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.

 

Former Democrat Claims Democrat Party Being Paid Millions by Cartels

page: 4
78
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: RickyD


Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea


Of course. The wall serves no other purpose but as a monument to Trumps ego. Which is why his supporters love it and why the Democrats hate it.

We’re dealing with a 72 year old lifelong rich narcissist who’s never had to deal with real life in any substantial way. This isn’t rocket surgery.


And the "No Wall" serves the bribees bank accounts well 🤫




posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: underwerks

Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea? I mean they voted for it previously right? How do you explain that? So they were for it but now its either they are opposing it solely because trump wants it and thats pretty bad optics on its own...or...they got paid off and are opposing anything that would hamper the cartels. Or can you explain why the 180?


It might be because he let the Government shut down for the longest period in U.S. history, while also being the only President in U.S. history to not give the speech for Congress.



He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.

— Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution
Though the language of the clause is not specific, since the 1930s, the President has made this report annually in late January or early February. Between 1934 and 2013 the date has been as early as January 3,[6] and as late as February 12.[7]

While not required to deliver a speech, every president since Woodrow Wilson, with the notable exception of Herbert Hoover,[8] has made at least one State of the Union report as a speech delivered before a joint session of Congress. Before that time, most presidents delivered the State of the Union as a written report.[6]

Since Franklin Roosevelt, the State of the Union is given typically each January before a joint session of the United States Congress and is held in the House of Representatives chamber of the United States Capitol. Newly inaugurated presidents generally deliver an address to Congress in February of the first year of their term, but this speech is not officially considered to be a "State of the Union".[6]


en.wikipedia.org...

I'm thinking they didn't like this very much. The first televised interaction with Trump, Pelosi, and Schumer was bad, very bad. You don't put stuff like that on camera and circulate it to the press. From that moment on, he had to stick it. Hopefully the blame game is getting old by now. If you look at it from an unbias, non-party-affiliated manner, you see the President trying to pull a totalitarian power move over an issue that, while severe, and will only get worse so needs to be dealt with asap, isn't on the level for this kind of behavior to begin with. I don't know if the people who get caught up in the arguing, # talking, and debates on the internet about the topic really take the time to grasp what the partial shutdown was slowly doing and making worse. Had it gone on for another month, all hell would've broken loose, even our security at the airports was vulnerable. Who knows what got through where in that period of time, if you really want to nitpick about these scenarios where and how drugs are smuggled. Most of us who aren't claiming ignorance via Trumps charisma know that the drugs aren't slipped through "weak" spots in the border where no one are. All of that # is under heavy surveillance, the vehicle going to meet the smugglers would probably get popped before it even made it there to pick up the drugs. Same thing goes for human beings.

They get through in groups at lucky moments in certain spots, but the drugs go through legal ports of entry with any form of goods you can imagine. They also get welded into mechanical parts deep inside the automobile. Ingenious methods including packing it with stuff that will always cover the scent. If the smuggler has to take the vehicle to a mechanic or spend a day or night with cartel friends waiting for them stateside to be partially disassembled to retrieve the goods, how are immigration agents going to find it when it's just another car or truck in a long line waiting to get in, day in and day out?

The wall is simply too extra to do this over. It will help keep immigrants, theives, gang members, drug dealers without the drugs on them, and under educated ruffians out but it's not the end all solution it's touted as. It's not a big enough immediate emergency going on right now, out of control, to shut down most of the entire federal government, making almost a million go without pay for an unknown period of time, with many Government offices and vitally important agencies simply being closed. It can cripple a nation, and there's already been talk that it will noticably impact our growth for that period. It just gets worse from there. The biggest superpower on Earth with the most enemies on Earth, constantly plotting against it but it's pants were down, ass showing, for the entire world to see over this of all issues.
edit on 1/27/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: underwerks


Crime only works as a viable monetary gain if the transfer of goods is as cheap as possible. If it takes millions to get an item to it's market point, then kidnappings, and extorsion would make better sense for money than drugs. This isn't a regular business with regulations, it's a cheap as possible model or move on to something else. Larger cartels can afford to spend a little extra on new ideas, but the smaller guys (which there are many which are allowed to function as long as they pay into the larger guys pockets) can't afford that.

And as I pointed out in another thread;
"Cancer Treatments isn't 100% effective either, so should we just stop doing that?"

The wall isn't going to 100% do anything other then stand there, but the deterrent that it creates for people just wanting to cross the boarder and drop off packages, transfer people, or grab and go kidnappings will get lowered in frequency that just like cancer treatments, makes it a good enough solution to implement .


The thing is, that no matter what measures are taken to combat the drug trade the amount of money that is made through it will always dwarf any attempt to try and stop it.

If I can make an ink pen for 15 cents and sell it for $15,000 no government on earth will be able to stop that. No wall, no laws, nothing will stop that. I think most people seriously underestimate how much money the sale of illegal drugs brings in.



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: RickyD


Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea


Of course. The wall serves no other purpose but as a monument to Trumps ego. Which is why his supporters love it and why the Democrats hate it.

We’re dealing with a 72 year old lifelong rich narcissist who’s never had to deal with real life in any substantial way. This isn’t rocket surgery.


And the "No Wall" serves the bribees bank accounts well 🤫


Which bank accounts? The ones of the border patrol who get fed millions yearly by the cartels or the imaginary story in the OP?

Please be specific.



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: RickyD


Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea


Of course. The wall serves no other purpose but as a monument to Trumps ego. Which is why his supporters love it and why the Democrats hate it.

We’re dealing with a 72 year old lifelong rich narcissist who’s never had to deal with real life in any substantial way. This isn’t rocket surgery.


And the "No Wall" serves the bribees bank accounts well 🤫


Which bank accounts? The ones of the border patrol who get fed millions yearly by the cartels or the imaginary story in the OP?

Please be specific.


LOL you're asking people to be specific ?

👏👌



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: RickyD


Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea


Of course. The wall serves no other purpose but as a monument to Trumps ego. Which is why his supporters love it and why the Democrats hate it.

We’re dealing with a 72 year old lifelong rich narcissist who’s never had to deal with real life in any substantial way. This isn’t rocket surgery.


And the "No Wall" serves the bribees bank accounts well 🤫


Which bank accounts? The ones of the border patrol who get fed millions yearly by the cartels or the imaginary story in the OP?

Please be specific.


LOL you're asking people to be specific ?

👏👌


Can you not?



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

We can stop a lot of it.

I think some people are so vocal about it because they don't want drugs to be harder to get.



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: RickyD


Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea


Of course. The wall serves no other purpose but as a monument to Trumps ego. Which is why his supporters love it and why the Democrats hate it.

We’re dealing with a 72 year old lifelong rich narcissist who’s never had to deal with real life in any substantial way. This isn’t rocket surgery.


And the "No Wall" serves the bribees bank accounts well 🤫


Which bank accounts? The ones of the border patrol who get fed millions yearly by the cartels or the imaginary story in the OP?

Please be specific.


LOL you're asking people to be specific ?

👏👌


Can you not?


can you will?



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Right. I keep telling my wife this. Human traffickers have access to technology that compltely nullifies any challenges posed by walls. Take for example teleportation and worm holes. You can transport a whole bus load of immigrants right through any wall, granny’s and all.
a reply to: iplay1up2



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Did we really need a ‘former democrat’ to tell us this??

Anybody with two IQ points to rub together already knew (it’s more than obvious) that democrats are on the take when it comes to drug cartels and human traffickers.

“No no, we vehemently oppose any and all border control laws”, kinda gives it away.



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: apydomis
Right. I keep telling my wife this. Human traffickers have access to technology that compltely nullifies any challenges posed by walls. Take for example teleportation and worm holes. You can transport a whole bus load of immigrants right through any wall, granny’s and all.
a reply to: iplay1up2



FINALLY we have the secret !! 😎

They hacked DARPA !!



posted on Jan, 27 2019 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aallanon
Nancy is afraid of a visit from MS13


I bet she welcomes "the stuffed envelopes" though 😎

Never forget the "cashless society" isn't for the elite 😎



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

If you still think this is about dems and reps, you're not paying attention. We are fully aware that the republican party has been, at very least, partially compromised. The democrat party has been overwhelmingly compromised. We're trying to save the last vestiges of american civilization and the republican party is a much more suitable vehicle to do it with than the democrat party and it's far more viable than trying to find another vehicle (e.g. independent parties).



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks
So when actual drug dealers say that the wall is an obstacle and problem to their operation, they're lying? Gotcha, sounds like you really know what you're talking about.



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 12:18 AM
link   
So 90% of intercepted drugs come through regulated ports of entry? All that means is drug enforcement officials are stopping a lot of drugs at the ports.
It says nothing about the quantity of drugs coming through the unguarded sections of the border.
In other words that 90% is pretty much a meaningless noise.
Border patrol documentaries are always showing massive evidence of traffic coming through remote unguarded sections, empty shell casings, tire tracks, a lot of phorensic evidence of illegal activity.
Just because you aren't seeing megatons of drugs being intercepted doesn't mean it ain't coming through.



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Chadwickus

If you still think this is about dems and reps, you're not paying attention. We are fully aware that the republican party has been, at very least, partially compromised. The democrat party has been overwhelmingly compromised. We're trying to save the last vestiges of american civilization and the republican party is a much more suitable vehicle to do it with than the democrat party and it's far more viable than trying to find another vehicle (e.g. independent parties).


Best you remind the op then, not me.




edit on 28/1/19 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Nothing in the OP indicated the republicans didn't have their traitors or scum bags. In fact it quoted nancy in saying that it was a "bipartisan" delegation. So I'm not entirely sure why you thought people needed go multiple links deep to learn that republicans were part of the delegation too, as it was posted right in the OP.



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 01:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Chadwickus

If you still think this is about dems and reps, you're not paying attention. We are fully aware that the republican party has been, at very least, partially compromised. The democrat party has been overwhelmingly compromised. We're trying to save the last vestiges of american civilization and the republican party is a much more suitable vehicle to do it with than the democrat party and it's far more viable than trying to find another vehicle (e.g. independent parties).


Best you remind the op then, not me.





Oh-So Stern and Serious



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: r0xor

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: underwerks

Yes...its much more believable cause "orange man bad" yea? I mean they voted for it previously right? How do you explain that? So they were for it but now its either they are opposing it solely because trump wants it and thats pretty bad optics on its own...or...they got paid off and are opposing anything that would hamper the cartels. Or can you explain why the 180?


It might be because he let the Government shut down for the longest period in U.S. history, while also being the only President in U.S. history to not give the speech for Congress.



He shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.

— Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution
Though the language of the clause is not specific, since the 1930s, the President has made this report annually in late January or early February. Between 1934 and 2013 the date has been as early as January 3,[6] and as late as February 12.[7]

While not required to deliver a speech, every president since Woodrow Wilson, with the notable exception of Herbert Hoover,[8] has made at least one State of the Union report as a speech delivered before a joint session of Congress. Before that time, most presidents delivered the State of the Union as a written report.[6]

Since Franklin Roosevelt, the State of the Union is given typically each January before a joint session of the United States Congress and is held in the House of Representatives chamber of the United States Capitol. Newly inaugurated presidents generally deliver an address to Congress in February of the first year of their term, but this speech is not officially considered to be a "State of the Union".[6]


en.wikipedia.org...

I'm thinking they didn't like this very much. The first televised interaction with Trump, Pelosi, and Schumer was bad, very bad. You don't put stuff like that on camera and circulate it to the press. From that moment on, he had to stick it. Hopefully the blame game is getting old by now. If you look at it from an unbias, non-party-affiliated manner, you see the President trying to pull a totalitarian power move over an issue that, while severe, and will only get worse so needs to be dealt with asap, isn't on the level for this kind of behavior to begin with. I don't know if the people who get caught up in the arguing, # talking, and debates on the internet about the topic really take the time to grasp what the partial shutdown was slowly doing and making worse. Had it gone on for another month, all hell would've broken loose, even our security at the airports was vulnerable. Who knows what got through where in that period of time, if you really want to nitpick about these scenarios where and how drugs are smuggled. Most of us who aren't claiming ignorance via Trumps charisma know that the drugs aren't slipped through "weak" spots in the border where no one are. All of that # is under heavy surveillance, the vehicle going to meet the smugglers would probably get popped before it even made it there to pick up the drugs. Same thing goes for human beings.

They get through in groups at lucky moments in certain spots, but the drugs go through legal ports of entry with any form of goods you can imagine. They also get welded into mechanical parts deep inside the automobile. Ingenious methods including packing it with stuff that will always cover the scent. If the smuggler has to take the vehicle to a mechanic or spend a day or night with cartel friends waiting for them stateside to be partially disassembled to retrieve the goods, how are immigration agents going to find it when it's just another car or truck in a long line waiting to get in, day in and day out?

The wall is simply too extra to do this over. It will help keep immigrants, theives, gang members, drug dealers without the drugs on them, and under educated ruffians out but it's not the end all solution it's touted as. It's not a big enough immediate emergency going on right now, out of control, to shut down most of the entire federal government, making almost a million go without pay for an unknown period of time, with many Government offices and vitally important agencies simply being closed. It can cripple a nation, and there's already been talk that it will noticably impact our growth for that period. It just gets worse from there. The biggest superpower on Earth with the most enemies on Earth, constantly plotting against it but it's pants were down, ass showing, for the entire world to see over this of all issues.




That's a very damning and very accurate statement, worth repeating...



posted on Jan, 28 2019 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Chadwickus

Nothing in the OP indicated the republicans didn't have their traitors or scum bags. In fact it quoted nancy in saying that it was a "bipartisan" delegation. So I'm not entirely sure why you thought people needed go multiple links deep to learn that republicans were part of the delegation too, as it was posted right in the OP.


Cool story bro.

I guess that’s why this highly starred comment exists huh?





top topics



 
78
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join