Forum Thread

An border deal?

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 36 1 2 3 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I saw on TV that the Dem's want to make an "deal" which includes an new 55 miles of an border "barrier" as they call it now.

    What the hell is going on here? Has Pelosi now become an "weakling" and "liar" ; she always said not a "penny for the "wall". An typical without "backbone" solution which gives Trump another finger , and then the "whole hand". It looks like the same stupidity as with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh , no guts, just "creep" and "bow". Are they so afraid of Trump?

    Yes Trump will "pocket" from it; this is just the start to enrich himself. What an unbelievable stupidity; if he wants to shut down the government again, that's his problem; show for a change who's the "boss" now (The House) and have an "backbone" and don't give in to the "mob". The "Dem's" still have not learned anything since the Hillary disaster.

    It is time the Dem's realize you are dealing with the "mafia mob" and not with just any normal party or non "mob boss" as President. Sorry "business" is not as we are used to; it ts time to adapt to reality!!

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    No comments? Anyway Trump now claims that this country is very rich and can afford a "wall". Wow; no one stood up and said the truth i.e. We are "trillions" in debt (but that does not matter, ask MMT); also only the 1% has "money to burn"; ever looked at L.A. where people sleep under bridges or in tents on the sidewalk, or kids who got ripped away from their parents who now also live in tents. Why does not anyone dare to say that straight into his face?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The building he was in allowed only about 6000 people according to the fire dept.

    Afbeelding kan het volgende bevatten: 1 persoon, tekst

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    He went to the wrong place for a campaign rally against Hispanics, Mexicans, Latinos, because according to statistics, El Paso is 82% Latino-Hispanic. city-data.com/county/El_Paso_County-TX....

    Races in El Paso County, Texas: Hispanic or Latino (82.2%) White Non-Hispanic Alone (12.3%) Black Non-Hispanic Alone (3.2%) Asian alone (1.2%) Two or more races (0.9%)

    Read more: http://www.city-data.com/county/El_Paso_County-TX.html

    And he again lied about by saying they're bringing in drugs, crime and other bullshit because most drugs that come into the USA come in through legal border crossings.

    When I lived near Elephant Butte, New Mexico, we were about 130 miles from El Paso, and used to visit there on occasion (Sam's Club). Down I-25, there are CBP checkpoints along the way back from El Paso, and everyone is required to stop for inspections for people hauling illegals and contraband in their vehicles. They ask people a series of questions and walk the drug interdiction dogs around vehicles in search of drugs, and etc.

    Did you notice the mayor of El Paso and Beto calling trump a liar?

    msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-takes...

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: What the hell is going on here? Has Pelosi now become an "weakling" and "liar" ; she always said not a "penny for the "wall". An typical without "backbone" solution which gives Trump another finger , and then the "whole hand". It looks like the same stupidity as with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh , no guts, just "creep" and "bow". Are they so afraid of Trump?

    What Speaker Pelosi said on numerous occasions is that she will not give a single penny for Donald's vanity project in order to reopen the government. Her position all along was to go through a process called regular order to negotiate funding for the various agencies affected in the current budget debate.

    Donald is getting 55 miles of new fencing and Congress gets to dictate exactly where that fencing goes. Our border with Mexico is 1,954 miles in length. Donald promised a big, beautiful wall along the entirety of the 1,954 miles and is instead getting 55 miles of fencing. And that's with Republicans controlling the Executive Branch and the Senate. I'd call that a pretty damn good deal for us.

    I personally think physical barriers are a waste of taxpayer dollars, but I'm also a pragmatist. I'll happily take 85% of something I'm for if the alternative is zero percent. That's something Bernie or busters really need to learn.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote: What the hell is going on here? Has Pelosi now become an "weakling" and "liar" ; she always said not a "penny for the "wall". An typical without "backbone" solution which gives Trump another finger , and then the "whole hand". It looks like the same stupidity as with Gorsuch and Kavanaugh , no guts, just "creep" and "bow". Are they so afraid of Trump?

    What Speaker Pelosi said on numerous occasions is that she will not give a single penny for Donald's vanity project in order to reopen the government. Her position all along was to go through a process called regular order to negotiate funding for the various agencies affected in the current budget debate.

    Yes, that is my understanding. No hostage notations. Trump was holding the US government (workers) hostage as a political tactic to accomplish a political goal. There was nothing about "The Wall" that required the government to shut down until it got more funding.

    Pelosi, along with Democrats and Republicans alike, fully understood that if Trump was successful once at using government assets as hostages, he would use such tactics again and again. Not just with another shut down, but other ways of causing serious government crisis through executive orders until he gets what he wants. He could punish individual states, or groups of people, etc using his executive powers.

    For Trump, the worse that will ever happen to him, not matter how bad it gets for the country, is that he retires and goes back to playing golf at Mar-a-largo. He can afford to double down, triple down, issue direct threats, raise the stakes as high as he wants, on and on and on. He literally could walk out on the WH lawn, and use a gun to execute someone, and he would not be arrested for it. It just would mean he would be forced to immediately resign. He'd be playing golf the very next day as a free man. Trump understands he is technically untouchable.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Pelosi is in complete control. She will not come out and call it a big win and do a dance like Trump does. She won on this border deal and somehow may let Trump call it a win for him..."the wall is being built" and "more money is on the way " See his Tweets:

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

    Was just presented the concept and parameters of the Border Security Deal by hard working Senator Richard Shelby. Looking over all aspects knowing that this will be hooked up with lots of money from other sources....

    Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump

    ....Will be getting almost $23 BILLION for Border Security. Regardless of Wall money, it is being built as we speak!

    =============================================

    His followers will choose to believe him, but more and more he is looking more pathetic in his continually changing wall story. Ann Coulter has him on a lease on his wall promise. Pelosi will watch him hang himself on the lease.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Reading your reply, it certainly does not show an "win" for Pelosi, let alone "complete control"; giving an 55 mile stretch of "whatever" ("wall or barrier") is like they say in Dutch; give one finger then eventually they will take the whole hand.

    When I negotiated aircraft deals that was the "golden rule" ; they did not call me "doctor NO" for nothing.

    Especially if you have to deal with the "mob" then "normal" rules are out of the window. Wake up America.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:

    Reading your reply, it certainly does not show an "win" for Pelosi, let alone "complete control"; giving an 55 mile stretch of "whatever" ("wall or barrier") is like they say in Dutch; give one finger then eventually they will take the whole hand.

    No one, especially Speaker Pelosi, is claiming she or the Democrats have "complete control" of anything other than the House of Representatives.

    We still have a Senate and entire Executive Branch under "complete control" of the Republican Party whether we like it or not and it will be that way for a minimum of two years.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Pretty bad when a president (not mine) and a political party holds the US Government hostage and demands a ransom for a singular thing (wall-fence-wfe) and federal employees pay. The constitution desperately needs revision/amended, presidents have too much power, especially for someone like trump who are power hungry.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: Pretty bad when a president (not mine) and a political party holds the US Government hostage and demands a ransom for a singular thing (wall-fence-wfe) and federal employees pay. The constitution desperately needs revision/amended, presidents have too much power, especially for someone like trump who are power hungry.

    We don't need a Constitutional Amendment to reign in an out of control President. All we need is a Legislative branch with a backbone. We got one after the Nixon fiasco, but the powers Congress took back after his resignation have been slowly given back to the Executive throughout the years culminating in Congress abrogating damn near all of their power in the post 9/11 days.

    A President is only as powerful as Congress and the courts allow them to be.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dockadams Wrote: Pretty bad when a president (not mine) and a political party holds the US Government hostage and demands a ransom for a singular thing (wall-fence-wfe) and federal employees pay. The constitution desperately needs revision/amended, presidents have too much power, especially for someone like trump who are power hungry.

    We don't need a Constitutional Amendment to reign in an out of control President. All we need is a Legislative branch with a backbone. We got one after the Nixon fiasco, but the powers Congress took back after his resignation have been slowly given back to the Executive throughout the years culminating in Congress abrogating damn near all of their power in the post 9/11 days.

    A President is only as powerful as Congress and the courts allow them to be.

    Which is exactly why we need an amendment to reign in the powers of a president, the congress hasn't any gonads or intestinal fortitude to stop a president like trump, who has shown he is not presidential material. Congress seems to have a bunch of gutless idiots.

    And, not to change the subject here, but remember when Obama first became president? The secret service was going to take away his blackberry?

    cnet.com/news/obamas-blackberry-brings-...

    Trump's smartphone needs to be deactivated, I'm fed up with his stupid tweets. The man is out of control.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: Which is exactly why we need an amendment to reign in the powers of a president, the congress hasn't any gonads or intestinal fortitude to stop a president like trump, who has shown he is not presidential material.

    I guess I'm just confused as to exactly what you'd like to see enshrined in the Constitution.

    Article I gives Congress vast powers. Congress has willingly given up much of those powers and handed them off to the President. It doesn't take a constitutional amendment to reassert Congressional authority. It takes a Congress that has enough balls to stand up to the President.

    Regardless of what route you want to take, Congress is involved. A Constitutional Amendment must be voted on and passed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress (unless you go the route of two-thirds of states holding a convention) before the individual states vote on it.

    There's a reason the Constitution has only been amended seventeen times in our history. It's far easier to just have Congress do it's damn job.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dockadams Wrote: Which is exactly why we need an amendment to reign in the powers of a president, the congress hasn't any gonads or intestinal fortitude to stop a president like trump, who has shown he is not presidential material.

    I guess I'm just confused as to exactly what you'd like to see enshrined in the Constitution.

    Article I gives Congress vast powers. Congress has willingly given up much of those powers and handed them off to the President. It doesn't take a constitutional amendment to reassert Congressional authority. It takes a Congress that has enough balls to stand up to the President.

    Regardless of what route you want to take, Congress is involved. A Constitutional Amendment must be voted on and passed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress (unless you go the route of two-thirds of states holding a convention) before the individual states vote on it.

    There's a reason the Constitution has only been amended seventeen times in our history. It's far easier to just have Congress do it's damn job.

    It's about time to lobby for another one to restrict presidential powers. The document is outdated. I'd also like to see the second amendment rewritten or repealed too.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dock you are right. Jared got way too much 1800's in his head. Yes there should be an strict re-written enforceable manual which dictates the powers of the President, indeed if only 17 amendments on this outdated 1800's document over 300 years were written then this is laughable. Each time Trump does something; they have to say " we never dealt with that before". But yeah due to the huge corruption right now, how can you straighten this out?. Also if you let the "dumb" States ( Alabama, Oklahoma, N.Dakota, Kentucky, Georgia, S. Carolina, Maine etc. run the show, forget that Congress does anything. The main reason why it does not work is the "electoral college"; if that stupidity would not have existed in 2016 we would have had Hillary as President; she had 3 million more votes. Stupidity and corruption reigns in this country; do something about it and reign in Presidential powers is not on any agenda. An President never should be able to demand "tariffs"( especially if he never studied "trade" or "studied anything in his life), or use the Army for "border control", or "declare" wars on its own. Therefore an "strict" enforceable manual should be written to exactly define the "limits" of an President, so then you don't need a zillion lawyers (or Congress) to explain "what is not described in the Constitution". Or have to dig in an zillion past "case laws", let alone if something never happened before, what to do then etc. Stupidity reigns here. Jared still lives in 1776 and thinks everything is fine the way it is.