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.

 

Fox News Savagely Fact Checked trumps border speech

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Agreed!!




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
What is amazing is that there are some of his supporters who will still respond as if he is infallible.

Or they will just say they don’t care

I don’t know what worse but I am really struggling to see how they can continue supporting him after this


Maybe some think he is infallibale.

Some anti trumpers think he is always wrong as well.

Meanwhile, this fact check is garbage, much like the cnn on was.

I will go thru it point by point even though it is making almost identical arguments that the cnn one was in a moment



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:30 PM
link   
I love when people pretend illegal border crossing apprehensions are the same as illegal border crossings. Illegal border crossing apprehensions are down, sure, but that is not he same as illegal border crossings, as Shep Smith and his base likes to pretend.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:33 PM
link   
That isn't really technically an opportunity cost but let's not get bogged down In semantics.

1. Is that 100b a verified net cost and if so what's the source.

2. What evidence is there that the wall will reduce immigration by sufficient to be cost effective.

3. Would alternative ways of reducing immigration be more cost effective.

4. Have you apologised to uncommitted for your post in page 1. Manners cost nothing after all (unlike the wall).



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Wow. What a savage fail by the MSM.

Love how the Fox haters are now (for one post anyway) onboard with Fox reporting. Haha



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: ScepticScot

When one has a broken water pipe...it is easier to fix and will cost less in damages if you can stop the incoming flow. A wall is a workable deterrent to lessen the flow of illegal immigrants from continuously accumulating.

Our country can then focus on fixing the broken pipe and actual clean up of our other immigrant policies. In the long term money saved will cover future maintenance of the wall.


If it's being sold as a way of reducing crime then surely the comparison is with other ways if reducing crime for the same money.

For example the total cost of building the wall is almost combined annual budget of ICE, the coast guard &'the FBI combined.

What would be the more effective way of decreasing crime & illegal immigration. The wall or increasing these agencies budgets?



It’s a one-off cost
Not an annual cost
It’s a good use of the money. It will work to reduce the number illegal immigrants.
Reducing the number of illegal immigrants is something the democrats and their supporters want to do.
You know that right?


It's not just a one off cost as will need a lot of maintenance and on going manpower.

It's also a pretty big one off cost and the point is the money could possibly be used far more effectively.

If there is a reliable study showing the wall is the best way to reduce illegal immigration then fine. But I suspect if there was it would be all over these threads.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
a reply to: ScepticScot

Wow. What a savage fail by the MSM.

Love how the Fox haters are now (for one post anyway) onboard with Fox reporting. Haha


Can you show where I referenced fox news?



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Lets go through your statements one by one.



“The government’s statistics show that there is less violent crime by the undocumented immigrant population than by the general population,” he said.


Notice he doesnt cite any actual studies anywhere. This is just asserted.

I assume he is referencing studies from groups like the Cato institute, that like illegal immigration. I have seen there studies that rely on individual states, and will say they had x number of homicides but only a few were committed by illegals.

The states actually have a more difficult time of tracking the status of illegals, and these numbers are small samples.

Nonetheless, Shep says the governments numbers on violent crime, yet doesnt cite them. Here are some government numbers.


A new report on federal convictions reveals that nearly half were committed by “non-citizens,” with most likely to be illegal immigrants.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission, reviewing data from 2011-2016, said that 44.2 percent of those convicted of violating a federal law were “non-citizens.”

...

For perspective, CIS Research Director Steven Camarota said that “non-citizens” make up about 8.4 percent of the U.S., so their criminal impact is “2.5 times their percentage of the population.”



www.washingtonexaminer.com...

More to follow



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: dug88


Hmmm actually....most of the heroin in north america comes from Afghanistan....


So? Do you have some reason to believe that it is not coming across the southern border? Are you unaware of the unholy alliances between some Mexican cartels and some Muslim terrorist groups?

There are only so many ways to get that crap in the country, including the borders. Since we don't share a border with Afghanistan, it has to come here another way.


Well....ummmm american military planes lol

www.presstv.com...


there was zero opium being produced before the US invasion,” the academic said.

“The first thing in the first year the US did was to release all the drug lords, set them up, and tell them to plant away. Within two years, Afghanistan was setting world records every single year in opium production as US troops guarded the poppy fields and supported the creation of a number of labs which were refining the opium into heroin, which was then transported to the West in Global Hawks – US military vehicles that can fly all way around the world without refueling,” he noted.



That's the funny thing about this whole wall thing....and just about every excuse america makes. The american government profits from the illegal drug trade, corporate lobbyists profit from illegal immigrants.

The american government doesn't want to stop illegal immigration or the drug trade. Why would they want to stop something their own CIA agents help facilitate?

That's the best part of it all....the complete denial or ignorance of the population as to the fact that the american government is responsible for these things. I mean even [url=https://beta.ctvnews.ca/national/business/2018/12/7/1_4208596.html]the president uses illegal workers in his businesses...
edit on 9/1/2019 by dug88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Here we are stuck in the little picture with facts. How about we look at the bigger picture. Clearly there is a drug problem regardless of where and how it gets into this country. Coming from Mexico is obviously one of the ways coming in over the border. Before I go further though lets get this "Fact" Established. Oddly enough coming from a right wing news source. Go figure.



This is a LOT of people dying from drugs and a LOT of money is spent all over the place trying to stop it. At least it is now. Some of us with a brain know that past administrations have proven to be behind bringing the drugs in themselves with their own little side set ups. Example, Fast and Furious. Ring a Bell?

Now why is it that back in the days there were a lot of leaders all for taking measures to protect that southern border? Another fact POTUS got right in his little 8 minutes last night and again brought to us by the same right leaning news channel



Oh and we have this little blurb also



Since we are sticking with facts here though, why the sudden change of heart? Why the strong stance in days gone by and now that we can actually FIX at least some of the problem they dont want it anymore? Do you not consider this a bit of a head scratcher? The ways they wanted to deal with it in the past would have eventually of cost the same amount to build the wall over time. Or would it? Hard to say really because they never really said what it is they actually wanted to do. They just talked about needing to take action on it to make it more secure. I guess we were just suppose to trust that they would get right on that.

How much has it cost us in pain and suffering with the way it is now? The deaths, the assaults, the rapes, the medical bills from the disease that comes with some of them. All that adds up in itself at some point. I would imagine after all these years of going unchecked it has probably reached the cost of the wall by now if not surpassed it.

I think it is easy to sit at home all nice and comfy and argue about this all day long. After all it isnt costing you anything in pain. It isnt affecting your daily life. At least not YET. We will just forget about our other fellow Americans that live on these borders and watch it all happen on the daily basis. Watch what happens to their towns etc..

I will leave you with one last piece that I would think should concern you in so many ways, but who knows. Hard to say when we are stuck in the little picture here to quibble about, when in reality there is a BIG Picture.




posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Trump also argued for his wall by saying that immigrants carry illegal drugs across the border, but Smith pointed out that a wall wouldn’t make much difference there.




“Government statistics show much of the heroin actually comes not over the unguarded border but through ports of call,” he said.


So whats the claim here, if wwe cant solve all the drugs, no use doing anything?

Of course the wall wont solve all drugs, but it will solve some. This was not a lie on trumps part, trump never said it would solve all drugs.

He said there is a problem with drugs, and a wall would help.

In addition, its no wonder most drugs are found at ports of entry. A main reason for that would be there are barriers and officers already there.

Who knows how much drugs slip through unaccounted for illegally.

In addition a wall would also stop other prfitiable ventures for cartels, such as human trafficing, which would further hurt their ability to peddle drugs.

So there is a drug problem, the wall can help with some of it, and we should also increas resources at points of enrty.

This is not trump lying in any way.

Next.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: iplay1up2
Here are some snipits, you can watch the Video too. Once again, trump proven wrong.

trump.

After Trump said that “innocent people” are being “horribly victimized” by immigrants who commit crimes, Smith quickly added perspective.


Fact.


“The government’s statistics show that there is less violent crime by the undocumented immigrant population than by the general population,” he said.




Trump also argued for his wall by saying that immigrants carry illegal drugs across the border, but Smith pointed out that a wall wouldn’t make much difference there.



“Government statistics show much of the heroin actually comes not over the unguarded border but through ports of call,” he said.




“He talks about undocumented crossings over the past months. In fact, the number of undocumented crossings over the southern border has been steadily down over the last 10 years and the government reports that there is more outward traffic than inward traffic.”



I know facts are facts. These are facts. trump creats his own. Watch for yourselves. I know the same 10 people, will just ignore the facts.

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





So you and the media are fine with bringing in criminals as long as it results in less the double the crime since your comparing the two.

And once the wall is built more existing resources can be moved to ports of entry and tunnels to tighten them up.

Media says the crossing are becoming less? Or maybe the coyotes that are connected to illegal drug trade are getting better.

There is no reasonable argument to NOT have a wall. Anyone who says there is justifying it irrationally with their emotions.

Mexico does not share the same values or rule of law with effective enforcement that the US does. Cut Mexico off.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
That isn't really technically an opportunity cost but let's not get bogged down In semantics.

1. Is that 100b a verified net cost and if so what's the source.

2. What evidence is there that the wall will reduce immigration by sufficient to be cost effective.

3. Would alternative ways of reducing immigration be more cost effective.

4. Have you apologised to uncommitted for your post in page 1. Manners cost nothing after all (unlike the wall).


Perhaps one should review facts for themselves.



Costs of illegal immigrants: Researchers agree that illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have modest levels of education — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education. There is also agreement that immigrants with this level of education are a significant net fiscal drain, creating more in costs for government than they pay in taxes.

The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants based on their educational attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their children.

2 Based on this estimate, there is a total lifetime fiscal drain of $746.3 billion. This assumes 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country based on the U.S. government's most recent estimate.

The fiscal cost created by illegal immigrants of $746.3 billion compares to total a cost of deportation of $124.1 billion, assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using FY 2012 deportation costs.

Center for Immigration Studies Report

There are many more details provided in this report Deportation vs cost of letting illegal immigrants stay. The facts show by deterring the flow of illegal immigrants to begin with will be a big win by reducing the numbers and costs. A wall is a start to deter such a continuous drain on our economy.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   

“He talks about undocumented crossings over the past months. In fact, the number of undocumented crossings over the southern border has been steadily down over the last 10 years and the government reports that there is more outward traffic than inward traffic.”


How does this prove trump is lying? He said there are a lot of crossings.

Shep says its down ofver the past ten years.

First, who cares that doesnt mean its not a problem. Greenhouse emissions have been steadily declinimmg, so according to shep and company, that must mean problem solved.

Secondly, how dishonest of this fact checker! He says trump says in the past few months, but instead of mentioning stats on the past few months, shep looks at it in a ten year span.

I wonder why he would do that?

Well lets take a look shall we?



Well look at that!

It turns out that apprehensions have been up in past months!

Isnt that odd that a fact checker would distort the truth like that?


In conclusions, this fact check was savage all right, but not in a positive way.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Great post.
Sheppard Smith is a whiny little gob#e who is just like the derranged idiots on CNN. Instead of getting the obvious and well made point, they babble on about irrelevent nonsense to try and deflect from the problem at hand.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Do you think we could find a single Democrat who could just tell the damn truth and state that they don't want the wall because they need the illegals for future votes?

Just one? Ocasio Cortez is kinda dumb, she might actually let it slip....



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: ScepticScot
That isn't really technically an opportunity cost but let's not get bogged down In semantics.

1. Is that 100b a verified net cost and if so what's the source.

2. What evidence is there that the wall will reduce immigration by sufficient to be cost effective.

3. Would alternative ways of reducing immigration be more cost effective.

4. Have you apologised to uncommitted for your post in page 1. Manners cost nothing after all (unlike the wall).


Perhaps one should review facts for themselves.



Costs of illegal immigrants: Researchers agree that illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have modest levels of education — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education. There is also agreement that immigrants with this level of education are a significant net fiscal drain, creating more in costs for government than they pay in taxes.

The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants based on their educational attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their children.

2 Based on this estimate, there is a total lifetime fiscal drain of $746.3 billion. This assumes 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country based on the U.S. government's most recent estimate.

The fiscal cost created by illegal immigrants of $746.3 billion compares to total a cost of deportation of $124.1 billion, assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using FY 2012 deportation costs.

Center for Immigration Studies Report

There are many more details provided in this report Deportation vs cost of letting illegal immigrants stay. The facts show by deterring the flow of illegal immigrants to begin with will be a big win by reducing the numbers and costs. A wall is a start to deter such a continuous drain on our economy.


The Centre for Immigration Studies is a political organization that conducts studies to try and achieve a pre determined conclusion.

And even if it's figures are correct ( which seems highly unlikely) it still doesn't demonstrate any evidence in favour of building the wall.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf
I love when people pretend illegal border crossing apprehensions are the same as illegal border crossings. Illegal border crossing apprehensions are down, sure, but that is not he same as illegal border crossings, as Shep Smith and his base likes to pretend.


You are correct.

And in fact over the past few months apprehensions are actually up as the graph I posted shows. The highest numbers since 2014 except when the unaccompanied minor crisis under Obama occured.



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Liberals just love endless open borders as they do in Europe it seems



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: dug88


The american government doesn't want to stop illegal immigration or the drug trade. Why would they want to stop their own CIA agents help facilitate?


Oh dear... don't you know the government doesn't like competition???


That's the best part of it all....the complete denial or ignorance of the population as to the fact that the american government is responsible for these things.


Everyone knows... it's just that some make excuses and others blame only some of the guilty.




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join