It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mexico president cancels Trump summit as wall jibe deepens spat

page: 7
98
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Aazadan

Just watched Trump on Hannity, he reiterated that The Wall is going to be a real wall, like the wall Israel has, he called it the blueprint for our wall. So far Trump has done what he said he was going to do, if it is at all possible, The Wall will be built, not just a continuation of a worthless fence. Maybe it just won't be possible to build The Wall, but you can be sure Trump will do everything he can to get a real wall built.


The vast majority of Israel's wall is just a fence. 80% of it is just a 2 layer chain link fence with razor wire on top of it.




posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I think something no one has considered: American ranchers own land on both sides of the border, and they cross over regularly doing their work on their land. To them, there is no border.

There are fences along much of the Texas border once you get out of Big Bend (maybe near Eagle Pass). But there are regular breaks in the fence so that ranchers can move freely across their land. How is that going to fit into the proposed wall? Will ranchers be forced to divest ranch land?



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan

I think something no one has considered: American ranchers own land on both sides of the border, and they cross over regularly doing their work on their land. To them, there is no border.

There are fences along much of the Texas border once you get out of Big Bend (maybe near Eagle Pass). But there are regular breaks in the fence so that ranchers can move freely across their land. How is that going to fit into the proposed wall? Will ranchers be forced to divest ranch land?


The wall wouldn't directly follow the border, it's actually a few hundred yards inland, in theory it can be as far inland as we want, so those farms can always be on the other side of the wall.

I know there's a similar problem with some of the reservations. When I was visiting Arizona a couple years ago I learned about the Tohono O'odham. Their lands cross into Mexico, and while the US does put some border restrictions on them crossing their own land, the tribe basically works against the US and it's a very porous area. I've been to their reservation, at the road into it is a small border control checkpoint. Basically a simple building with no electricity 4-6 agents, and sometimes a dog. It's extremely common for vehicles to unload illegals about a half mile before the checkpoint, and pick them up on the other side.

Areas like this would be extremely difficult to secure, just this one reservation is larger than some New England states and the US government has limited opportunity to interfere with the tribe. How would they ever build the wall through the land? It's a big detour they'll have to make, but it could be done.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

President Trump should respond by imposing sanctions against Mexico because we do have proof that Mexico has interfered with the U.S. elections. President Trump should then use the money from such sanctions to pay for the wall. If President Trump does that we'll see if Mexico likes it.

Heck, Mexico and the Obama administration could be prosecuted for the whole "Fast and Furious" scandal, and other similar operations done under ex-President Obama. The President of Mexico, and several Mexican diplomats even went to the press claiming the reason why the Mexican drug cartels got weapons from the U.S. was because of the Second Amendment rights. The ironic part is that there is evidence the President of Mexico, his officials and the Obama administration were well aware that they were the reason for the drug cartels getting firearms from the U.S. Of course, ex-President Obama probably already issued several pardons, including to himself "just in case" they were prosecuted.

edit on 26-1-2017 by ElectricUniverse because: correct comment.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Its ridiculous to think Obama, or any president, can pardon someone without that person having been convicted first. So there's no "just in case". That is called "immunity" and is not a power enjoyed by the executive branch as far as I am aware.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Like that ever Stopped ex-President Obama from imposing policies without the consent of Congress such as the several EPA mandates imposed by the Obama administration.


Cliff Gilley, Technologist, Problem Solver, Product Manager, Lawyer, and all-around fun guy.
Written 13 Nov 2016

As with any legal answer, it depends. This is a long one, so I’ll TL;DR it up here — as far as we know, there is nothing in the Constitution or laws of the US that grant the President such immunity.

First, as to any actions that they take in their official role as President of the United States, they have almost complete immunity from suit except where expressly permitted by law (this is an extension of “sovereign immunity”). When so permitted, they are sued through the office of the President and represented by the Federal lawyers in the Department of Justice.
...
So that leaves us with three possible situations which are entirely unresolved: (1) tortious acts committed while President but unrelated to their authorized legal duties in the office; (2) criminal acts committed but not resolved until after they become President; and (3) criminal acts committed during the Presidency.
...

www.quora.com...

Like i wrote, ex-President Obama has imposed several policies without Congress' approval which in itself is against the law. But will he ever be prosecuted for imposing such policies?



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Its ridiculous to think Obama, or any president, can pardon someone without that person having been convicted first. So there's no "just in case". That is called "immunity" and is not a power enjoyed by the executive branch as far as I am aware.





Absolutely. Indeed, one of the best-known (and controversial) Presidential pardons was Gerald Ford’s preemptive pardon of Richard Nixon. At the time Ford pardoned Nixon, there was no actual prosecution under way, although certainly there was a good chance of one starting soon. Ford’s executive pardon barred any prosecution of Nixon.

However, the President cannot issue a pardon for crimes which had not yet been committed at the time of the pardon.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Screen captured your reply, so that in about two years once things go on a different route i can plaster it all over in your face, if you're still around.
You don't have a clue what your talking about but let me try to explain just a bit. The US imports more than what you think from other countries, once they're gone, the food and other products are also gone. That money you talk about is generated by lots of people, most of them are immigrants that are not even Mexican, they came from other countries, but we know ignorant people like trump think all immigrants are mexican so ok, just think for a moment, once the people that generated that money is gone, the money is gone as well (no one will work those jobs)


And finally, if orange baboon causes that the US is not in a trade deal with the countries that buy the most American products guess what will happen next? once the US can't import because of the excessive taxes and can't export because no one wants to buy, who will buy or how will the US get the money it gets right now? also who will work on those fields/restaurants and whatever? i don't think you understand the impact of the stupidity but all's good all's good.


I'll save the screenshot so you can see back a couple years from now, if we ever get there at all



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 02:03 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert
Fake news.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 02:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Then again we pay for it! Either way WE pay for the stupid wall.

we don't necessarily pay for it, we get more local jobs, and our local businesses get more sales, mexico loses sales and the influx of dollars. IF it is true we have over 60B in trade deficit going their way, abolishing that more than covers the wall.

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Orwells Ghost

So then who pays for it? Please enlighten us. New Trump trickle down economics. Please explain how spending $30 billion on a wall will bring in more money in tax revenue from jobs.


If we pay americans to build and maintain the wall, then americans get paid and the money flows through the economy, they get jobs, they get work, and they get taxed. It generates economic activity, and businesses thrive, the money is not burnt in an offering to the gods. And again wasn't Obama handing 10s of billions to foreign states like iran,iirc?



originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Orwells Ghost
a reply to: Aazadan

Except for those American's who now have an actual income thanks to the job creation that will follow. They'll actually be able to purchase more, and pay more taxes, and they'll be purchasing American. Will it hurt at first? Yep. Why is this so hard to understand?


They won't have an income though. Illegals hold jobs that pay minimum wage or less. When there's no more illegals, those jobs will still pay minimum wage because if you increase it, those jobs will be automated away.

The bottom 50% of this country has 0.4% of all the wealth generation. Every unemployed person could be given a minimum wage job today and it would be less than 1/10 of 1% in increased wealth.

If you cannot start at atleast 35k/year (average, in some places that number is as high as 70k) it's not worth working the job. That applies to creating the job as well.


Machines have been shown to be able to do jobs from managing, to driving trucks, to dermatologist scans of tumors, to radiologists analysis of x-rays. As computing power grows and software innovation continues no job is safe. Expect universal basic income.

As for illegals their presence is merely delaying the adoption of automation. Existing in basically below living wage conditions that foster crime is not acceptable, nor is it any acceptable way to raise a family. If you do not have a living wage, and can provide adequately for children, you shouldn't be allowed to have children that starve and suffer and do not have adequate housing, education, health care, etc, etc, etc.

Minimum wage was once equivalent to about 21 of today's dollars, iirc, it has not kept pace with inflation and the difference in pay has gone up to the top as gravy for the rich.
edit on 27-1-2017 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-1-2017 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
Do we really want to have a hostile nation on our southern border?

Do we really want to have Chinese military bases in Mexico?


Oh you mean like in RED DAWN right? Didnt work out too well then in fiction and in real life woudnt work out as well either.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

If the tribe's land is assisting in trafficking people across our border illegally and they're complicit in it, run the wall right thru their land.

And I say that as someone with Native American blood.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
a reply to: Aazadan

Just watched Trump on Hannity, he reiterated that The Wall is going to be a real wall, like the wall Israel has, he called it the blueprint for our wall. So far Trump has done what he said he was going to do, if it is at all possible, The Wall will be built, not just a continuation of a worthless fence. Maybe it just won't be possible to build The Wall, but you can be sure Trump will do everything he can to get a real wall built.



Or at least where it counts most.





posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: WarriorMH

Somebody on ATS has screens hots of me saying Brexit would be voted in and Trump would become POTUS with the intent of rubbing my face in my own words... maybe this one will actually work out for the screen capturer, but I doubt it.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 05:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: solargeddon

We ARE in a strong position. If we have to pay for the wall, it'll likely be more than compensated by the reduced drain on our economy.


In a way I wish we would just make canal. Sure it took near 33 years to make the Panama canal and it is only 48 miles long, but if we ever managed to complete the full 2000 miles of the Mexican border we would at least have an alternative to the Panama trade route. Also as a bonus Mexico could sell it as a perk to its people because it would expand their trade. We get a barrier, everyone wins.

edit on 27-1-2017 by ThingsThatDontMakeSense because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd


I don't know why Trump thought Mexico would come tamely to the table and pay for the wall



Do we know that Trump thought that?

Or did Trump assume that Nieto would operate with the same lack of respect for the US that his citizens who have crossed our border illegally?

And they have driven up US crime rates and used welfare dollars from various programs which need to be paid back by Mexico.


edit on 27-1-2017 by Miracula2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: mzinga
So ya'll Trump supporters still on board? This 20% import tax on Mexican goods to pay for this stupid wall gets paid by who?!?!? Ya'll..


Mexico simply adds 20% to the cost of imported goods.

We pay for it.


Supply and demand, and price elasticity can not be ignored. If Mexico could just add 20% to the cost of imported goods, they already would have.

Pricing is not a simplistic linear model.
edit on 27/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Some here on this site have suggested that Trump called the meeting off first...posting a tweet by the Prez but according to the OP it sure looks like the Mexican Prez called off the meeting first. What won't some people do to push their progressive agenda.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: WarriorMH

You don't know how homeopathy works.
Like I said yesterday just let Ashley Judd and her idiot friends buy the imports from Mexico because they can afford the tariffs. If they aren't willing to do that for their Mexico then let them buy from China. ☺️



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: burdman30ott6

If Trump fixes the corporate tax codes I'll sing his praises! But in doing so, will eliminate many positions of financial analysts in corporate america.
Good them we can get rid of Soros and his 13 fund managers 😜
edit on 27-1-2017 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
98
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join