Mr Trump will not declare a national emergency on Tuesday evening, in a bid to launch construction of a wall by circumventing Congress.

The article below does point out that "310,531 people were apprehended trying to cross the southern border illegally in 2017" though it also says that 600,000 came by air overstaying their visas. But that does not engate the 310,531 who CAME ILLEGALLY ACROSS THE LAND BORDER>

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/08/trump-fact-check-speech-imm igration-border-security





[Edited on 1/9/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/9/2019 at 10:05 PM

Coast Guard Families given tips to survive the shutdown BY the Coast Guard includes having garage sales.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/01/09/coast-guard-fam ilies-told-they-can-have-garage-sales-cope-with-government-shutdown/?noredi rect=on&utm_term=.7873cdc7aa1b

Employees of the U.S. Coast Guard who are facing a long U.S. government shutdown just received a suggestion: To get by without pay, consider holding a garage sale, babysitting, dog-walking or serving as a “mystery shopper.”

The suggestions were part of a five-page tip sheet published by the Coast Guard Support Program, an employee-assistance arm of the service often known as CG SUPRT. It is designated to offer Coast Guard members help with mental-health issues or other concerns about their lives, including financial wellness.

https://www.scribd.com/document/397140587/Managing-Furlough




[Edited on 1/9/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/9/2019 at 10:20 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-walks-out-of-border-security- meeting-after-pelosi-rejects-wall-pitch/ar-BBS2bNO

“He asked Speaker Pelosi, ‘will you agree to my wall?’ She said no. And he just got up, and said, 'Well we’ve got nothing to discuss,'" Schumer said.

The president, in a tweet, called the meeting “a total waste of time” and appeared to confirm that he left after Pelosi's answer.

“I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!” Trump tweeted.

@realDonaldTrump
Follow Follow @realDonaldTrump
More
Just left a meeting with Chuck and Nancy, a total waste of time. I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!

12:34 PM - 9 Jan 2019


2112 - 1/9/2019 at 11:28 PM

I have a crazy idea. Maybe he can get Mexico to pay for the wall. I wonder if he ever thought about doing that?


OriginalGoober - 1/10/2019 at 12:53 AM

The democratic party arguing crime stats is like arguing that crack is less addicitve than heroien.


cyclone88 - 1/10/2019 at 01:10 AM

quote:
The democratic party arguing crime stats is like arguing that crack is less addicitve than heroien.


WTF does that even mean & what does it have to do w/this thread?


OriginalGoober - 1/10/2019 at 01:43 AM

quote:
quote:
The democratic party arguing crime stats is like arguing that crack is less addicitve than heroien.


WTF does that even mean & what does it have to do w/this thread?


THere has been a statitstic quoted by MSM that Illegals are more deserving because they commit less violent crime than legal residents. The number is slightly lower but look at that homicide rate... wowwiee. Sad..... If a wall can cut the inflow of drugs and drive down or eliminate the murder rate thats a WIN-WIN. Democrats would rather ignore or deny that illegals ARE causing crime. Future voters and all.....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/two-charts-demolish- the-notion-that-immigrants-here-illegally-commit-more-crime/?utm_term=.5ef8 aafc54db


BoytonBrother - 1/10/2019 at 03:16 AM

quote:
The democratic party arguing crime stats is like arguing that crack is less addicitve than heroien.


Yikes, what a snoozefest bomb of a one-liner attempt.



[Edited on 1/10/2019 by BoytonBrother]


BoytonBrother - 1/10/2019 at 03:22 AM

quote:
If a wall can cut the inflow of drugs and drive down or eliminate the murder rate thats a WIN-WIN.


American legalization of marijuana is already drastically reducing it, but if crediting Daddy Trump makes you feel better, have at it.

quote:
Democrats would rather ignore or deny that illegals ARE causing crime.


Why do you need a boogeyman? I’m dying to know what happened to you as a boy.


nebish - 1/10/2019 at 03:33 AM

quote:
Lots of good points nebish and I'm sure most Americans feel similarly. Obviously border security is important but a wall will not be the only fix many think it will.

As for the president, it's just a lightning rod topic for him to rile up his supporters. When he said Mexico was going to pay for it, he lost all credibility with sensible thinking citizens regarding the issue. To hell with him.

Countless times throughout our nation's history, immigrants (legal or not) and immigration policies have been targets for political agendas. Sadly, it will continue.


Strat, your voice is a welcome post in these threads!

Trump is over promising on what a wall will do. Additional and upgraded physical barriers can help. The reality is too many of his supporters just think it is the be all-end-all. Trump is not the first person to promote wall/fence on the Mexican border. He is the first one to call for one the entire length, and definitely hit a nerve on both sides. A wall the entire length is virtually impossible anyway. Plus when you hang your hat on Mexico paying for it, then you kind of have to get Mexico to pay for it to maintain any credibility. Ultimately our border security is our responsibility and the only way to do it is take something both sides can agree to. That is our system. He doesn’t/t get it.


nebish - 1/10/2019 at 03:43 AM

quote:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-walks-out-of-border-sec urity-meeting-after-pelosi-rejects-wall-pitch/ar-BBS2bNO

“He asked Speaker Pelosi, ‘will you agree to my wall?’ She said no. And he just got up, and said, 'Well we’ve got nothing to discuss,'" Schumer said.

The president, in a tweet, called the meeting “a total waste of time” and appeared to confirm that he left after Pelosi's answer.

“I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!” Trump tweeted.

@realDonaldTrump
Follow Follow @realDonaldTrump
More
Just left a meeting with Chuck and Nancy, a total waste of time. I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!

12:34 PM - 9 Jan 2019




The Democrats are under no obligation to do anything. It’s their House. Republicans can not control the agenda any longer. That is the consequences of elections. Sure they gained in the Senate, but lost the House. It is divided government now and Trump acts like people that don’t share his views on what is best must cave to his demands. That is not how it works.

Here is what I would’ve like Pelosi to have said in response to Trump today; “
Mr President I can not agree to your wall funding. What I will do is guarantee to give your bill (or McCarthy’s or whatever they write) a vote on the floor of the House. It is you and your party’s responsibility to craft a bill to garner passage. Mr President, I will will not suppress it and I will let my colleagues vote their own conscious and I see that your bill will get a vote, that is the best I can give you. Whether it passes or not is up to you. Deal?”


2112 - 1/10/2019 at 05:16 AM

quote:
quote:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-walks-out-of-bord er-security-meeting-after-pelosi-rejects-wall-pitch/ar-BBS2bNO

“He asked Speaker Pelosi, ‘will you agree to my wall?’ She said no. And he just got up, and said, 'Well we’ve got nothing to discuss,'" Schumer said.

The president, in a tweet, called the meeting “a total waste of time” and appeared to confirm that he left after Pelosi's answer.

“I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!” Trump tweeted.

@realDonaldTrump
Follow Follow @realDonaldTrump
More
Just left a meeting with Chuck and Nancy, a total waste of time. I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!

12:34 PM - 9 Jan 2019




The Democrats are under no obligation to do anything. It’s their House. Republicans can not control the agenda any longer. That is the consequences of elections. Sure they gained in the Senate, but lost the House. It is divided government now and Trump acts like people that don’t share his views on what is best must cave to his demands. That is not how it works.

Here is what I would’ve like Pelosi to have said in response to Trump today; “
Mr President I can not agree to your wall funding. What I will do is guarantee to give your bill (or McCarthy’s or whatever they write) a vote on the floor of the House. It is you and your party’s responsibility to craft a bill to garner passage. Mr President, I will will not suppress it and I will let my colleagues vote their own conscious and I see that your bill will get a vote, that is the best I can give you. Whether it passes or not is up to you. Deal?”


Seems like a fair way to handle it, but only if the Senate is allowed to vote on bills the Republicans don't want to bring to a vote as well. It's got to work both ways.


nebish - 1/10/2019 at 12:38 PM

I wouldn't go that far. Plenty of bills passed out of one chamber never sees the light of day with an opposing party controlling the other chamber. I don't like it that way, just the way it is - that is not new and requesting that for this negotiation is a bridge too far.

Specific to this issue, I think that if Trump would sign the government open, then in 30 days Pelosi could've allowed a vote on their border security bill. All you can ask for is a chance, an opportunity. You can't expect to bully people in government to get what you want. That is just who he is, and his own tactics are make my it harder for him to get what he wants. This shutdown is going to have very negative consequences for the Republicans.

Trump has never even told us where more fencing would be constructed. What is the roll out for this $5.7 billion? Tell us. Get it in writing and sell us on why this makes the most sense right now. But he can't. Best he could do is lie and say the Democrats wanted a steel slat fence, or Ballard wall, when in reality that is what border patrol wants.

I think there have already been 8 wall projects started or finished in 2018. So where is the next portion going with this funding? Tell us and why. Some Democrats are still saying they are against a 2000 mile concrete wall when that isn't eve what is on the table here. It is very frustrating to have such ineffective messaging when I too want additional barriers, but the "salesman" isn't selling it in a way to make everyone understand. You don't need to scare or threaten people, reason with them. Democrats have supported walls and wall money before. You have to frame it in a way they can support it again.

[Edited on 1/10/2019 by nebish]


Chain - 1/10/2019 at 09:59 PM

quote:
I wouldn't go that far. Plenty of bills passed out of one chamber never sees the light of day with an opposing party controlling the other chamber. I don't like it that way, just the way it is - that is not new and requesting that for this negotiation is a bridge too far.

Specific to this issue, I think that if Trump would sign the government open, then in 30 days Pelosi could've allowed a vote on their border security bill. All you can ask for is a chance, an opportunity. You can't expect to bully people in government to get what you want. That is just who he is, and his own tactics are make my it harder for him to get what he wants. This shutdown is going to have very negative consequences for the Republicans.

Trump has never even told us where more fencing would be constructed. What is the roll out for this $5.7 billion? Tell us. Get it in writing and sell us on why this makes the most sense right now. But he can't. Best he could do is lie and say the Democrats wanted a steel slat fence, or Ballard wall, when in reality that is what border patrol wants.

I think there have already been 8 wall projects started or finished in 2018. So where is the next portion going with this funding? Tell us and why. Some Democrats are still saying they are against a 2000 mile concrete wall when that isn't eve what is on the table here. It is very frustrating to have such ineffective messaging when I too want additional barriers, but the "salesman" isn't selling it in a way to make everyone understand. You don't need to scare or threaten people, reason with them. Democrats have supported walls and wall money before. You have to frame it in a way they can support it again.

[Edited on 1/10/2019 by nebish]


What you're pointing out, Neb, is there are NO ACTUAL DETAILS FOR THE WALL....Mostly because the Wall was and remains nothing more than a campaign slogan. Which is why he made the claim that Mexico would pay for it...A very easy claim given he never had any intention of actually building it. Which is why he initially agreed to the House and Senate bill passed just prior to the shut down.

It was only when two female right wing talk radio personalities called him a pussy for agreeing to McConnell's bill that he suddenly decided to refuse. That should tell everyone just how much of a man child we have in the Oval office. Not only is he incompetent but he's so thin skinned and spineless that he can't even stand up to Ann Coulter and Laura Ingram (sp)....


MartinD28 - 1/10/2019 at 11:18 PM

On Trump's red meat rallies this is what he intended. Of course the lock her up crowd drinking from the Fountain Of Trump understood this at the rallies, and of course this is exactly what Trump meant along. This is comedy gold.

"Trump claims he never said Mexico would cut a check for the wall. Let’s go to the tape."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/10/trump-claims-he-never-sa id-mexico-would-cut-check-wall-lets-go-tape/?utm_term=.8e597f516b2c


StratDal - 1/11/2019 at 10:14 PM

quote:
quote:
Lots of good points nebish and I'm sure most Americans feel similarly. Obviously border security is important but a wall will not be the only fix many think it will.

As for the president, it's just a lightning rod topic for him to rile up his supporters. When he said Mexico was going to pay for it, he lost all credibility with sensible thinking citizens regarding the issue. To hell with him.

Countless times throughout our nation's history, immigrants (legal or not) and immigration policies have been targets for political agendas. Sadly, it will continue.


Strat, your voice is a welcome post in these threads!

Trump is over promising on what a wall will do. Additional and upgraded physical barriers can help. The reality is too many of his supporters just think it is the be all-end-all. Trump is not the first person to promote wall/fence on the Mexican border. He is the first one to call for one the entire length, and definitely hit a nerve on both sides. A wall the entire length is virtually impossible anyway. Plus when you hang your hat on Mexico paying for it, then you kind of have to get Mexico to pay for it to maintain any credibility. Ultimately our border security is our responsibility and the only way to do it is take something both sides can agree to. That is our system. He doesn’t/t get it.


Thanks Nebish. You've never made any of your posts personal regardless of topic. Well done.

It's Friday. To hell with all the jive. Black Sabbath's Neon Knights. There's something about Tonny Iommi that's good for one's soul. Cheers!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF3jeAPGhrY


gina - 1/12/2019 at 12:03 AM

This is what Congress is like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTcRRaXV-fg



gina - 1/18/2019 at 10:48 PM

Bella is helping out her Mom who is furloughed. She's amazing. We should buy some of that scrub!

https://www.etsy.com/shop/BellaSweetScrubs

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/11-old-girl-starts-her-own-business-while-1333061 53--abc-news-topstories.html

Bella started Bella Sweet Scrubs using a recipe she and her mom used to make body scrubs during a day they spent together in December. She began by selling the scrubs to neighbors and friends and now has her own store on Etsy, where she ships them to customers across the country.

https://twitter.com/BellaBerrellez?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembe d%7Ctwterm%5E1081406691588100096&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.yimg.com%2Fos% 2Fyc%2Fhtml%2Fembed-iframe-min.2d7621e2.html


https://twitter.com/hashtag/sweetscrubs?src=hash




gina - 1/18/2019 at 10:55 PM

Virginia Senator Warner introduces legislation to help furloughed workers.

The Federal Employee Civil Relief Act addresses the real threat of federal workers losing their homes, falling behind on student loans and other bills, having their car repossessed, or losing their health insurance because they have been furloughed during a shutdown or required to work without pay. Modeled after the Servicemembers Relief Act, the legislation will prohibit landlords and creditors from taking action against federal workers or contractors who are hurt by the government shutdown and unable to pay rent or repay loans. The bill would also empower federal workers to sue creditors or landlords that violate this protection. The Federal Employee Civil Relief Act would safeguard workers impacted by a shutdown from the following:

Being evicted or foreclosed;
Having their car or other property repossessed;
Falling behind in student loan payments;
Falling behind in paying bills; or
Losing their insurance because of missed premiums.
The protection would last during and 30 days following a shutdown to give workers a chance to keep up with their bills. The partial government shutdown, now in its third week, hurts hundreds of thousands of federal employees and contractors. Virginia alone is home to more than 170,000 federal workers.

Additional cosponsors of the bill include U.S. Sens. Ben Cardin (D-MD), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV).

https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/1/warner-introduces-leg islation-to-protect-federal-workers-who-fall-behind-on-bills-during-trump-s hutdown


Remarks: That's nice, but how are the banks going to deal with the 800,000 people not paying for their houses? Where to do they get the money to cover those losses? Will we need another banking bailout if this shut down continues in the long term?



[Edited on 1/18/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/18/2019 at 10:59 PM

For some workers they will end up declaring bankruptcy such as this couple.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/well-have-no-other-option-than-declaring- bankruptcy-how-the-shutdown-could-impact-government-workers-for-months/ar-B BSr40T?li=BBnb7Kz


gina - 1/19/2019 at 12:43 AM

How bad is it? W is delivering pizza to his Secret Service detail. Seriously. There's a picture of him doing it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-george-w-bush-delivers-222826831.html

https://www.instagram.com/p/BsykhY0Asju/?utm_source=ig_embed


AND only 21 of the 80 people who take care of the W.H. are reporting to work. At least a chef and a butler are still coming in. If Trump had to live on McDonalds, BK and Wendy's, he's have to do some serious exercise, those meals are great but can add on the pounds.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/shutdown-hits-home-trump-lives-government-housin g-180400475--politics.html





[Edited on 1/19/2019 by gina]

[Edited on 1/19/2019 by gina]


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
https://allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
https://allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=147601