Thread: Trump To Address The Nation Tonight

crazyjoe - 1/8/2019 at 07:16 PM

Oh Boy!!!!! Hope we get to hear all about what Crooked Hillary has been up to, and that closet Muslim Obama too!!!!!!............Peace.........joe


MartinD28 - 1/8/2019 at 07:21 PM

Will Trump bring along Sanders & Conway for 30 minutes of perpetual lies?


Chain - 1/8/2019 at 09:29 PM

It should make for great unreality TV....Watching Trump try and sell/scare the American electorate into paying for a Wall he has no definition of, specifics for, or even real plan to build....Seriously, 8 minutes of buffoonery.

[Edited on 1/8/2019 by Chain]


BrerRabbit - 1/8/2019 at 09:33 PM

Just one more reason to be happy I don't watch TV.


Jerry - 1/8/2019 at 09:33 PM

quote:
Will Trump bring along Sanders & Conway for 30 minutes of perpetual lies?


Why oh why would he want Bernie on the podium?


porkchopbob - 1/8/2019 at 10:06 PM

quote:
Will Trump bring along Sanders & Conway for 30 minutes of perpetual lies?


So you think he will cover the spread?
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-trump-lies-gambling-speech -odds-35-bet-20190108-story.html

We know where Mulebot will be: https://twitter.com/StormyDaniels/status/1082745074474237953

[Edited on 1/8/2019 by porkchopbob]


BoytonBrother - 1/8/2019 at 10:13 PM

In all seriousness, what’s there to watch? He will say there is a huge threat of terrorists, rapists, and gangsters at the border attacking troops and forcing entry. What’s the need to tune in?


porkchopbob - 1/8/2019 at 10:23 PM

quote:
In all seriousness, what’s there to watch? He will say there is a huge threat of terrorists, rapists, and gangsters at the border attacking troops and forcing entry. What’s the need to tune in?


LIVE BORDER FEED:


MartinD28 - 1/8/2019 at 10:54 PM

quote:
quote:
Will Trump bring along Sanders & Conway for 30 minutes of perpetual lies?


Why oh why would he want Bernie on the podium?


So you would actually compare Bernie with Sarah in the realm of lies? That's quite rich.


MartinD28 - 1/8/2019 at 11:03 PM

quote:
quote:
Will Trump bring along Sanders & Conway for 30 minutes of perpetual lies?


So you think he will cover the spread?
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-pol-trump-lies-gambling-speech -odds-35-bet-20190108-story.html

We know where Mulebot will be: https://twitter.com/StormyDaniels/status/1082745074474237953

[Edited on 1/8/2019 by porkchopbob]


Those links make for some good reading.

Over / under of 3.5. That seems like an awfully low number. This may be a sucker bet. May be safer to take a contrarian bet? Then again, if Trump goes off script & improvises, 3.5 could be a gift to take the over.

[Edited on 1/8/2019 by MartinD28]


gina - 1/8/2019 at 11:20 PM

quote:
Just one more reason to be happy I don't watch TV.


He'll be on the radio too! Thursday he will be at the border where the national security problems are. Yes problems, narcotics trafficking, MS-13 gang members coming in, Isis fighters who trained at those camps Alex Jones told you about across the border in El Paso etc. etc. There IS a problem.

[Edited on 1/8/2019 by gina]


cyclone88 - 1/8/2019 at 11:38 PM

quote:
Just one more reason to be happy I don't watch TV.


A kindred spirit! I haven't had a TV for at least a decade & life is good. I get in-depth news from selected print & transcripts and stream entertainment/sports of my choosing. The best part is I never, ever have to have people shrieking over each other in my home.

I wish the networks had said no. He's not making a statement that warrants primetime prez usage. The networks - afraid that he'll say they discount him (like he doesn't say that anyway) - caved. They should've kept their regular entertainment programming & interrupted w/breaking news if there's actually any news.

An alternative would be for NBC to re-run an episode of The Apprentice.


cyclone88 - 1/8/2019 at 11:49 PM

quote:
Over / under of 3.5. That seems like an awfully low number. This may be a sucker bet. May be safer to take a contrarian bet? Then again, if Trump goes off script & improvises, 3.5 could be a gift to take the over.


How long is the speech?????? 3.5 seems really low if the speech is longer than 12 minutes. I don't think DJT has ever kept to a script (the long running lame joke being that he can't actually read) & spontaneously combusts at every opportunity.

I think checking out Stormy's laundry folding on instagram is a much better use of time.


2112 - 1/9/2019 at 12:32 AM

If Trump's speech is being broadcast on the major networks, then for once he will be right about "fake news" on those networks.


nebish - 1/9/2019 at 12:48 AM

quote:
quote:
Over / under of 3.5. That seems like an awfully low number. This may be a sucker bet. May be safer to take a contrarian bet? Then again, if Trump goes off script & improvises, 3.5 could be a gift to take the over.


How long is the speech?????? 3.5 seems really low if the speech is longer than 12 minutes. I don't think DJT has ever kept to a script (the long running lame joke being that he can't actually read) & spontaneously combusts at every opportunity.

I think checking out Stormy's laundry folding on instagram is a much better use of time.


When I first saw this I thought it said 35 over/under and I was thinking, maybe the under. But 3.5? The Washington Post is used for grading, but even Fox News could find 4.


nebish - 1/9/2019 at 01:01 AM

CNN is doing a "Prebuttal"


nebish - 1/9/2019 at 01:04 AM

I just looked up the odds: https://www.bookmaker.eu/live-lines/politics

You have to put up $450 to win $100 on the over. Heavy odds.


MartinD28 - 1/9/2019 at 01:17 AM

quote:
I just looked up the odds: https://www.bookmaker.eu/live-lines/politics

You have to put up $450 to win $100 on the over. Heavy odds.


Taking Clemson & the points last night was a gift for betters. Betting on Trump & his lies...classic.


nebish - 1/9/2019 at 01:25 AM

Technically you'd be betting against Trump on the over 3.5 falsehoods. Betting on Trump (or believing him) would be taking the under assuming he will tell 3 or less falsehoods. Over 3.5 should be easy money, but you have to pony up 4.5:1 to do it.


BrerRabbit - 1/9/2019 at 02:20 AM

quote:
He'll be on the radio too!


Oh joy.

I will pass on the Two Minutes Hate this evening. . . all a tad too Orwellian for my taste.





MartinD28 - 1/9/2019 at 12:40 PM

I wouldn't and didn't watch his entire speech. I caught about 2 minutes - enough to see him reading. He seems very unnatural reading - something like a fifth grader...much different than his delivery at red meat campaign rallies.

Not sure how many lies he told and if he exceeded the over under. Will have to read up on the fact checkers. However I did find this article reflecting Shep Smith of FOX discussing the lies. Pretty bad when the prez's favorite and only go to TV network calls out his lies.

"Donald Trump's Border Speech Gets A Savage Instant Fact-Check On Fox News"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-apos-border-speech-054604564.html


cyclone88 - 1/9/2019 at 01:49 PM

quote:
I wouldn't and didn't watch his entire speech. I caught about 2 minutes - enough to see him reading. He seems very unnatural reading - something like a fifth grader...much different than his delivery at red meat campaign rallies...


Your observation that Trump was uncomfortable reading underscores the lame running joke that Trump can't read. That's obviously not the case, but his impatience/inability to focus/comprehend even the shortest documents is one of the symptoms that led to the book "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump" - a collection of observations made by psychiatrists edited by a Yale psychiatrist that DJT was mentally unfit for the office prior to his election.

Although psychs can't diagnose w/o seeing a pt, a number of psychs noted his lifelong narcissism, pathological lying, lack of impulse control, & poor concentration as symptoms of a man with emotional compulsions so unstable that when he won, approached Congress w/a warning that it should give serious consideration to invoking the 25th amendment. His refusal to read briefs has certainly unsettled the DOJ & pentagon.

Trump knows he's not good when constrained by a script. Reports are surfacing that he didn't want the TV scripted format but was "pushed" by his advisers. Who knows what's true, but the fact remains that the man communicates best when making grandiose false extemporaneous pronouncements. Even the 280 (formerly 140) Twitter character limit allows him to make head-scratching & contradictory statements in a single tweet.






BoytonBrother - 1/9/2019 at 03:33 PM

How about we give Trump $5bilion for enhanced border security, in the form of more foot agents on the ground patrolling the porous areas? It would help catch illegals and create jobs. Would Trump supporters be ok with that? LOL, just kidding. I know these deranged idiot babies need a wall to feel safe, and couldn’t care less about creating jobs.



[Edited on 1/9/2019 by BoytonBrother]


BIGV - 1/9/2019 at 05:44 PM

You have to love the childish interplay between the two Parties. "Give me this or I'll".....and "Drop your demand and we'll return to the table"....Right, like that is going to accomplish anything with a Problem that has been ongoing for decades. Yeah, The Democrats have a solution that will fix everything!...Right

"Trump can't read"......and Pelosi and Schumer were were wearing so much make-up they could have passed for extras in the Walking Dead.

Nice work, this is going to go on for quite a while....


BrerRabbit - 1/9/2019 at 06:01 PM

quote:
Pelosi and Schumer were were wearing so much make-up they could have passed for extras in the Walking Dead.


LOL. I literally can't look at any of them. They all look like mediawhore Frankensteins to me. The Walking Dead is a lot easier to watch.




JimSheridan - 1/9/2019 at 07:39 PM

"You have to love the childish interplay between the two Parties. "Give me this or I'll".....and "Drop your demand and we'll return to the table"....Right, like that is going to accomplish anything with a Problem that has been ongoing for decades."

The sad thing, Big V, is that the parties did have a bill with enough bi-partisan support just a few weeks back. Republicans and Democrats did actually decide to work together. However, we have a THIRD force beyond the two groups of elected officials: the media. The right-wing media took Trump to task, and he folded.


MartinD28 - 1/9/2019 at 09:50 PM

quote:
"You have to love the childish interplay between the two Parties. "Give me this or I'll".....and "Drop your demand and we'll return to the table"....Right, like that is going to accomplish anything with a Problem that has been ongoing for decades."

The sad thing, Big V, is that the parties did have a bill with enough bi-partisan support just a few weeks back. Republicans and Democrats did actually decide to work together. However, we have a THIRD force beyond the two groups of elected officials: the media. The right-wing media took Trump to task, and he folded.


Jim is correct. Trump was on board until the right-wing media intervened. Also Trump got a dose from the Freedom Caucus members of HOR which are little more than an extension of right wing media.

Facts matter, and this goes against the idea of "childish interplay between two parties". It is actually not Dems vs GOP. It is Trump. And it is Trump who proudly said that he'd own the shutdown. He's doing a great job of leading.


BoytonBrother - 1/9/2019 at 10:25 PM

quote:
The sad thing, Big V, is that the parties did have a bill with enough bi-partisan support just a few weeks back. Republicans and Democrats did actually decide to work together.


Exactly. Blaming an entire political party or affiliation is the height of laziness. Bad apples are to blame, and they are not specific to any political affiliation.


gina - 1/9/2019 at 10:30 PM

THE Speech from the Oval Office.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/08/trump-speech-read-f ull-oval-office-address-president-trump/2520124002/#annotations:16185891


My fellow Americans, tonight I am speaking to you because there is a growing humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. Every day customs and border patrol agents encounter thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country. We are out of space to hold them and we have no way to promptly return them back home to their country.

America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled, illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African-Americans and Hispanic Americans.

Our southern border is a pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs including meth, heroin, cocaine, and fentanyl. Every week 300 of our citizens are killed by heroin alone, 90 percent of which floods across from our southern border. More Americans will die from drugs this year than were killed in the entire Vietnam War.

In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults, 30,000 sex crimes, and 4000 violent killings. Over the years thousands of Americans have been brutally killed by those who illegally entered our country and thousands more lives will be lost if we don't act right now.

This is a humanitarian crisis, a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul. Last month 20,000 migrant children were illegally brought into the United States, a dramatic increase. These children are used as human pawns by vicious coyotes and ruthless gangs. One in three women are sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek up through Mexico.

Women or children are the biggest victims by far of our broken system. This is the tragic reality of illegal immigration on our southern border. This is the cycle of human suffering that I am determined to end.

My administration has presented Congress with a detailed proposal to secure the border and stop the criminal gangs, drug smugglers and human traffickers. It's a tremendous problem. Our proposal was developed by law enforcement professionals and border agents at the Department of Homeland Security. These are the resources they have requested to properly perform their mission and keep America safe. In fact, safer than ever before.

The proposal from Homeland security includes cutting-edge technology for detecting drugs, weapons, illegal contraband, and many other things. We have requested more agents, immigration judges, and bed space to process the sharp rise in unlawful migration fueled by our very strong economy.

Our plan also contains an urgent request for humanitarian assistance and medical support. Furthermore, we have asked Congress to close border security loopholes so that illegal immigrant children can be safely and humanely returned back home.

Finally, as part of an overall approach to border security law enforcement professionals have requested $5.7 billion for a physical barrier. At the request of Democrats, it will be a steel barrier rather than a concrete wall. This barrier is absolutely critical to border security. It's also what are professionals at the border want and need.

This is just common sense. The border wall would very quickly pay for itself. The cost of illegal drugs exceeds $500 billion a year, vastly more than the $5.7 billion we have requested from Congress.

The wall will also be paid for indirectly by the great new trade to deal we have made with Mexico. Senator Chuck Schumer, who you will be hearing from later tonight, has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past along with many other Democrats. They changed their mind only after I was elected president. Democrats in Congress have refused to acknowledge the crisis and they have refused to provide our bright brave border agents with the tools they desperately need to protect our families and our nation.

The federal government remains shut down for one reason and one reason only because Democrats will not fund border security. My administration is doing everything in our power to help those impacted by the situation, but the only solution is for Democrats to pass a spending bill that defends our borders and reopens of the government. This situation could be solved in a 45-minute meeting. I have invited congressional leadership to the White House tomorrow to get this done. Hopefully, we can rise above partisan politics in order to support national security.

Some have suggested that barrier is immoral. Then why do wealthy politicians build walls, fences, and gates around their homes? They don't build walls because they hate the people on the outside but because they love the people on the inside. The only thing that is immoral is the politicians to do nothing and continue to allow more innocent people to be so horribly victimized.

America's heart broke the day after Christmas when a young police officer in California was savagely murdered in cold blood by an illegal alien, who just came across the border. The life of an American hero was stolen by someone who had no right to be in our country. Day after day precious lives are cut short by those who have violated our borders.

In California, an Air Force veteran was raped, murdered, and beaten to death with a hammer by an illegal alien with a long criminal history. In Georgia, an illegal alien was recently charged with murder for killing, beheading, and dismembering his neighbor. In Maryland, MS-13 gang members who arrived in the United States as unaccompanied minors were arrested and charged last year after viciously stabbing and beating a 16-year-old girl.

Over the last several years I've met with dozens of families whose loved ones were stolen by illegal immigration. I've held the hands of the weeping mothers and embraced the grief-stricken fathers. So sad. So terrible. I will never forget the pain in their eyes, the trouble in their voices, and the sadness gripping their souls.

How much more American blood must we shed before Congress does its job? To those who refuse to compromise in the name of border security, I would ask, imagine if it was your child, your husband, or your wife whose life was so cruelly shattered and totally broken. To every member of Congress, pass a bill that in this crisis. To every citizen, call Congress and tell them to finally, after all of these decades, secure our border. This is a choice between right and wrong, justice and injustice. This is about whether we fulfill our sacred duty to the American citizens we serve. When I took the oath of office, I swore to protect our country and that is what I will always do, so help me God. Thank you and good night.


Comments: He delivered a great speech. To the point, with examples to back up why there is a serious problem and WHY we need a wall and border security. Unfortunately there are still those who will say this fact is not exact. Bottom Line, WE NEED BORDER SECURITY. Nit picking will not solve the problems of having an open, unsecured border.


tbomike - 1/9/2019 at 10:58 PM

quote:
You have to love the childish interplay between the two Parties. "Give me this or I'll".....and "Drop your demand and we'll return to the table"....Right, like that is going to accomplish anything with a Problem that has been ongoing for decades. Yeah, The Democrats have a solution that will fix everything!...Right

"Trump can't read"......and Pelosi and Schumer were were wearing so much make-up they could have passed for extras in the Walking Dead.

Nice work, this is going to go on for quite a while....


Nonsense. The Republicans had control of the House and Senate and the White House the last 2 years and did not fund a border wall. Period.


crazyjoe - 1/9/2019 at 11:26 PM

Well, it is very tempting to attack on looks, I had no intention of doing that, but seeing the tit for tat why not? I can't help it, when I see Trump I am struck by that "Fake Tan" orange hue, when I see his associates, 90% of them look like they come straight out of the Third Reich! I mean thsee cats look so uptight it's like they all wearing but plugs or something, waiting to go get punished by Hilga The Dominatrix.
Anyway, I didn't watch, I just have a hard time stomaching Trump, I have listened to all his scumbags and lackeys speak, but I just can't tolerate this lowlife........Peace......joe


OriginalGoober - 1/10/2019 at 12:08 AM

I heard nothing but facts last nite- statistics about horrible crime incidents committed by illegals.... and those are the only ones where they HAVE TO document that they are here illegally.

Both CHUCK AND NANCI are documented ON TAPE saying they are in favor of border security that included a wall.

What changed? T R U M P


BIGV - 1/10/2019 at 01:08 AM

quote:
Facts matter, and this goes against the idea of "childish interplay between two parties".


This is exactly what is going on. It has gone on for decades and no end is in sight.....


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

quote:
I just have a hard time stomaching Trump


I can't look at Pelosi and Schumer without laughing out loud.


2112 - 1/10/2019 at 01:12 AM

quote:
I heard nothing but facts last nite- statistics about horrible crime incidents committed by illegals.... and those are the only ones where they HAVE TO document that they are here illegally.

Both CHUCK AND NANCI are documented ON TAPE saying they are in favor of border security that included a wall.

What changed? T R U M P




If you heard nothing but facts last night, then what were you doing while Trump was speaking?


OriginalGoober - 1/10/2019 at 01:53 AM



What changed for the democrats? Was it because we are in the run-up to the election? Dont want to solve an issue you have been promising the American people you would reform.. Look at the Schummer Clinton and Obama quotes.

Again what changed in getting it done now?

T R U M P


MartinD28 - 1/10/2019 at 03:02 AM

quote:


What changed for the democrats? Was it because we are in the run-up to the election? Dont want to solve an issue you have been promising the American people you would reform.. Look at the Schummer Clinton and Obama quotes.

Again what changed in getting it done now?

T R U M P


What changed? Trump campaigned on & on promising Mexico would pay for the wall? What changed - why should he not follow through with his campaign rhetoric? What changed, goob. Why should US taxpayers pay for the wall that Trump said Mexico would pay for?

Goob - can you provide a detailed answer?

[Edited on 1/10/2019 by MartinD28]


BoytonBrother - 1/10/2019 at 03:13 AM

quote:
Again what changed in getting it done now?

T R U M P


And? Point? Let the victim sob story begin.

How is this different from what happened to Obama? Isn’t it kind of stupid to be shocked by this? What don’t you understand?


2112 - 1/10/2019 at 04:08 AM

If Donald Trump gets his wall, Mexicans will certainly follow Trump's advice from 2004..

https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1083169537263054849?s=20

[Edited on 1/10/2019 by 2112]


crazyjoe - 1/10/2019 at 05:03 AM

quote:
quote:
I just have a hard time stomaching Trump


I can't look at Pelosi and Schumer without laughing out loud.


To my Good Brothers and Sisters here who are Trump supporters, I have tryed to remain as verbally as appropriate as I could here, but I gotta admit, Your boy is really motherf*ckin stoopid! I am 55yrs old never went to college and have worked 34 yrs in the same factory, I am pretty much brain dead, yet I would lay 2 to 1 money that on a High School SAT test, I would smoke Your "champion's" fat ass!! Seriously wish we could pull that off.......Peace.......joe


gina - 1/10/2019 at 10:22 PM

Does anybody here think that we DO NOT need a border wall for border security?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/21-bodies-found-us-mexico-border-trump-visits-18 2250452.html

Mexico City (AFP) - Mexican authorities said Thursday they had found 21 bodies on the US-Mexican border after a drug-gang shootout in a town near where President Donald Trump was due to visit later in the day.
McAllen, where he was meeting with border patrol agents, sits across from Tamaulipas. The US State Department has issued its most severe travel warning for the state because of violent crime, classifying it alongside countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

More than 200,000 people have been murdered in Mexico since the government deployed the army to fight the country's powerful drug cartels in 2006, including a record 28,711 in 2017.


Remarks: But Nancy Pelosi thinks a border wall is immoral for us to put up.

[Edited on 1/10/2019 by gina]


cyclone88 - 1/10/2019 at 11:49 PM

quote:
Does anybody here think that we DO NOT need a border wall for border security?


We DO NOT need a wall for border security.


2112 - 1/10/2019 at 11:51 PM

No, we do not need a wall. I'm not opposed to having additional barriers along the border in places, but a wall along the entire border is unnecessary and a waste of money.

And of all the threats to our country, I wouldn't put a few Mexicans entering our country to pick our fields anywhere near the top of the list. I guess I'm not as scared of people with brown skin as most Trump supporters. Illegal aliens are a problem, but not as big a problem as budget deficits, mass shootings, health care, and lying presidents.


OriginalGoober - 1/11/2019 at 12:20 AM

quote:
I'm not opposed to having additional barriers along the border in places, but a wall along the entire border is unnecessary and a waste of money.



good start. I think that if there were porous sections that should be a no-brainer that a wall is needed. Think of all the patroling, riding around wasting man-power to police open stretches. Build a wall its more cost effective and reassign these agents to focus on drugs, tunnels, coyotes, etc. instead of lassoing and rounding up migrant herds. Modern day cowboys I guess.


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 12:40 AM

W's 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized a barrier across the border. Less than a year later, Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD).

In sum, 17 years ago, Republicans acknowledged that requiring a physical barrier made of a specific material was an outdated concept & enacted legislation that said so.


JimSheridan - 1/11/2019 at 01:04 AM

"W's 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized a barrier across the border. Less than a year later, Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD).

In sum, 17 years ago, Republicans acknowledged that requiring a physical barrier made of a specific material was an outdated concept & enacted legislation that said so. "

Thank you. Goob and Gina, please read the above quotation, and then sign to indicate that you did read it and did understand it.

I keep seeing strawman arguments here:

"Democrats are against border security."

No, they are against a wildly expensive WALL. There really are other kinds of border security.

"Democrats used to want a big concrete wall, but suddenly now they are just being anti-Trump."

No, they never wanted a big concrete wall, but they have always wanted border security.


OriginalGoober - 1/11/2019 at 01:11 AM


17 years ago? No good to compare a 2001 stock against 2018 value. It works the same with this comparison. In order to draw that conclusion below they had to have some illegal immigration data to work with. The crossings now are probably 10X what it used to be. Look at the recent herd from Central America. 1000's crossing in a day or two.


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 01:19 AM

The latest from President Shutdown

"President Trump has been briefed about using disaster-relief money meant to help storm-soaked Puerto Rico and fire-ravaged California to build his border wall, according to a report."

What a guy he is. He's basically telling the people of real emergencies & disasters in Puerto Rico & California to go "f" yourselves so he can build his wall for his fabricated emergency that he promised Mexico would pay for.

That's today. Tomorrow will bring another chaotic issue by Putin's little bitch. Everyday it's something new with that clown.

https://nypost.com/2019/01/10/trump-may-use-puerto-rico-california-disaster -funds-to-build-border-wall/


Bhawk - 1/11/2019 at 01:21 AM

quote:

17 years ago? No good to compare a 2001 stock against 2018 value. It works the same with this comparison. In order to draw that conclusion below they had to have some illegal immigration data to work with. The crossings now are probably 10X what it used to be. Look at the recent herd from Central America. 1000's crossing in a day or two.


Please tell me you are just trolling.


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 01:30 AM

quote:
What a guy he is. He's basically telling the people of real emergencies & disasters in Puerto Rico & California to go "f" yourselves so he can build his wall for his fabricated emergency that he promised Mexico would pay for.

That's today. Tomorrow will bring another chaotic issue by Putin's little bitch. Everyday it's something new with that clown.


Clown - or carny barker - he may be, but it's disgraceful that we - whatever political affiliation we may have - are not rising up against this man who is literally ruining the lives of human beings. He's passing out candy while federal workers & disaster victims suffer.


OriginalGoober - 1/11/2019 at 01:32 AM

Why? At that time outsourcing your labor or production was hot, hot, hot. A large part of that prior Republican Party was only concerned about keeping lbig business happy. THats mindset is still a problem today, but the devestating effects of Nafta and globalism have others like Trump wanting action on reform, not another study. If you found a brown guy to do it for less money, you did.

[Edited on 1/11/2019 by OriginalGoober]


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 01:42 AM

quote:
quote:
What a guy he is. He's basically telling the people of real emergencies & disasters in Puerto Rico & California to go "f" yourselves so he can build his wall for his fabricated emergency that he promised Mexico would pay for.

That's today. Tomorrow will bring another chaotic issue by Putin's little bitch. Everyday it's something new with that clown.


Clown - or carny barker - he may be, but it's disgraceful that we - whatever political affiliation we may have - are not rising up against this man who is literally ruining the lives of human beings. He's passing out candy while federal workers & disaster victims suffer.


Solutions follow:

indictment

impeachment

vote the clown out of office if he runs again

other solutions?


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 02:09 AM

quote:

Solutions follow:

indictment

impeachment

vote the clown out of office if he runs again

other solutions?


I, having faith in the judicial system, hope for indictment. Beyond that, there must be people far savvier than I in how to effect change addressing the issue. NOW. I don't think victims can wait until 2020.

I'm of an era when demonstrations & letters/phone calls (now emails/tweets) to elected representatives were effective. With all the communication technology available, I can't believe there isn't a way to get those w/clout in Washington to quit whispering privately & publicly denounce Trump. Can McConnell not see that he could be perceived as a hero if he grew a pair rather than acting as though he works for the prez? His job is to put passed legislation on the table & let the prez really take the fall in the form of veto & then go back & over-ride the veto. Instead, his position is that he's not going to even bring anything that could be vetoed to a vote.

The constitution is stronger than a single person. Congress doesn't work FOR the prez; it serves as a check on the resident of the WH.


OriginalGoober - 1/11/2019 at 02:21 AM

Can you vote him out without abolishing the electoral college?


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 02:43 AM

quote:
"W's 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized a barrier across the border. Less than a year later, Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD).

In sum, 17 years ago, Republicans acknowledged that requiring a physical barrier made of a specific material was an outdated concept & enacted legislation that said so. "

Thank you. Goob and Gina, please read the above quotation, and then sign to indicate that you did read it and did understand it.



I've no interest in making things personal. There are trolls & there are individuals w/strongly held opinions.

I don't believe there is an abundance of Luddites on Capitol Hill. They weren't there in 2007 & they're not there now. Every former president dealt w/border security (we have northern & coastal borders, too) & they've denounced Trump's assertion that they support him - W most emphatically has addressed the issue. Not 17 years ago. 5 days ago.

Jim, I enjoy your reasoned comments & look for them between the detritus of trolls.


JimSheridan - 1/11/2019 at 03:10 AM



Original Goober wrote: "17 years ago? No good to compare a 2001 stock against 2018 value. It works the same with this comparison. In order to draw that conclusion below they had to have some illegal immigration data to work with. The crossings now are probably 10X what it used to be. Look at the recent herd from Central America. 1000's crossing in a day or two."

Goob, you are guessing rather than using facts. Here are some facts:


"How many people are crossing the border illegally?

There’s no official measure of how many people succeed in illegally crossing the border, but authorities use the number of apprehensions to gauge changes in illegal immigration. Apprehensions on the Southwest border peaked in 2000 at 1.64 million and have generally declined since, totaling 396,579 in 2018."

Those numbers come from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/

So, illegal immigration has gone DOWN since it was decided that George W's 2006 fence was not needed.


nebish - 1/11/2019 at 03:45 AM

quote:
W's 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized a barrier across the border. Less than a year later, Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD).

In sum, 17 years ago, Republicans acknowledged that requiring a physical barrier made of a specific material was an outdated concept & enacted legislation that said so.




They passed the act, then failed to fund it and gutted it, then President Obama declared the fence "basically complete" Shameful these politicians.


nebish - 1/11/2019 at 03:52 AM

While we are talking about CBP statistics....they averaged over 51,000 apprehensions the first two months of FY2019. More people are trying to enter than 2018 (about 35,000 and 39,000 in the same months year-over-year).

Edit- add link
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

[Edited on 1/11/2019 by nebish]


2112 - 1/11/2019 at 06:29 AM

Yet most illegals still arrive via plane and overstay their visa. Should be build a ceiling?


BoytonBrother - 1/11/2019 at 12:37 PM

It’s sad to see people dance around their honest feelings. They can’t be honest out of shame for themselves, so they make up a bunch of b.s. stats and lingo that they found online. The wall is an obvious symbol, and the sheep all know it, but none have the courage of their own convictions to just say it. Beyond sad to watch. I’d have much more respect if they came out and said they want to send a message to the world to just “stay out”.

[Edited on 1/11/2019 by BoytonBrother]


nebish - 1/11/2019 at 01:00 PM

quote:
Yet most illegals still arrive via plane and overstay their visa. Should be build a ceiling?


That's a good one. Maybe use tracking devices.

quote:
Who are these scared little p*ssies that need a wall to feel better?


I feel pretty good now. I could feel pretty good if there was no border wall at all. I choose to care about this issue, just as I choose to care about any issue, because I think it is the right thing for the country.

The point of a wall or any physical barrier vs drones or sensors or any technology that gets used is a wall hopefully prevents entry. The technology can monitor them and alert us where they are and when they enter the country, but then we have to apprehend them and process them. By making crossing more difficult the end goal is that less people enter, fail in their attempts and less people try and come due to increased difficulty in coming.


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 01:06 PM

quote:
quote:

Solutions follow:

indictment

impeachment

vote the clown out of office if he runs again

other solutions?


I, having faith in the judicial system, hope for indictment. Beyond that, there must be people far savvier than I in how to effect change addressing the issue. NOW. I don't think victims can wait until 2020.

I'm of an era when demonstrations & letters/phone calls (now emails/tweets) to elected representatives were effective. With all the communication technology available, I can't believe there isn't a way to get those w/clout in Washington to quit whispering privately & publicly denounce Trump. Can McConnell not see that he could be perceived as a hero if he grew a pair rather than acting as though he works for the prez? His job is to put passed legislation on the table & let the prez really take the fall in the form of veto & then go back & over-ride the veto. Instead, his position is that he's not going to even bring anything that could be vetoed to a vote.

The constitution is stronger than a single person. Congress doesn't work FOR the prez; it serves as a check on the resident of the WH.


I'm not sure how much those with clout in Washington listen to common people & voters. Once they get there, they seem to operate in a party vacuum. Look at the many protests in the last year such a marches for women, protests against Judge K., gun rallies after the school in Florida, etc. Legislators are numb to reality other than the ballot box.

Mitch is from Kentucky, a safe red sate. He can keep his seat until he chooses to leave. As far as his leadership position - he has abdicated the responsibility of his position probably out of frustration or fear of Trump & the 30 something % base. It appears Mitch is content to sit things out, give lip service, let Trump take the lead, and let the chips fall as they will. That is pathetic, but until the light bulb goes off with Mitch and others in the GOP that they fear ballot box fallout by being on the losing side of an issue, perceptions, and public relations nothing will change. This is Trump's party, and the real GOP is on sabbatical.


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 02:25 PM

quote:
I'm not sure how much those with clout in Washington listen to common people & voters. Once they get there, they seem to operate in a party vacuum. Look at the many protests in the last year such a marches for women, protests against Judge K., gun rallies after the school in Florida, etc. Legislators are numb to reality other than the ballot box.

Mitch is from Kentucky, a safe red sate. He can keep his seat until he chooses to leave. As far as his leadership position - he has abdicated the responsibility of his position probably out of frustration or fear of Trump & the 30 something % base. It appears Mitch is content to sit things out, give lip service, let Trump take the lead, and let the chips fall as they will. That is pathetic, but until the light bulb goes off with Mitch and others in the GOP that they fear ballot box fallout by being on the losing side of an issue, perceptions, and public relations nothing will change. This is Trump's party, and the real GOP is on sabbatical.


Martin, I fear your assessment is accurate. Not only do leaders not care, but those of us non-politicians have become indifferent to anything beyond our own self-interest. Alternatively, we do care, but the failures of expression of dissatisfaction outside the ballot box you pointed out have deterred us from even trying. Those Parkland students who so sincerely believed in the power of their stories to influence change certainly learned that DC is nothing but deaf ears. Nobody really cares that attending school can get you killed. We've been immune to that since Columbine.

It IS pathetic that the GOP & our government have been hijacked by this nebulous "Trump base." I'm just gob-smacked that smug shrill ratings jockeys like Coulter seem to be running the country.


BIGV - 1/11/2019 at 04:31 PM

quote:
Legislators are numb to reality other than the ballot box.


Interesting comment in that "Reality" in Gubmint IS the Ballot box. We, have the power, we can change everything, but you must participate through Voting....

quote:
Look at the many protests in the last year such a marches for women, protests against Judge K., gun rallies after the school in Florida


How many of these people Voted?


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 05:14 PM

quote:
quote:
Legislators are numb to reality other than the ballot box.


Interesting comment in that "Reality" in Gubmint IS the Ballot box. We, have the power, we can change everything, but you must participate through Voting....

quote:
Look at the many protests in the last year such a marches for women, protests against Judge K., gun rallies after the school in Florida


How many of these people Voted?


How many of these people voted? We'll never know the statistical count. What we can conclude is that either directly or indirectly they voted or had impact upon others voting, as the GOP lost 40 or so HOR seats. Trump said at many rallies that he was on the ballot. The disgust aimed at him was pretty much self fulfilling. The record number of midterm turnout in many states would indicate that this was more than just a normal cycle of expected results.

Momentum should remain consistent into the next election for senate, house, prez, and if Trump is on the ballot...well...you can fill in the blanks.


BoytonBrother - 1/11/2019 at 05:26 PM

quote:
By making crossing more difficult the end goal is that less people enter, fail in their attempts and less people try and come due to increased difficulty in coming.


Understood. But $5billion to manage those who overstay their visas would probably have a much greater affect on that goal. Border crossers are a small percentage and typically work labor jobs that contribute to farming and small construction company owners. But we won’t hear from the sheep about how those business owners will get hurt from this emotional knee jerk reaction to his Obama Derangement Syndrome. Target the ones that don’t contribute, not the tough as nails ones that are willing to do anything for American small businesses. Trump’s idiotic plan will prevent those that we need from coming, and turn a blind eye to those that don’t contribute in any way.

Emotionally damaged souls that follow Trump don’t think of these things because they hate their lives and need a boogeyman to blame for it. Give Trump the $5billion for immigration if it means this much to the guy, but put it towards something that targets the right individuals, not some idiotic wall that keeps out the best workers.


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 06:01 PM

Ya gotta luv Stern - onetime friend of the Orange Prez. Best line - "“I never saw him this orange or with those rings around his eyes”. See article below:


Howard Stern says Trump's border wall won't solve immigration problems: It’s just something ‘morons can get behind’
Suzy Byrne 1 hour 56 minutes ago
Reactions Reblog on Tumblr Share Tweet Email

Howard Stern had a lot to say about Donald Trump and his border wall. (Photo: Getty Images)
While Howard Stern “can’t find anything more boring” than having a political discussion, he broke his rule Wednesday to discuss Donald Trump’s immigration and border security address that was broadcast the night before.

The men go way back, and you may recall their conversations about “piece of a**” Ivanka on Stern’s show, so the King of All Media had many notes on Trump’s primetime performance — skip the teleprompter, work on the “heavy breathing” and stop with the spray tan (“I never saw him this orange or with those rings around his eyes”). But while Stern said he expected Trump’s speech to be “full of sh**,” it topped expectations.

After saying “there’s no crisis” at the U.S.-Mexico borders, Stern went on to talk about Trump’s proposed border wall — which is behind the ongoing partial government shutdown — saying it won’t solve any of the country’s immigration problems. He brushed it off as being just a campaign tactic that “morons can get behind.”

“The wall’s a problem because it’s a waste of money, even Donald knows that,” Stern said. “You gotta know Donald a bit to understand what’s going on here. The wall’s a simplistic answer to our problems with immigration. It’s something that, you know, morons can get behind because they’re like, ‘Oh, yeah, if you build a wall no one can get over it.’ But it’s not that simple.”

Stern said Trump’s demands of $5.7 billion in funding for the wall — a wall he originally said Mexico would pay for — wouldn’t even cover the cost of the proposed wall.

“You’re talking about building a massive wall across this country on the southern border,” Stern continued. “It’s a tremendous amount of property and a tremendous amount of area to cover. You’re not going to get a whole wall for $5 billion. If you really want a wall, it’s probably going to cost you some trillions of dollars.”


He said Trump isn’t being “straight up” with Americans. Stern said he should have come on and said, “‘F*** this, I’m not going to bullsh** you guys. I want $20 billion.”

While Stern admitted that he’s “all about keeping f***ing illegal aliens out because it’s f***ing not fair — it’s not fair to people who apply legally,” he added, “At the same point, you can’t be hypocritical and be hiring illegal aliens over at Mar-a-Lago,” referring to undocumented immigrants working at Trump’s golf resort in New Jersey.

Stern also talked about how drugs were coming “into our ports,” versus just from over the southern border. But he pointed out that Trump’s shutdown over not getting his wall is making security in the country even weaker.

“Right now we don’t even have air traffic controllers being paid,” Stern pointed out. “Talk about a lack of security. If I’m a terrorist, I’m coming in now. I bet you they’re flooding in while this government shutdown is going on.”


Donald Trump and Melania next to Howard Stern and Beth at a New York Knicks game in 2005. (Photo: Getty Images)
“Even Donald’s not into this wall. It’s just he’s embarrassed because he can’t get it, and Rush Limbaugh shamed him,” he said, adding, “The whole concept of the wall got him elected, a lot of people could wrap their brain around it. But the wall ain’t going to solve sh**. And it’s going to cost a fortune. Come on, it’s nonsense. It’s just nonsense.”

Stern said that Trump doesn’t consult him anymore though. “I got it figured out, but nobody talks to me. Donald doesn’t call me anymore because I didn’t vote for him.”

And lest you think Stern was only critical of Trump, he also also criticized Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer’s on-camera rebuttal to Trump’s address. Stern said they looked like “vampires” on-screen and “need media training.” He called their use of a teleprompter “a drag,” saying, “Just talk from the heart.” He said he hoped they watch their performance back and are “mortified” over it.


2112 - 1/11/2019 at 08:41 PM

Here is the part I don't get. Illegal crossings are down already - way down, and have been going down for over a decade. There are over 1 million fewer illegals living in the US today than in 2007. So why is this a crisis right now? Why doesn't Trump just declare victory that is policies have been working, take credit, and move on? Trend lines haven't kept him from taking credit for the economy, so why isn't he just declaring victory for the drop in illegal immigration and moving on?


MartinD28 - 1/11/2019 at 08:56 PM

quote:
Here is the part I don't get. Illegal crossings are down already - way down, and have been going down for over a decade. There are over 1 million fewer illegals living in the US today than in 2007. So why is this a crisis right now? Why doesn't Trump just declare victory that is policies have been working, take credit, and move on? Trend lines haven't kept him from taking credit for the economy, so why isn't he just declaring victory for the drop in illegal immigration and moving on?


Nocando - Trump taking orders from Coulter, Hannity, Ingraham, & pill popper Rush.


2112 - 1/11/2019 at 09:08 PM

quote:
quote:
Here is the part I don't get. Illegal crossings are down already - way down, and have been going down for over a decade. There are over 1 million fewer illegals living in the US today than in 2007. So why is this a crisis right now? Why doesn't Trump just declare victory that is policies have been working, take credit, and move on? Trend lines haven't kept him from taking credit for the economy, so why isn't he just declaring victory for the drop in illegal immigration and moving on?


Nocando - Trump taking orders from Coulter, Hannity, Ingraham, & pill popper Rush.


They'll fall in line. Especially Hannity. Whatever Trump does,, Hannity is all in, and the Trump fans wlll follow.


cyclone88 - 1/11/2019 at 10:24 PM

quote:
Here is the part I don't get. Illegal crossings are down already - way down, and have been going down for over a decade. There are over 1 million fewer illegals living in the US today than in 2007. So why is this a crisis right now? Why doesn't Trump just declare victory that is policies have been working, take credit, and move on? Trend lines haven't kept him from taking credit for the economy, so why isn't he just declaring victory for the drop in illegal immigration and moving on?


Brilliant!!!!

Facts and the truth have never stopped him before from doing anything. Why not, indeed.

Say it, Donald, say your policies have made the country more prosperous, secure, bigger, better, & happier than it's ever been. You made it happen because you know more about everything than all the experts & take a delayed Christmas vacation to Florida.


BIGV - 1/11/2019 at 11:01 PM

quote:
Emotionally damaged souls that follow Trump don’t think of these things because they hate their lives and need a boogeyman to blame for it.


Too funny!.... The same to be said for the 10 or so clones here who repeatedly use every thread to spew their utter hatred for the President, we get it, you despise the man. The vitriol laid out here is double the level of pathetic that we witnessed by those who loathed President Obama and his policies. There are "emotionally damaged souls" on both sides of the fence who have equal disdain for their lives.......


gina - 1/11/2019 at 11:58 PM

quote:
quote:
What a guy he is. He's basically telling the people of real emergencies & disasters in Puerto Rico & California to go "f" yourselves so he can build his wall for his fabricated emergency that he promised Mexico would pay for.

That's today. Tomorrow will bring another chaotic issue by Putin's little bitch. Everyday it's something new with that clown.


Clown - or carny barker - he may be, but it's disgraceful that we - whatever political affiliation we may have - are not rising up against this man who is literally ruining the lives of human beings. He's passing out candy while federal workers & disaster victims suffer.



How is Trump ruining people's lives? He has been available to work on any deal/compromise bill/legislation that can be brought to him. His only sticking point is he must get funding for the wall/fence for the purpose of border security not because he wants to say he is right or kept his promise to do it.

Yes 880,000 are not getting paid, they have real problems, and I think the states and local communities could try to come up with something to help them with their bills during this terrible time, but that is only one part of the problem.

What about border security? Do we just back down and do nothing so the govt. shutdown can end and then the democratic led Congress tries to proceed with impeachment hearings?

Pelosi says it is "immoral" to build the wall.
How is it immoral to stop illegals from entering our country?
She should not advocate the caravan of 'dreamers' try to break the law and come in illegally, that is obstructing justice and interfering with interstate commerce since they cross state lines and go everyplace once they get here. She took an oath entering Congress to uphold the laws of this nation and then advocates illegals continue to come and calls Trump immoral.

And Chuck Shumer is her Candyman, egging her on, encouraging her unrealistic outlook.

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






[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


gina - 1/12/2019 at 12:17 AM

quote:
quote:
Does anybody here think that we DO NOT need a border wall for border security?


We DO NOT need a wall for border security.


How do we stop people from illegally crossing the border along all the miles of unmanned, unfenced, unprotected land?


gina - 1/12/2019 at 12:23 AM

quote:
"W's 2006 Secure Fence Act authorized a barrier across the border. Less than a year later, Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD).

In sum, 17 years ago, Republicans acknowledged that requiring a physical barrier made of a specific material was an outdated concept & enacted legislation that said so. "

Thank you. Goob and Gina, please read the above quotation, and then sign to indicate that you did read it and did understand it.

I keep seeing strawman arguments here:

"Democrats are against border security."

No, they are against a wildly expensive WALL. There really are other kinds of border security.

"Democrats used to want a big concrete wall, but suddenly now they are just being anti-Trump."

No, they never wanted a big concrete wall, but they have always wanted border security.



I read it. "Congress recognized that technology could more securely, efficiently, and effectively serve the purpose of a physical barrier over varying topography & the Act was amended: no specific building material, no specific type of barrier (physical v electronic v TBD)."

What did Congress come up with? What were their ideas that were NOT implemented?

Were armed drones part of the concept?

Or satellite or heat sensor technology that can let planes know that people are in a certain area and then the blackhawk choppers can come and use whatever methodology they deem appropriate to stop the interlopers?

Or should we just send Joe Arpaio and his border buddies in their pick-ups to dissuade potential border breachers?

What technology/means can be used to deal with the problem WITHOUT a wall/fence?


MartinD28 - 1/12/2019 at 12:32 AM

quote:


Yes 880,000 are not getting paid, they have real problems, and I think the states and local communities could try to come up with something to help them with their bills during this terrible time, but that is only one part of the problem.
[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


Why should states and local communities pay for a self-inflicted and failed promise Trump made that Mexico would pay for the Trump wall, and now he sees that's not happening. All who drink from his cup have been bamboozled. How does it taste, Gina?

Drump said he'd own the shutdown...so your beef is with him. Why don't you contact the White House & let them know that he let you down.

He's dug quite a hole for himself and can't find a way out.


OriginalGoober - 1/12/2019 at 01:21 AM

Chuck and Nsncy have been in Congress over 50 years. What have they done about the issue. Nothing. YOU should be ashsmed.


crazyjoe - 1/12/2019 at 01:28 AM

I've always noticed and even commented here a time or two, that most of the conservative's here in Good 'Ol Red Indiana, seem to be overly stimulated by fear, overreact to threats and just generally seem terrified of things? Now we have scientific and fact based evidence to explain why this phenomenon exists........Peace.........joe

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservative s-big-fear-brain-study-finds


BoytonBrother - 1/12/2019 at 12:52 PM

quote:
There are "emotionally damaged souls" on both sides of the fence who have equal disdain for their lives.......


No kidding. I posted about Trump Derangement Syndrome just a day or two ago. What is your point Mr. Defensive?


nebish - 1/12/2019 at 03:05 PM

quote:
Here is the part I don't get. Illegal crossings are down already - way down, and have been going down for over a decade. There are over 1 million fewer illegals living in the US today than in 2007. So why is this a crisis right now? Why doesn't Trump just declare victory that is policies have been working, take credit, and move on? Trend lines haven't kept him from taking credit for the economy, so why isn't he just declaring victory for the drop in illegal immigration and moving on?


You are right, that illegal alien apprehensions are down from their historic peak. However, it is also true that the trend line is increasing now. Apprehensions bottomed to under 20,000 per month in the spring of 2017; since then the numbers have been steadily climbing as high as 3x.

In this chart you can see the recent history trend lines and also where FY2019 has started:



Ironically, CBP website is not updated due to the shutdown, but DHS has the December apprehensions/ inadmissibles for FY2019 were 60,782 marking the third straight month exceeding 60,000. Inadmissibles are those turned away at ports of entry, which average about 10,000 a month. This makes the captures between ports roughly 50,000 each month so far this FY, and that makes the third straight month of apprehensions over 50k.

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/01/09/dhs-releases-southwest-border-enforceme nt-statistics

So illegal crossing apprehensions are climbing, and you will also see in the DHS link that family unit apprehensions for the first three months of FY19 are up 280% over the same time frame of FY2018.

Regarding the total numbers of illegals living in the US, you are correct in that according to Pew, the number has dropped from 1 million to maybe even as high has 2 million lower than 2007.

Although, there have been others suggesting the illegal alien population in the US considerably higher, such as an MIT-Yale study resulting in 16 to 29 million with 22.1 being their average - double the commonly referenced 11 million from polling data. Moral of the story, it is difficult to estimate the total number and there could be many more than is typically assumed.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-21/mit-yale-study-doubles-e stimates-of-u-s-undocumented-immigrants

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/10/09/som-study-estimates-higher-undocu mented-immigration-numbers/

I would submit that this has always been a crisis. And the reality is, it always will be a crisis.


nebish - 1/12/2019 at 03:15 PM

quote:
quote:
By making crossing more difficult the end goal is that less people enter, fail in their attempts and less people try and come due to increased difficulty in coming.


Understood. But $5billion to manage those who overstay their visas would probably have a much greater affect on that goal. Border crossers are a small percentage and typically work labor jobs that contribute to farming and small construction company owners. But we won’t hear from the sheep about how those business owners will get hurt from this emotional knee jerk reaction to his Obama Derangement Syndrome. Target the ones that don’t contribute, not the tough as nails ones that are willing to do anything for American small businesses. Trump’s idiotic plan will prevent those that we need from coming, and turn a blind eye to those that don’t contribute in any way.

Emotionally damaged souls that follow Trump don’t think of these things because they hate their lives and need a boogeyman to blame for it. Give Trump the $5billion for immigration if it means this much to the guy, but put it towards something that targets the right individuals, not some idiotic wall that keeps out the best workers.


I would be ok with directing focus and efforts to VISA overstays instead of the wall. I would be ok with directing and focusing efforts to "round up" employers who have hired illegal workers instead of the wall.

Illegal immigration should not be any kind of solution to the needs and wants of farms or business.

You can talk about sheep and damaged souls or people with derangement syndrome, but that is all nonsense. Just because we are not in a position of authority and decision making and just because we type out our feelings on an unrelated internet message board doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that sometimes, people that disagree with us have good points and suggestions and raise our objections and assertions in a constructive manner.

The trolls just bring us all down, but we can ignore and rise above that and maintain constructive discourse - if we want to.


cyclone88 - 1/12/2019 at 04:03 PM

quote:
The trolls just bring us all down, but we can ignore and rise above that and maintain constructive discourse - if we want to.


We certainly can. We could ignore them rather than respond. There's no engaging w/trolls. If they're asked to clarify a point, they either run or respond w/more off-topic gibberish. It's futile, although apparently some of us find it amusing to play w/trolls.

We even have trolls on the very thread designed to ask us to be civil. That makes zero sense. Why disrupt an administrative request from Rowland?


BIGV - 1/12/2019 at 04:21 PM

quote:
quote:
There are "emotionally damaged souls" on both sides of the fence who have equal disdain for their lives.......


No kidding. I posted about Trump Derangement Syndrome just a day or two ago. What is your point Mr. Defensive?


My point Mr. Leftist?....is that fictitious labels like "derangement Syndrome" are not strictly limited to one Party or person.....


BoytonBrother - 1/12/2019 at 04:44 PM

quote:
My point Mr. Leftist?....


Notice how I focus on your specific defensive post, but you attack the political affiliation. Deplorable bigot.

quote:
is that fictitious labels like "derangement Syndrome" are not strictly limited to one Party or person....


No kidding, I just posted this the other day. Thanks genius.


BIGV - 1/12/2019 at 04:52 PM

quote:
quote:
My point Mr. Leftist?....


Notice how I focus on your specific defensive post, but you attack the political affiliation. Deplorable bigot.

quote:
is that fictitious labels like "derangement Syndrome" are not strictly limited to one Party or person....


No kidding, I just posted this the other day. Thanks genius.


I'm guessing this is the high point of your day!

lol


gina - 1/12/2019 at 06:54 PM

quote:
quote:


Yes 880,000 are not getting paid, they have real problems, and I think the states and local communities could try to come up with something to help them with their bills during this terrible time, but that is only one part of the problem.
[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


Why should states and local communities pay for a self-inflicted and failed promise Trump made that Mexico would pay for the Trump wall, and now he sees that's not happening. All who drink from his cup have been bamboozled. How does it taste, Gina?


Drump said he'd own the shutdown...so your beef is with him. Why don't you contact the White House & let them know that he let you down.

He's dug quite a hole for himself and can't find a way out.



At this point I don't think it is about campaign promises. if he gets his wall, sure when 2020 comes around he can say that is one of his accomplishments, but the greater issue remains border security, though the Democrats wants to dig their heels in and say, no we won't give you the wall because you want it. They know we need border security but have not countered his wall concept with any other ideas to secure the border, maybe because they know we need it.

As to who pays for it, if he cannot get Mexico to pay for it, then logically we as a nation must find another way to get it done otherwise the impasse continues, federal workers continue to not be paid and things will get worse and very ugly, that outcome benefits nobody.


MartinD28 - 1/12/2019 at 07:15 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:


Yes 880,000 are not getting paid, they have real problems, and I think the states and local communities could try to come up with something to help them with their bills during this terrible time, but that is only one part of the problem.
[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


Why should states and local communities pay for a self-inflicted and failed promise Trump made that Mexico would pay for the Trump wall, and now he sees that's not happening. All who drink from his cup have been bamboozled. How does it taste, Gina?


Drump said he'd own the shutdown...so your beef is with him. Why don't you contact the White House & let them know that he let you down.

He's dug quite a hole for himself and can't find a way out.



At this point I don't think it is about campaign promises. if he gets his wall, sure when 2020 comes around he can say that is one of his accomplishments, but the greater issue remains border security, though the Democrats wants to dig their heels in and say, no we won't give you the wall because you want it. They know we need border security but have not countered his wall concept with any other ideas to secure the border, maybe because they know we need it.

As to who pays for it, if he cannot get Mexico to pay for it, then logically we as a nation must find another way to get it done otherwise the impasse continues, federal workers continue to not be paid and things will get worse and very ugly, that outcome benefits nobody.




Wrong! It is about his campaign promise. He had millions of people in a state of delusion by campaigning on a promise of Mexico paying for a wall. How foolish of anyone to have believed such a non-starter. If his words mean nothing & are devoid of reality, then why is the default the American taxpayer to cover for his failure?

You are incorrect that "logically we as a nation must find another way to get it done". Trump created this fiction. He needs to figure a way out of the hole he dug w/out taking the country down with him. Any foolish people that want to go down his rabbit hole with him are welcome to follow him into fantasy land.

The Dems and the American people have spoken in the midterms & rejected his immigration policies and rhetoric. He campaigned during the midterms on immigration fears while the Dems made health care #1 issue. In the midterms, he was defeated resoundingly. The message has been delivered. He has backed himself into a corner and sees no way of getting himself out. The Dems are all for border security in practical ways; not just his ever changing wall - concrete to steel, etc. If you want to give him a contribution for his wall, feel free.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by MartinD28]


gina - 1/12/2019 at 07:35 PM

Yes it was a campaign promise, but we all know things change and evolve. If he cannot get Mexico to fund it 100% should he give up on the idea of building a wall?

You are correct that there are differences in the priorities of the Democrats and the Republicans, and that is another problem stalling resolution.

Another poll, conducted by NPR, PBS and Marist from November to December, found that 63% of Republicans believed building the wall was an "immediate priority".

Health care is a big problem, nobody disputes that, but right now he, as President wants to focus on border security and the wall. Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.

Here are some interesting things from his old book and how they can pertain to the wall.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46822452



[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


2112 - 1/12/2019 at 08:03 PM

quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


Chain - 1/12/2019 at 08:16 PM

quote:
quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


That's the scariest thing about Trump and some of his supporters....They, like him, seem oblivious and, frankly, ignorant as to how the American republic works.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by Chain]


MartinD28 - 1/12/2019 at 08:55 PM

quote:
Yes it was a campaign promise, but we all know things change and evolve. If he cannot get Mexico to fund it 100% should he give up on the idea of building a wall?

You are correct that there are differences in the priorities of the Democrats and the Republicans, and that is another problem stalling resolution.

Another poll, conducted by NPR, PBS and Marist from November to December, found that 63% of Republicans believed building the wall was an "immediate priority".

Health care is a big problem, nobody disputes that, but right now he, as President wants to focus on border security and the wall. Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.

Here are some interesting things from his old book and how they can pertain to the wall.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46822452
[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


Per Gina - Yes it was a campaign promise, but we all know things change and evolve. If he cannot get Mexico to fund it 100% should he give up on the idea of building a wall?

Response - It was unrealistic from the minute he began using it as a go to line. Too bad that not realistic, but yes, he should give up or let people like you pay for it; not taxpayers as a whole nor raid funds designated for real emergencies / disasters.

Per Gina - Another poll, conducted by NPR, PBS and Marist from November to December, found that 63% of Republicans believed building the wall was an "immediate priority"

Response - What do the polls that include Dems & Independents say about wanting Trump's wall? What do polls at large say about Trump?

Per Gina - Health care is a big problem, nobody disputes that, but right now he, as President wants to focus on border security and the wall. Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.

Response - See answers provided by 2112 & Chain. Read them & after you read them, then reread them.


cyclone88 - 1/12/2019 at 11:30 PM

quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


That's the scariest thing about Trump and some of his supporters....They, like him, seem oblivious and, frankly, ignorant as to how the American republic works.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by Chain]


Not only Trump, but McConnell seems to have forgotten that it is job to pass legislation, put it in front of the Executive, and if the Executive doesn't sign, return to get an over-ride. Congress doesn't work for the Executive branch. That means putting legislation to a vote regardless of what the Executive has whispered in his ear about veto.

3 Equal Branches of Government.




[Edited on 1/13/2019 by cyclone88]


BIGV - 1/13/2019 at 12:38 AM

quote:
Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


And wise enough to establish the Electoral College.....


Chain - 1/13/2019 at 12:47 AM

quote:
quote:
Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


And wise enough to establish the Electoral College.....


Perhaps at the time....13 colonies is far different than 50 states that encompass millions of people across a geographic area the founding father had no idea of at the time.

The true brilliance of the founding fathers was incorporating the ability to change the Constitution and thereby the republic as time and circumstances deemed so...For example abolishing the Electoral College when it became obsolete. The Electoral College is a holdover that no longer makes sense.


BoytonBrother - 1/13/2019 at 01:22 PM

quote:
You can talk about sheep and damaged souls or people with derangement syndrome, but that is all nonsense. Just because we are not in a position of authority and decision making and just because we type out our feelings on an unrelated internet message board doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that sometimes, people that disagree with us have good points and suggestions and raise our objections and assertions in a constructive manner.


Bullsh*t. These emotionally damaged sheep are the reason we likely have a compromised Russian asset as President working against American interests. Some people couldn’t handle a black President, so Trump is simply revenge. The right didn’t want someone who would benefit the USA the most.....they wanted whoever would hurt the left the most. The end result is dozens of indictments and a mentally disturbed lunatic in charge of our country.

After it’s proven that Trump is under Putin’s control, and that Trump used brainwashing tactics on the weak-minded, Trump supporters will be cowering in shame a decade from now, hiding and denying they ever liked the guy. The ending of Inglorious Bastards comes to mind.


MartinD28 - 1/13/2019 at 04:28 PM

quote:
quote:
You can talk about sheep and damaged souls or people with derangement syndrome, but that is all nonsense. Just because we are not in a position of authority and decision making and just because we type out our feelings on an unrelated internet message board doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that sometimes, people that disagree with us have good points and suggestions and raise our objections and assertions in a constructive manner.


Bullsh*t. These emotionally damaged sheep are the reason we likely have a compromised Russian asset as President working against American interests. Some people couldn’t handle a black President, so Trump is simply revenge. The right didn’t want someone who would benefit the USA the most.....they wanted whoever would hurt the left the most. The end result is dozens of indictments and a mentally disturbed lunatic in charge of our country.

After it’s proven that Trump is under Putin’s control, and that Trump used brainwashing tactics on the weak-minded, Trump supporters will be cowering in shame a decade from now, hiding and denying they ever liked the guy. The ending of Inglorious Bastards comes to mind.


Re: your last paragraph. Not so sure. There's a good chance that in spite of facts & evidence of everything that Trump is and has done, the followers will still hang onto beliefs in a deep state and cling to denials that these things are true of Russian Don. He did a great job in his campaign of preying on the weak, and they look like they are dug in.

The redeeming factor is he has not been able to expand his base.


nebish - 1/13/2019 at 07:00 PM

quote:
quote:
You can talk about sheep and damaged souls or people with derangement syndrome, but that is all nonsense. Just because we are not in a position of authority and decision making and just because we type out our feelings on an unrelated internet message board doesn't mean we can't acknowledge that sometimes, people that disagree with us have good points and suggestions and raise our objections and assertions in a constructive manner.


Bullsh*t. These emotionally damaged sheep are the reason we likely have a compromised Russian asset as President working against American interests. Some people couldn’t handle a black President, so Trump is simply revenge. The right didn’t want someone who would benefit the USA the most.....they wanted whoever would hurt the left the most. The end result is dozens of indictments and a mentally disturbed lunatic in charge of our country.

After it’s proven that Trump is under Putin’s control, and that Trump used brainwashing tactics on the weak-minded, Trump supporters will be cowering in shame a decade from now, hiding and denying they ever liked the guy. The ending of Inglorious Bastards comes to mind.


I'm content what I get out of the forum based on what I put into it, I assume then you must be as well.


gina - 1/13/2019 at 08:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


That's the scariest thing about Trump and some of his supporters....They, like him, seem oblivious and, frankly, ignorant as to how the American republic works.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by Chain]


Not only Trump, but McConnell seems to have forgotten that it is job to pass legislation, put it in front of the Executive, and if the Executive doesn't sign, return to get an over-ride. Congress doesn't work for the Executive branch. That means putting legislation to a vote regardless of what the Executive has whispered in his ear about veto.

3 Equal Branches of Government.

[Edited on 1/13/2019 by cyclone88]


"No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president."

That may be how our government is supposed to work, but it hasn't worked that way for a long time.
When we went to war with Iraq the second time, that should have been something that everyone in Congress agreed to, but I don't think that happened, we then went to the United Nations and when they would not agree for us to go there, Bush Jr. just said, well if they won't agree, then we just don't take the vote, and they ignored the United Nations and went anyway starting a war in Iraq.

They passed and implemented the Patriot Act even though it is unconstitutional. How does a law abiding Congress pass an unconstitutional piece of legislation and then it is implemented as a rule of law?

Our government has ignored the Constitution for a long time.

We don't just have 3 equal branches of government working as they were supposed to. The passing of Executive Orders is one example of how the president (and I don't mean Trump, I mean those who came before him) used it to pass laws the other branches would not have. One such piece of legislation was that Bush Jr. passed an Executive Order granting himself and all members of his administration immunity from prosecution for war crimes going back to 9-11-01. We never even started bombing Afghanistan till 9-29-01. So what war crimes could he be thinking of that they might need immunity for? I can think of one committed the same day he backdated their immunity to, 9-11-01.


cyclone88 - 1/14/2019 at 01:20 PM

quote:
quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


That's the scariest thing about Trump and some of his supporters....They, like him, seem oblivious and, frankly, ignorant as to how the American republic works.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by Chain]


Not only Trump, but McConnell seems to have forgotten that it is job to pass legislation, put it in front of the Executive, and if the Executive doesn't sign, return to get an over-ride. Congress doesn't work for the Executive branch. That means putting legislation to a vote regardless of what the Executive has whispered in his ear about veto.

3 Equal Branches of Government.

[Edited on 1/13/2019 by cyclone88]


quote:
Our government has ignored the Constitution for a long time.


That's a bold inaccurate statement. If the constitution had been ignored, the US wouldn't exist. There would be anarchy or 50 individual states relying on their own constitutions w/no obligation to or support from the 49 other states.

The judicial branch has adhered to its responsibilities even though decisions have been unpopular. It frequently reminds litigants of the division of power - especially when it specifically points to what are legislative rather than judicial or executive functions. Those who overstep lose their case & get their hands metaphorically slapped.

Your expectation that the "man in the big chair" be given what he wants all the time is wrong, wouldn't get past the first judicial hurdle, and I suspect, changes w/who occupies the chair.


gina - 1/15/2019 at 10:26 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Since he is the man in the big chair, doesn't he get to call the shots and decide what is most important, he is after all the President, which is the one in charge of leading the nation.


No, the Constitution defines three equal branches of government. It is a system of checks and balances. The president doesn't always get what he wants. Our founding fathers were wise not to give absolute power to the president.


That's the scariest thing about Trump and some of his supporters....They, like him, seem oblivious and, frankly, ignorant as to how the American republic works.

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by Chain]


Not only Trump, but McConnell seems to have forgotten that it is job to pass legislation, put it in front of the Executive, and if the Executive doesn't sign, return to get an over-ride. Congress doesn't work for the Executive branch. That means putting legislation to a vote regardless of what the Executive has whispered in his ear about veto.

3 Equal Branches of Government.



[Edited on 1/13/2019 by cyclone88]


quote:
Our government has ignored the Constitution for a long time.


That's a bold inaccurate statement. If the constitution had been ignored, the US wouldn't exist. There would be anarchy or 50 individual states relying on their own constitutions w/no obligation to or support from the 49 other states.

The judicial branch has adhered to its responsibilities even though decisions have been unpopular. It frequently reminds litigants of the division of power - especially when it specifically points to what are legislative rather than judicial or executive functions. Those who overstep lose their case & get their hands metaphorically slapped.

Your expectation that the "man in the big chair" be given what he wants all the time is wrong, wouldn't get past the first judicial hurdle, and I suspect, changes w/who occupies the chair.




Certainly you are aware of the changes post 9-11-01 whereby the rights guaranteed citizens have been circumvented and ignored. People can be seized if the govt. wants to, held without charges (violating due process), they don't even have to let you contact a lawyer, they can torture you here or send you abroad to do it, they can even assassinate you if they feel like it. They can get warrantless phone taps, etc. etc. They decided all this was necessary to combat 'the war on terror', they can go to other countries and assassinate any of their people without even telling the other govt.

I believe that anarchy will come, and the proof of that is the desire of some states to secede from the union. Many have just quietly tried reforming their own Constitutions giving more power to their individual states. Some like California have publicly announced that they would like to just be their own state apart from the US, you have heard of the Cal-Exit movement I'm sure. North Dakota has their own state bank, rather than relying on the big banks and other states needing the bailouts of 2008 and whenever the next one comes.


You should read Rogue State by Wiilliam Blum and find out what some of the branches of government have done over the years. You will be amazed at the evilness that has infiltrated various sectors of the government. The carnage was not limited to international events. Deliberate acts were perpetrated upon people in THIS country. If you think no that could not happen here, you need to find out. This is factual, documented and NON -FICTION.

https://williamblum.org/books/rogue-state


Our country has not functioned as the forefathers envisioned, planned it to in a long time, and I do not think it will ever get back to that.




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=147622