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.
At one point during the meeting, according to the Wall Street Journal, Pelosi interrupted Nielsen, who was citing statistics related to the border, including how many criminal illegal immigrants attempted to enter the U.S. last year. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “I reject your facts,” Pelosi told Nielsen “These aren’t my facts," Nielsen shot back. "These are the facts.”
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
"Facts" coming from the White House are open to question without evidence being presented to support those "facts" especially when the "facts" are related to Trumps pet project.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
what facts were presented incorrectly?
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
"Facts" coming from the White House are open to question without evidence being presented to support those "facts" especially when the "facts" are related to Trumps pet project.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
what facts were presented incorrectly?
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
"Facts" coming from the White House are open to question without evidence being presented to support those "facts" especially when the "facts" are related to Trumps pet project.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
what facts were presented incorrectly?
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
what facts were presented incorrectly?
What evidence was presented to show the reported facts are facts and not assertions ?
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
"Facts" coming from the White House are open to question without evidence being presented to support those "facts" especially when the "facts" are related to Trumps pet project.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
what facts were presented incorrectly?
Shouldn't you have included in your OP what "facts" were questioned? Then also shown how these "facts" are correct and not fabricated?
I mean, just claiming somethings "a fact", doesn't necessarily make it "a fact"!
Nielsen reportedly told the Democrats at the meeting that border officials along the U.S.-Mexico border had apprehended about 3,000 people with terrorist ties and 17,000 criminals last year. Pelosi also asked the DHS head whether she was counting anyone crossing the border illegally as having a criminal record, with the administration denying that’s how the figure was devised.
I presented a news article for discussion. In the article, the facts that are in dispute weren't mentioned.
Nielsen reportedly told the Democrats at the meeting that border officials along the U.S.-Mexico border had apprehended about 3,000 people with terrorist ties and 17,000 criminals last year.
. I was curious to know how you were privy to the facts and could make the comment you made, without being full of crap.
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude
"Facts" coming from the White House are open to question without evidence being presented to support those "facts" especially when the "facts" are related to Trumps pet project.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, also criticized Nielsen’s presentation, telling Bloomberg that it “was not a credible presentation.”
“It was preposterous,” Durbin said. “At a time when we have the lowest level of apprehensions at the border — stopping people from coming in illegally — the lowest level historically, she is saying that we have all these terrorists and criminals and all these people on their way in.”
lol, see the post above yours. I listed the facts that were in the article, then listed another fact that showed the known crossing numbers of those apprehended.
But you win, you are superior. you get the prize, the big trophy, the number one spot. your crown should be in the mail.
You could also argue that anything coming out of the mouth of a politician from Illinois should be closely scrutinized.