Jump to content
trex

Donald Trump

Recommended Posts

Barack
3 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

The article is published on Fox News, but it was written by a Democrat.

Yeah did wonder, why they gave it credence though.

 

Publishing it, gives the "la-la-la I can't hear you" mantra the network loves, a bit of a dumbing down. 

 

Are they realising all is actually not well...? Like...maybe there's actual discontent in the USA & The GOP in particular...?

 

Strange days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Ugly American said:

This is quite the article if the reporting holds up.  The wall was something his advisors cooked up to keep him on message, intending it to just stand in for hating on immigrants in general.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/05/us/politics/donald-trump-border-wall.html

 

Instead, it's turned into a personal obsession that he won't let go and it's keeping his toadies from doing the kind of kid-stealing, brown people hating that they wanted to do instead of a concrete wall.

Interesting article on several levels. I don't see why the reporting shouldn't hold up.

 

Trump's obsession with the wall seems to be (in part at least) about his ego and determination not to lose face,  by at least meeting some of the "Build That Wall" promise/threat that was so central to his campaign. He may be being advised (by his own backers) that it is a bit of an irrelevance to real control of immigration (and seems prepared to concede some measure of real control to get his wall) but his personal "achievement" is what matters to him. . As with Syria and recognising Jerusalem as Israel's capital, he seems to feel a need for the sake of his own ego to meet some at least of his campaign promises he chanted in a hundred rallies around the country, covered on TV. As the article says so far he has not added one metre to the hundreds of miles of border barriers in place when he took office. For a man with a long history of failure it must wrankle. 

 

And now the "toxic Trump -loving whataboutery"!  It is interesting to read that Barack and Hillary were among the Democratic senators who in 2006 voted to support building hundreds of miles  of fences on the Mexican Border. And the Democrat currently leading the fight in Congress to deny a penny for Trump's wall also voted that way. This week Nancy Pelosi talked passionately about a wall being un-American. I struggle to understand why a fence is in line with American values but a wall (likely in practice to be more fence) is not.

Edited by Francis Albert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp
46 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Interesting article on several levels. I don't see why the reporting shouldn't hold up.

 

Trump's obsession with the wall seems to be (in part at least) about his ego and determination not to lose face,  by at least meeting some of the "Build That Wall" promise/threat that was so central to his campaign. He may be being advised (by his own backers) that it is a bit of an irrelevance to real control of immigration (and seems prepared to concede some measure of real control to get his wall) but his personal "achievement" is what matters to him. . As with Syria and recognising Jerusalem as Israel's capital, he seems to feel a need for the sake of his own ego to meet some at least of his campaign promises he chanted in a hundred rallies around the country, covered on TV. As the article says so far he has not added one metre to the hundreds of miles of border barriers in place when he took office. For a man with a long history of failure it must wrankle. 

 

And now the "toxic Trump -loving whataboutery"!  It is interesting to read that Barack and Hillary were among the Democratic senators who in 2006 voted to support building hundreds of miles  of fences on the Mexican Border. And the Democrat currently leading the fight in Congress to deny a penny for Trump's wall also voted that way. This week Nancy Pelosi talked passionately about a wall being un-American. I struggle to understand why a fence is in line with American values but a wall (likely in practice to be more fence) is not.

There is no doubt there are a few changing their tune about border security of a physical type be it fenc e, wall or electric beams. The fact is it is hypocrisy on the part of both parties, it has absolutely nothing to do with immigration legal or otherwise. The whole thing is that the Democrats are not going to give Trump anything that he can desc ribe as a wall as to do so will be providing him promises made promises kept 2020 campaign rhetoric. Conversely Trump will not accept anything that does not have the word wall in it for exactly the same campaign strategy. pathetic.

Meanwhile there are people working for no pay, or are on unpaid vacation, Trump a billionaires son, says he can relate to these people, as one reporter stated this morning he know very well about people not being paid because when he had financial difficulties he did not pay taxes, contractors, workers or anyone else, yes he can relate to the Federal workers but from the other side.

We have Fox news wavering, Bolton says different about Syria than Trump, Mulvaney is a bit wishy washy, and two Republicans voted against the party in a recent vote, its like one of those intersections you drive through every day and think boy this is a disaster about to happen, that to me describes this presidency.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American
1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Interesting article on several levels. I don't see why the reporting shouldn't hold up.

 

Trump's obsession with the wall seems to be (in part at least) about his ego and determination not to lose face,  by at least meeting some of the "Build That Wall" promise/threat that was so central to his campaign. He may be being advised (by his own backers) that it is a bit of an irrelevance to real control of immigration (and seems prepared to concede some measure of real control to get his wall) but his personal "achievement" is what matters to him. . As with Syria and recognising Jerusalem as Israel's capital, he seems to feel a need for the sake of his own ego to meet some at least of his campaign promises he chanted in a hundred rallies around the country, covered on TV. As the article says so far he has not added one metre to the hundreds of miles of border barriers in place when he took office. For a man with a long history of failure it must wrankle. 

 

And now the "toxic Trump -loving whataboutery"!  It is interesting to read that Barack and Hillary were among the Democratic senators who in 2006 voted to support building hundreds of miles  of fences on the Mexican Border. And the Democrat currently leading the fight in Congress to deny a penny for Trump's wall also voted that way. This week Nancy Pelosi talked passionately about a wall being un-American. I struggle to understand why a fence is in line with American values but a wall (likely in practice to be more fence) is not.

 

On your latter paragraph, the deal in 2006 was similar to a deal during Obama's Presidency that is similar to a deal that was offered Trump last month. Most Democrats think that any wall at all beyond a little bit in urban areas and around major crossing points is a horrendous waste of money. But Democrats have been willing to build some wall on a couple hundred rather than the full 2,000 miles (which is patently stupid, insane, useless, ridiculous, and all-around nonsense) IF it is tied to reform to allow undocumented workers a path to citizenship and resolve a situation where millions of people who have been living peacefully and productively in the country for decades can get paperwork. Every time the nativists in the GOP have thrown a fit and scuppered the deal. And now they control the White House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ri Alban

I thought Mexico were paying for the wall. And what about Canada, do terrorists not cross that border. Get Canada to put some grizzlies on patrol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kalamazoo Jambo
6 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

And what about Canada, do terrorists not cross that border. Get Canada to put some grizzlies on patrol.

 

Indeed. That should be the bear minimum.

 

Being serious, I know of more evidence of terrorists coming in via Canada than via Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J.T.F.Robertson
23 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

 

Indeed. That should be the bear minimum.

 

Being serious, I know of more evidence of terrorists coming in via Canada than via Mexico.

 

Saw though me. :(

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alfajambo
Posted (edited)

Is it not true to say that the ‘Wall’ will be successful in deterring and preventing at least to some degree large mass illegal immigration? America is a generous country, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

When the wall is built will I be able to view it on google earth? And will it be beautiful?

 

Edited by alfajambo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maple Leaf
11 hours ago, ri Alban said:

I thought Mexico were paying for the wall. And what about Canada, do terrorists not cross that border. Get Canada to put some grizzlies on patrol.

 

Trump said dozens of times that Mexico would pay for the wall.  Mexico's answer was no, and the President of Mexico actually used the word "****" in his answer.  But there is a new President now and, as far as I know, President best-deal-maker-in-the-world hasn't even asked him for money.

 

As for the Canadian border, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants have crossed over, BUT, they have been heading north into Canada from the USA.  The last number I heard was in August, when the count was 31,000. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DETTY29
9 hours ago, alfajambo said:

Is it not true to say that the ‘Wall’ will be successful in deterring and preventing at least to some degree large mass illegal immigration? America is a generous country, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

When the wall is built will I be able to view it on google earth? And will it be beautiful?

 

The best, most beautiful wall ever built.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert

Reminds me of Nixon's reaction to the Great Wall of China when he visited it in 1973 on his ground breaking visit to China. His judgement: "It is a great wall".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American

If he declares a national emergency to build the wall tonight, a lawsuit will be waiting in federal court at 10 AM tomorrow morning, which I can only assume will be directly forwarded to the Supreme Court. There's also talk that it would be grounds for an abuse of power impeachment charge and that the House could pull the trigger on it right away.

 

More likely though SCOTUS says "LOL no" to his national emergency and he tries to do it anyway, and THEN we get the impeachment.

 

At this point he's shown he's hellbent to do the stupid thing, and while the Democratic party of 15 years ago would have folded like a cheap metal chair long before now, the House Democrats have finally found some spine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American

Oh, and as to whether the border wall will actually do anything, I mean, it will do a little, but there's already a fairly substantial wall through most of the San Diego/Tijuana border, and immigrants routinely go over that one instead of going out into the desert where there's just a small fence, because an unmanned wall is effectively just a minor obstacle for a determined crosser.

 

Add to that that a very large percentage of the undocumented immigrants in this country crossed the border legally but overstayed visit visas. 

 

(This is on top of the most fundamental point that they are almost entirely kind, hardworking, determined, friendly, peaceful people who commit crimes at rates far below that of the native-born population. But if you say that, it's hard to turn them into scapegoats...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
milky_26
5 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

Oh, and as to whether the border wall will actually do anything, I mean, it will do a little, but there's already a fairly substantial wall through most of the San Diego/Tijuana border, and immigrants routinely go over that one instead of going out into the desert where there's just a small fence, because an unmanned wall is effectively just a minor obstacle for a determined crosser.

 

Add to that that a very large percentage of the undocumented immigrants in this country crossed the border legally but overstayed visit visas. 

 

(This is on top of the most fundamental point that they are almost entirely kind, hardworking, determined, friendly, peaceful people who commit crimes at rates far below that of the native-born population. But if you say that, it's hard to turn them into scapegoats...)

surely any wall would increase illegal immigration as there would be less security since the wall would be "the bestest of best walls ordered by the smartest of all smart people ever" and would do its job. then those people who actually understand trump realise it might be easier to get across the wall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig Gordons Gloves

I'm looking forward to is 8-10 minute ramble on TV tonight, no doubt there will be a great speech written for him which he'll discard after 30 seconds and end up ranting about how he was the most decisive winner in history etc etc.

 

With regards the shut down, i read this on NPR last night, we're semi frequent visitors to National Parks and they're quite amazing, it's incredibly sad that this is yet another consequence of the vanity of the president on top of the fact that nearly a million workers have no paycheck etc.

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/06/682686357/national-park-service-plans-to-expand-operations-amid-government-shutdown-degrad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp

I am sure one of his talking points will be the murder of a California cop by an illegal alien. My sympathies for the dead officer and his family are deep. However my sympathies for the fifty eight people murdered by a fellow American in Las Vegas, and the slaughter of sixteen lovely young people in Florida are also horrific, these atrocities were carried out by fellow Americans, armed with firearms, yet the President has done nothing, seems to have no plans to do anything, thousands of Americans are murdered by firearms by fellow Americans, probably more than by illegal immigrants but he needs billions of dollars to stop the illegal aliens at present a lesser problem than home brewed persons.  

Every country that is reasonable to live in with peace and democracy is plagued with illegal immigration, it is an unfortunate fact of life in the 21st century, as some have recommended a part solution may be to provide aid and counselling to these other countries to try and make them more attrac tive to their  citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jambo-Jimbo

As Bob & UA have touched upon this, how many Illegal Immigrants have carried out mass murder be it by shooting or otherwise, as opposed to American born mass murderers?

 

If they are mostly criminals and terrorists as Trump claims them to be, then there should be many many cases of Illegal immigrants going on the rampage.

 

I would be interested on any stats on this, if there is any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justin Z
1 hour ago, bobsharp said:

thousands of Americans are murdered by firearms by fellow Americans, probably more than by illegal immigrants

 

By far. Probably at a rate of ten to one.

 

11 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

I would be interested on any stats on this, if there is any.

 

Yeah, I may as well not just throw a number out there. Let's see.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/undocumented-aliens-violent-crime-murder-statistics-data-2018-8?r=US&IR=T

 

Lots of stuff in the article, but here's a nice bit:

The research found that native-born residents were most likely to commit and be convicted of crimes, while unauthorized immigrants saw a conviction rate that was about 50% lower. Legal immigrants appeared to be the most law-abiding, with 86% fewer convictions than native-born Texans.

 

And another nice one:

There's also a Criminology journal study from March that examined states' reported rates of violent crime and illegal immigration. From 1990 through 2014, that data found a negative correlation — meaning that the more a population was made up of unauthorized immigrants, the lower the violent crime rate seemed to be.

 

So yeah. It's pure scapegoating, pure race-baiting, pure, bald, bigotry, and not based in reality whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alfajambo

A national emergency declaration will not be announced by Trump, Imo.

However, the suggestion of the possibility of such will ensure distribution and address views are positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JackLadd

So Manafort colluded with Kremlin and I bet Trump directed him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp
Posted (edited)

Well I listened to the Oval Office talk. Heard it all before, and most of it was bull then and still is. He quoted figures that are known to be false or at least subject to clarification.  He told how he has looked into the eyes of people he has met who have lost relatives murdered by illegal immigrants, he has looked into their eyes and held their hand, I have never seen or heard anything about any of these incidents.

Its funny how something can stimulate an old old memory, in the Scottish Police College,1956, one class I believe it was on fraud and the essentials in a case was reduced to a few words, Fraud, Falsehood, and Wilful Imposition, that was what sixty four year years ago, and listening to Trump tonight those words kept going through my mind.

Edited by bobsharp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American
5 hours ago, JackLadd said:

So Manafort colluded with Kremlin and I bet Trump directed him.

 

No wonder he's about to declare a national emergency. This is now a direct link between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

 

If this holds up as a matter of fact (and it sure looks like it will) then it's effectively a question of how much more there is and how much Trump himself knew about it. I'm not a lawyer, but it sure seems like that's not just impeachable, it's high treason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House:
Good evening.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak directly to the American people tonight about how we can end this shutdown and meet the needs of the American people.

Sadly, much of what we have heard from President Trump throughout this senseless shutdown has been full of misinformation and even malice.

The president has chosen fear. We want to start with the facts.

The fact is: on the very first day of this Congress, House Democrats passed Senate Republican legislation to reopen government and fund smart, effective border security solutions.

But the president is rejecting these bipartisan bills which would reopen government – over his obsession with forcing American taxpayers to waste billions of dollars on an expensive and ineffective wall – a wall he always promised Mexico would pay for.

The fact is: President Trump has chosen to hold hostage critical services for the health, safety and wellbeing of the American people and withhold the paychecks of 800,000 innocent workers across the nation – many of them veterans.

He promised to keep government shutdown for “months or years” – no matter whom it hurts. That’s just plain wrong.

The fact is: We all agree that we need to secure our borders, while honoring our values: we can build the infrastructure and roads at our ports of entry; we can install new technology to scan cars and trucks for drugs coming into our nation; we can hire the personnel we need to facilitate trade and immigration at the border; and we can fund more innovation to detect unauthorized crossings.

The fact is: the women and children at the border are not a security threat, they are a humanitarian challenge – a challenge that President Trump’s own cruel and counterproductive policies have only deepened.

And the fact is: President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must reopen the government.

Thank you.

 

Chuck Schumer, Senate minority leader

Thank you, Speaker Pelosi.

My fellow Americans, we address you tonight for one reason only: the president of the United States – having failed to get Mexico to pay for his ineffective, unnecessary border wall, and unable to convince the Congress or the American people to foot the bill – has shut down the government.

American democracy doesn’t work that way. We don’t govern by temper tantrum. No president should pound the table and demand he gets his way or else the government shuts down, hurting millions of Americans who are treated as leverage.

Tonight – and throughout this debate and his presidency – President Trump has appealed to fear, not facts. Division, not unity.

Make no mistake: Democrats and the president both want stronger border security. However, we sharply disagree with the president about the most effective way to do it.

So, how do we untangle this mess?

There is an obvious solution: separate the shutdown from the arguments over border security. There is bipartisan legislation – supported by Democrats and Republicans – to reopen government while allowing debate over border security to continue.

There is no excuse for hurting millions of Americans over a policy difference. Federal workers are about to miss a paycheck. Some families can’t get a mortgage to buy a new home. Farmers and small businesses won’t get loans they desperately need.

Most presidents have used Oval Office addresses for noble purposes. This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis, stoke fear, and divert attention from the turmoil in his administration.

My fellow Americans, there is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it. We can reopen the government AND continue to work through disagreements about policy. We can secure our border without an expensive, ineffective wall. And we can welcome legal immigrants and refugees without compromising safety and security.

The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall.

So our suggestion is a simple one: Mr President, reopen the government and we can work to resolve our differences over border security. But end this shutdown now.

Thank you.

 

:greggy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert

The smug Wallace face is appropriate. Assuming this is the same Chuck Schumer who in 2006 voted (along with Hillary and Barack and 23 other Democrat Senators) for the construction, at the American taxpayers expense, of several hundred additional miles of border fence. Presumably an ineffective, unnecessary border fence, adding to physical barriers which totalled nearly 700 miles at the time Trump took office. "The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall". "There is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it". The underlying message is spot on but would be more persuasive without the hypocrisy and high-blown rhetoric. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp

Trump is reported that shortly after the election and victory he phoned the Mexican President and told him they were in a bind. He is alleged to have stated that he was advised by strategists to use the Wall as a point to get excitement in the crowd, he basically admitted that he really had no desire for a Wall but now Mexico was going to have to pay for it because it looked like he was going to have to build it. It is also reported the Mexican President very diplomatically, but in good English told him to F... Off.

He is also reported to have told reporters at a lunch yesterday that he didn't want to do the talk, and does not want to go to the Texas Border.

Manaforts lawyers submitted documents to the Court about his direct dealings with a suspec ted Russian Intelligence agent. They redac ted by blacking out the words but did not do it properly and the now public believed redacted doc uments released yesterday can be read through the blacking out and reveal the information about the meetings and a subsequent trip to Madrid. This again is suspected to provide information about the famous Trump Tower meeting and confirm that at least collusion was proven, but if the Democrats are succesful in getting the blocked telephone number they believe is Trumps, the question of the crime of conspiracy again rears its head, with possibly the President  involved, not likely to happen because he says it did not and he is known as a man of truth and integrity.

Of course last night the Fake News stations were all convinced the net around the Presidents neck is tightening, but Carlson and Hannity of course are proud of his presentation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp
3 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

The smug Wallace face is appropriate. Assuming this is the same Chuck Schumer who in 2006 voted (along with Hillary and Barack and 23 other Democrat Senators) for the construction, at the American taxpayers expense, of several hundred additional miles of border fence. Presumably an ineffective, unnecessary border fence, adding to physical barriers which totalled nearly 700 miles at the time Trump took office. "The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall". "There is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it". The underlying message is spot on but would be more persuasive without the hypocrisy and high-blown rhetoric. 

 

Chris Cuomo on CNN has spent a lot of time reporting and visiting the fences along the Border. He made the point that during all his visits he has never heard anyone make a negative statement about the fences, in fact most were positive. The Democrats did and have never denied having supported fences, the problem is that Trump made promises that he would build a concrete wall and that Mexico would pay for it, this has turned out of course to be a complete fallacy.  Trump now wants 5.7 billion dollars to build the wall as well as money for Border securtiy, he is using false statistics to achieve this. The truth is that Trump and everyone is aware of it could care less about border security, he wants the money to satisfy his base by keeping a promise he made about a Wall. remember the cries and shouts of Build That Wall, Build that Wall, also remember when he seemed to falter Rush Limbaugh and Fox News turned on him, and he did not sign an agreement he had already agreed to  and ultimately closed government. His whole purpose is motivated by keeping his base happy, nothing to do with anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
13 minutes ago, bobsharp said:

 

Chris Cuomo on CNN has spent a lot of time reporting and visiting the fences along the Border. He made the point that during all his visits he has never heard anyone make a negative statement about the fences, in fact most were positive. The Democrats did and have never denied having supported fences, the problem is that Trump made promises that he would build a concrete wall and that Mexico would pay for it, this has turned out of course to be a complete fallacy.  Trump now wants 5.7 billion dollars to build the wall as well as money for Border securtiy, he is using false statistics to achieve this. The truth is that Trump and everyone is aware of it could care less about border security, he wants the money to satisfy his base by keeping a promise he made about a Wall. remember the cries and shouts of Build That Wall, Build that Wall, also remember when he seemed to falter Rush Limbaugh and Fox News turned on him, and he did not sign an agreement he had already agreed to  and ultimately closed government. His whole purpose is motivated by keeping his base happy, nothing to do with anything else.

As to Trump's motivation, I agree and posted much the same the other day, adding only his (related) egotistical need to save face, having used the "Build that Wall" slogan so often in his televised rallies.

As to the difference between an impenetrable metal fence and an impenetrable concrete wall (other than who builds them) I remain puzzled. And Trump has of course admitted that his wall may in fact be a fence.

 

(And with apologies for some cross contamination of threads I read that those opposed to the wall argue that modern electronic technology and other "technical solutions" offer better controls of borders than physical barriers. In another context, I believe these are known as "moonbeams and unicorns")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack

Forrest Trump, having another Adderall moment, it appears...

 

 

Screenshot_20190109-152149_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade
21 minutes ago, Barack said:

Forrest Trump, having another Adderall moment, it appears...

 

 

 

He seems unaware that most of the Forest Management in California has been privitized and that cutting funding to the state forestry commission won't do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Cade said:

He seems unaware that most of the Forest Management in California has been privitized and that cutting funding to the state forestry commission won't do anything.

Amongst other things he's overlooked...including spelling.It's a tantrum thing too, about the wall, I'd suspect.

 

Not sure what % is Federal.

 

Which state voted Democrat...?

What State does Nancy Pelosi represent...?

Who's paying for the rakes...?

Edited by Barack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American
5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

The smug Wallace face is appropriate. Assuming this is the same Chuck Schumer who in 2006 voted (along with Hillary and Barack and 23 other Democrat Senators) for the construction, at the American taxpayers expense, of several hundred additional miles of border fence. Presumably an ineffective, unnecessary border fence, adding to physical barriers which totalled nearly 700 miles at the time Trump took office. "The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall". "There is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it". The underlying message is spot on but would be more persuasive without the hypocrisy and high-blown rhetoric. 

 

As has already been explained, the vote in 2006 included a very small section of wall as a compromise with GOP members in return for providing a path to documentation for undocumented immigrants. The same deal has been offered to Trump. He's rejected it.

 

FFS either try and pay attention or stop spamming the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XB52
16 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

 

As has already been explained, the vote in 2006 included a very small section of wall as a compromise with GOP members in return for providing a path to documentation for undocumented immigrants. The same deal has been offered to Trump. He's rejected it.

 

FFS either try and pay attention or stop spamming the thread.

well said but wasted I suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maple Leaf
5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

The smug Wallace face is appropriate. Assuming this is the same Chuck Schumer who in 2006 voted (along with Hillary and Barack and 23 other Democrat Senators) for the construction, at the American taxpayers expense, of several hundred additional miles of border fence. Presumably an ineffective, unnecessary border fence, adding to physical barriers which totalled nearly 700 miles at the time Trump took office. "The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall". "There is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it". The underlying message is spot on but would be more persuasive without the hypocrisy and high-blown rhetoric. 

 

Picking out Schumer for hypocrisy is fine, but hypocrisy is prevalent in politics, and there is no-one better at it than Trump.  He surely takes the cake for flip-flopping on party allegiance.  Here's an extract from an online article about Trump.

  

Trump registered as a Republican in Manhattan in 1987 and since that time has changed his party affiliation five times. In 1999, Trump changed his party affiliation to the Independence Party of New York. In August 2001, Trump changed his party affiliation to Democratic. In September 2009, Trump changed his party affiliation back to the Republican Party. In December 2011, Trump changed to "no party affiliation" (independent). In April 2012, Trump again returned to the Republican Party.[23]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

 

As has already been explained, the vote in 2006 included a very small section of wall as a compromise with GOP members in return for providing a path to documentation for undocumented immigrants. The same deal has been offered to Trump. He's rejected it.

 

FFS either try and pay attention or stop spamming the thread.

As the post of mine you quoted said, the points made by Pelosi and Schumer were spot on but would IMO have been more persuasive without the hypocrisy and Kennedyesque  rhetoric.

Do try to pay attention (with apologies for being sanctimonious!).

Edited by Francis Albert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
41 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Picking out Schumer for hypocrisy is fine, but hypocrisy is prevalent in politics, and there is no-one better at it than Trump.  He surely takes the cake for flip-flopping on party allegiance.  Here's an extract from an online article about Trump.

  

Trump registered as a Republican in Manhattan in 1987 and since that time has changed his party affiliation five times. In 1999, Trump changed his party affiliation to the Independence Party of New York. In August 2001, Trump changed his party affiliation to Democratic. In September 2009, Trump changed his party affiliation back to the Republican Party. In December 2011, Trump changed to "no party affiliation" (independent). In April 2012, Trump again returned to the Republican Party.[23]

Positively Churchillian!

In that sense only I hasten to add!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seymour M Hersh
9 hours ago, Cade said:

Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House:
Good evening.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak directly to the American people tonight about how we can end this shutdown and meet the needs of the American people.

Sadly, much of what we have heard from President Trump throughout this senseless shutdown has been full of misinformation and even malice.

The president has chosen fear. We want to start with the facts.

The fact is: on the very first day of this Congress, House Democrats passed Senate Republican legislation to reopen government and fund smart, effective border security solutions.

But the president is rejecting these bipartisan bills which would reopen government – over his obsession with forcing American taxpayers to waste billions of dollars on an expensive and ineffective wall – a wall he always promised Mexico would pay for.

The fact is: President Trump has chosen to hold hostage critical services for the health, safety and wellbeing of the American people and withhold the paychecks of 800,000 innocent workers across the nation – many of them veterans.

He promised to keep government shutdown for “months or years” – no matter whom it hurts. That’s just plain wrong.

The fact is: We all agree that we need to secure our borders, while honoring our values: we can build the infrastructure and roads at our ports of entry; we can install new technology to scan cars and trucks for drugs coming into our nation; we can hire the personnel we need to facilitate trade and immigration at the border; and we can fund more innovation to detect unauthorized crossings.

The fact is: the women and children at the border are not a security threat, they are a humanitarian challenge – a challenge that President Trump’s own cruel and counterproductive policies have only deepened.

And the fact is: President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must reopen the government.

Thank you.

 

Chuck Schumer, Senate minority leader

Thank you, Speaker Pelosi.

My fellow Americans, we address you tonight for one reason only: the president of the United States – having failed to get Mexico to pay for his ineffective, unnecessary border wall, and unable to convince the Congress or the American people to foot the bill – has shut down the government.

American democracy doesn’t work that way. We don’t govern by temper tantrum. No president should pound the table and demand he gets his way or else the government shuts down, hurting millions of Americans who are treated as leverage.

Tonight – and throughout this debate and his presidency – President Trump has appealed to fear, not facts. Division, not unity.

Make no mistake: Democrats and the president both want stronger border security. However, we sharply disagree with the president about the most effective way to do it.

So, how do we untangle this mess?

There is an obvious solution: separate the shutdown from the arguments over border security. There is bipartisan legislation – supported by Democrats and Republicans – to reopen government while allowing debate over border security to continue.

There is no excuse for hurting millions of Americans over a policy difference. Federal workers are about to miss a paycheck. Some families can’t get a mortgage to buy a new home. Farmers and small businesses won’t get loans they desperately need.

Most presidents have used Oval Office addresses for noble purposes. This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis, stoke fear, and divert attention from the turmoil in his administration.

My fellow Americans, there is no challenge so great that our nation cannot rise to meet it. We can reopen the government AND continue to work through disagreements about policy. We can secure our border without an expensive, ineffective wall. And we can welcome legal immigrants and refugees without compromising safety and security.

The symbol of America should be the Statue of Liberty, not a thirty-foot wall.

So our suggestion is a simple one: Mr President, reopen the government and we can work to resolve our differences over border security. But end this shutdown now.

Thank you.

 

:greggy:

 

 

Dwb5rP9X0AAg-74.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig Gordons Gloves

I watched him last night - 2 things that i noticed.

 

1) His central message was "Brown people are coming to kill you and your family and feed drugs to everyone you love while also stealing all of your jobs"

2) The 'speech' being 9 mins is the absolute maximum of his attention span and i'm pretty sure the only reason he managed to stick to the speech, which he was quite obviously reading directly from the autocue, was because Pence was stood behind the camera with a big bowl of ice cream and a sign that says "This is for you if you only read what's there".

 

Btw, i also think that Schumer and Pelosi didn't do so well either but they also didn't use false claims throughout to try and create an environment of fear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack
1 minute ago, Craig Gordons Gloves said:

I watched him last night - 2 things that i noticed.

 

1) His central message was "Brown people are coming to kill you and your family and feed drugs to everyone you love while also stealing all of your jobs"

2) The 'speech' being 9 mins is the absolute maximum of his attention span and i'm pretty sure the only reason he managed to stick to the speech, which he was quite obviously reading directly from the autocue, was because Pence was stood behind the camera with a big bowl of ice cream and a sign that says "This is for you if you only read what's there".

 

Btw, i also think that Schumer and Pelosi didn't do so well either but they also didn't use false claims throughout to try and create an environment of fear. 

Do you have any evidence, of these supposed Trump "false claims?"

 

I have not heard of these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig Gordons Gloves
2 minutes ago, Barack said:

Do you have any evidence, of these supposed Trump "false claims?"

 

I have not heard of these.

 

Most of the networks provided either live fact checking or closely following.  I'll go with the slightly less partisan NPR reporting.

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683205814/fact-check-trumps-oval-office-pitch-for-a-border-wall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobsharp

I listened to our local radio this morning, the guy had a regular guest on, the man is Canadian but is resident in the States as a reporter on U.S.Politics. He commented about Trump making a campaign speech, and then said and the opposition response was by two geriatrics who said nothing, the way it came out it was comical, and just about summed up the state of U.S. politics at the moment.Mrs Pelosi should invest in as I did implants to keep your denture firm instead of constantly as she seems to do having to put it back in place with her tongue whilst speaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack
3 minutes ago, Craig Gordons Gloves said:

 

Most of the networks provided either live fact checking or closely following.  I'll go with the slightly less partisan NPR reporting.

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683205814/fact-check-trumps-oval-office-pitch-for-a-border-wall

Was kidding...but cheers, I'll have a read anyway.

 

:lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig Gordons Gloves
9 minutes ago, Barack said:

Was kidding...but cheers, I'll have a read anyway.

 

:lol:

 

 

D'oh! My excuse is that it's been a busy week and i'm taking everything at face value :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack
Posted (edited)

Democrats agree to Wall funding, in meeting with Nancy & Chuck! :scenes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. Not really. They said no, he slammed the table, said: "Bye-bye" and walked out.

 

Mitch McConnell then accused the Democrats of: "opposing the president out of partisan spite." :rofl:

 

You remember Mitch, don't you? Mitch said this, once upon a time, in case you've forgotten the definition of partisan spite...

 

"One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama, 'You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy."

 

And this...in the spirit of bipartisan politics...

 

 

 

"Donald Trump insisted again yesterday that Barack Obama "did nothing" about the threat posed by Russia's attack on U.S. elections in 2016. This is an odd thing for the Republican president to say.

After all, Trump -- the direct beneficiary of Moscow's intelligence operation -- has spent the better part of two years pretending Russia wasn't responsible for the attack; he's done nothing to punish Russia for its intervention in our elections; and he hasn't taken steps to protect us from further attacks.

But of particular interest is the idea that Trump's predecessor sat on his hands and let the intervention happen. There's certainly room for debate about whether Obama could have gone further, but it's factually wrong to say he "did nothing." What the Democratic president did was try to generate bipartisan support for an American response to a foreign attack -- which did not happen in large part because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell didn't want it to.

 

 

Oh, Mitchy, Mitchy...enjoy your last sunset at the top. 

 

Edited by Barack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly American
4 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

As the post of mine you quoted said, the points made by Pelosi and Schumer were spot on but would IMO have been more persuasive without the hypocrisy and Kennedyesque  rhetoric.

Do try to pay attention (with apologies for being sanctimonious!).

 

I pointed out that what you called hypocrisy wasn't. That was the point* of my reply to you. It's a reading thing.

 

*As Uly continues to note, engaging with you is a pretty pointless activity, so I'll quit now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
13 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

 

I pointed out that what you called hypocrisy wasn't. That was the point* of my reply to you. It's a reading thing.

 

*As Uly continues to note, engaging with you is a pretty pointless activity, so I'll quit now.

I think it was hypocrisy. And I am not alone on that.The fact you said it wsn't hypocrisy doesn't mean it wasn't hypocrisy. Whatever Uly may think.

"A reading thing"? Patronise away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ulysses
5 hours ago, Ugly American said:

 

FFS either try and pay attention or stop spamming the thread.

 

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ulysses
20 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

 

 pretty pointless activity

 

It ain't pretty, that's for sure.

 

Lesson learnt, I trust?  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert
34 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

It ain't pretty, that's for sure.

 

Lesson learnt, I trust?  :thumbsup:

Isn't about time you gave up pretending you are ignoring me. And failing to persuade others to do so. A bit pathetic really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×