And just like that Trump caves.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Southern Guardian
No I never saw this as his top agenda. The top agenda from what I saw was tax reform. I think you just invested yourself into that agenda more than the others.

Are you serious? I don't recall hearing "TAX RE-FORM!" chanted by him or the crowds at his rallies.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Drucifer

Yeah, anyone who thinks the wall isn't a big trump promise wasn't paying attention. There's a reason dems don't want to fund it while they did so many times before. It's central to his re-election campaign. It's kinda sad really, dems would rather have innocent americans killed than lose another presidential election. American lives are worth much less to them than political power. They don't oppose the wall on any other grounds that make any sense.

Stop and think about the country we are living in. It's so debased that both sides will throw their constituents under the bus rather than let the other side have a "win" other than on election night.

Now what the wall is, is up for debate. The idea behind that chant was support for stopping illegal immigration and secure the border. If there is another solution, I'm all ears and I would consider such a proposal him keeping the build the wall promise. But honestly, I would love a sea to shining sea, wall.

a reply to: Dfairlite

There have been a few thread comments about DJT's ability to use covert funding to build the wall.
Covert funds probably have covert oversight and use proprietary sourcing for their contracts.
So I couldn't honestly weigh this solution against waiting out another long stall by the Democrats.

Theoretically the president could hold the SOTU address and announce that the border security funding issue was no longer up for congressional vote. That would give Congress 17 days to work out a bipartisan budget with less pressure and much better prospects of success. The SOTU speech would then be able to cover a lot of other ground, which might be healthier for our political system. I've seen enough..

a reply to: Dfairlite

Now what the wall is, is up for debate.

I have noticed that almost always when President Trump talks about the Wall, the first thing he mentions is drugs like fentanyl and heroin. Then he mentions gangs and human trafficking, and the criminals that hide among the women and children. That is usually the order.

He is serious about tackling the illegal immigration problem step by step. I do not understand why any American would be against what his plan is. It boggles the mind, until you realize what the Dem politicians may really be about.

While I'm not the biggest fan of the guy, I do believe he's smart enough, or at least has enough people around him to know if he makes this move, they'll make that move and that makes me think this wasn't him caving, but setting up the next play. I don't think Trump cares about the workers not getting paid on a personal level and optics don't matter when it comes to him. The same people who didn't like Trump before the shutdown still don't like him and the fans, while some admitted they weren't thrilled at first, I'm sure they're all satisfied with what his decision now.

From my perspective, he's letting the Dems screw themselves over because they're so damn stuck on opposing the guy that they'd rather point the finger and get nothing done than prove themselves as caring and honest as they claim to be. Like I said, I don't think Trump gives a # about using the federal employees as a bargaining tool. He just shoved the federal employees head's in the toilet for a month, he's letting them up for a air right now, but we should all know what's coming next if the Dems don't pull their head's out of their asses. If they weren't in support of this stuff when Obama was in office, I wouldn't have this point of view, but again, they do an amazing job at shooting themselves in the foot.

i am not American neither for our against Trump, but as an outsider it only seems as if he is giving Chuck and Nancy some rope to hang themselves with.

Trump will lose either way if the government stays shut he is heartless, if he"caves" he is a coward, but he will keep his support.

the dems are looking more and more like idiots, they keep losing ground in this war vs Trump.

a reply to: Drucifer

If they weren't in support of this stuff when Obama was in office, I wouldn't have this point of view, but again, they do an amazing job at shooting themselves in the foot.

Yep. It makes it abundantly clear that they don't care about the wall either way, what they care about is spiting trump.

originally posted by: matafuchs
A national emergency can...

1. Stop Immigration completely
2. Provide a solution to prevent illegal immigration
3. Enforce Policy and protect the country

It is all within the right of the president to do this.

What you are suggesting is a too-simple answer to a highly complex problem.

* stop immigration completely
- including those in the process of becoming citizens?
- What about tourists?
- students?
- foreign nationals with a professional job offer (like an X-ray diagnostician MD that I know... from France)
What do you do about those?
* Provide a solution for illegal immigration
- most are tourists and students and workers who have green cards who overstay their visa. They're not farm workers from Mexico. They flew in, and often from Europe. What's your proposal for stopping tourists from overstaying their visa here in America? One of my acquaintances is an illegal (from Iceland who's been deported a number of times and keeps coming back on tourist visas. He's currently married an American woman in hopes of staying longer and I *think* he's legal right now. And what about women from Russia coming here to have babies in Miami (that's a big story) and overstaying their visas? What do you propose to stop these examples?
* Enforce and protect the country
- from who, exactly?

Trump and his border wall don't do a thing for Russian women coming to America to have anchor babies and overstaying their visas - and by the way, all the non-US citizens who entered the country and committed acts of terrorism came from Europe. A border wall won't stop that.

...so this is why I think your idea is far too simple. You need to break those down and look at each part and come up with something better than a simple bandaid because it really won't work.

a reply to: Byrd

Visa overstayers aren't an emergency. If you got a visa, you were vetted. This argument that visa overstays undermine trump's position and the wall are asinine. It's more conflation by the left, just like how being against illegal immigration is being against immigration, now.

In 2006 we had 600k illegal border crossings. We put up fencing in strategic locations and saw a big decrease over the last decade (400k in 2016). Trump simply wants to put up more and get that number down as close to zero as possible.

Why? Gang violence. Gang members aren't getting visa's in mass numbers and overstaying.
Drugs. Drug mules aren't getting visa's in mass numbers and overstaying.
Human trafficking. Human traffickers (or those being trafficked) aren't getting visa's and overstaying.

The above are doing two things:
1) Crossing at non-secured locations (this is the purpose of the wall)
2) Bribing border agents (the wall won't help this, very little can be done other than upholding the law in these cases)

Trump rarely mentions terrorists other than in the capacity that it would be an easy entrance point and is as dangerous as leaving your front door wide open. The truth is, terrorists are smart enough to get around a wall, they currently use people that are off the radar to commit their terrorist acts and that's how they get in with visa's. That's why we stopped accepting people from dangerous locations with no vetting in place, to minimize our exposure.

The truth is, trump knows what he's talking about and the only argument against it is to obfuscate. Which is what the left has been doing since day one on both issues.

a reply to: Dfairlite


Usually, a president declares AN emergency, not a "Chicken Little - the sky is falling everywhere" emergency.

Even though there are several types of national emergencies Trump could invoke here, they're all codified differently. Economic emergencies are codified differently than national defense or humanitarian emergencies.

Emergency presidential powers are dramatic, and range from suspending all laws regulating chemical and biological weapons, including the ban on human testing (50 U.S.C. § 1515, passed 1969); to suspending any Clean Air Act implementation plan or excess emissions penalty upon petition of a state governor (42 U.S.C. (f) § 7410 (f), passed 1977); to authorizing and constructing military construction projects (10 U.S.C. (a) § 2808 (a), passed 1982) using any existing defense appropriations for such military constructions ($10.4 billion in FY2018[16]); to drafting any retired Coast Guard officers (14 U.S.C. § 331, passed 1963) or enlisted members (14 U.S.C. § 359, passed 1949) into active duty.
………..
Beyond the National Emergencies Act, Congress has established three other emergency power frameworks:
42 U.S.C. § 247d — Public Health Service Act (1944), as amended.
42 U.S.C. § 5121 et seq. — Stafford Act (1988), replacing the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended in 2000 and 2006.
22 U.S.C. § 2318(a)(1) — Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, including by the Arms Export Control Act (1962)

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm not a lawyer, but I think Trump would have to declare several different emergencies, rather than group all possible arguments for a wall into one emergency.

a reply to: soundguy

I just wanted to swing by to say I completely ignored this thread the first time around because I knew it was total BS that would be a waste of time, and I was right.

So in accordance with the ancient rules of the great philosophers of yore, I do hereby declare:
1) Haha
2) You loser

originally posted by: Drucifer

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Southern Guardian
No I never saw this as his top agenda. The top agenda from what I saw was tax reform. I think you just invested yourself into that agenda more than the others.

Are you serious? I don't recall hearing "TAX RE-FORM!" chanted by him or the crowds at his rallies.

www.youtube.com...

Well it doesnt make a great chant and it doesnt irritate the Dems. After all the pc nonsense weve been forced to swallow, the Human part of me feels kinda good to see all the dems up in arms over a tiny crumb of expenditure that they all agreed on not so long ago...

Of course the Spiritual part of me knows this is not the most mature way to go about things. But admitting we are human is an obstacle we must surpass together. You can point your finger and gloat about the immaturity I have admitted but that would make you just as immature.

I find it is often helpful to ask yourself "What would Jesus Do" in this particular situation.

a reply to: Dfairlite

So people being illegal is not the problem?

It's lack of being vetted?

a reply to: 3n19m470

I find it is often helpful to ask yourself "What would Jesus Do" in this particular situation.

LOL Jesus? (AKA Yoshua) He'd probably break out in song about Jerico. God didn't like walls much, towers neither!

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Dfairlite

So people being illegal is not the problem?

It's lack of being vetted?

Reading comprehension is not your thing, is it?

I feel like Trump did the correct thing. A 3 week extension that pays govt workers, gets him the State of the Union speech, and has a hard deadline.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Byrd

Visa overstayers aren't an emergency. If you got a visa, you were vetted.

And yet that's the bulk of the illegals, is it not?

In 2006 we had 600k illegal border crossings. We put up fencing in strategic locations and saw a big decrease over the last decade (400k in 2016). Trump simply wants to put up more and get that number down as close to zero as possible.

It could also be accomplished less expensively by making temporary work permits easier to get. Plus that would take less time and would need less manpower and would funnel people to the access points and break the finances of the coyotes. Same with permits for refugees.

Trump's approach is ham-handed and overly simplistic.

Why? Gang violence. Gang members aren't getting visa's in mass numbers and overstaying.
Drugs. Drug mules aren't getting visa's in mass numbers and overstaying.
Human trafficking. Human traffickers (or those being trafficked) aren't getting visa's and overstaying.

Having worked with the police, I can safely say that most gangs are not made up of illegal immigrants or even immigrants. (See FBI page on gangs) The wall does nothing to affect these gangs.
You say that drug mules aren't overstaying... I would agree here that they don't since most drugs come in via airport and via postal service. So 'drugs' is a non-starter for the wall.

Human trafficking... (reference: National Human Trafficking Statistics) is a small number... it's actually less than the number of foreign nationals on visas giving birth in the US each year Many are NOT coming in from the southern border, but are brought in from other countries or are recruited here at home. A wall doesn't address this.

The above are doing two things:
1) Crossing at non-secured locations (this is the purpose of the wall)
2) Bribing border agents (the wall won't help this, very little can be done other than upholding the law in these cases)

I agree that some of this is happening in the south, but a lot of #2 happens at every point of entry in the US, including up north.

Trump rarely mentions terrorists other than in the capacity that it would be an easy entrance point and is as dangerous as leaving your front door wide open.

And that's the problem. He's got a tiny view of the world. So he proposes tiny solutions for something that's much bigger.

The truth is, terrorists are smart enough to get around a wall, they currently use people that are off the radar to commit their terrorist acts and that's how they get in with visa's. That's why we stopped accepting people from dangerous locations with no vetting in place, to minimize our exposure.

The truth is, trump knows what he's talking about and the only argument against it is to obfuscate. Which is what the left has been doing since day one on both issues.

I found this long list of terrorist attacks in the US - I don't agree with it all but it serves as a talking point that most acts of terrorism are committed by home-grown Americans and not foreign nationals. The 9/11 attacks are the huge exception but even since then, the bulk of the attacks are not from outside.

And looking at the list shows that none of them would have been stopped by a wall. A wall wouldn't have stopped 9/11.

And that's why we think that the measure is just a waste of money and ineffective.

a reply to: InTheLight

I think it was actually the Air Traffic Controllers union that busted his balls....

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Dfairlite

So people being illegal is not the problem?

It's lack of being vetted?

Reading comprehension is not your thing, is it?

i think i got the major talking point.

he said this

Visa overstayers aren't an emergency. If you got a visa, you were vetted. This argument that visa overstays undermine trump's position and the wall are asinine.

how much longer you going to be my puppy for?

originally posted by: Sapphire
a reply to: F4guy

You may want to re-evaluate your stance on your President. I just find it really strange that you nay sayers use such nasty lingo to describe the President, and so openly, especially in light of how much he's accomplished. Maybe you guys are a little too spoiled over there. ;-]

's Canadian
I reread my post and can't find any "nasty lingo". Maybe that's Canadian for "will not kiss his butt. I only pointed out that no matter how much desire 45 has for a unitary Presidency, his powers, after declaring an emergency, are limited. I sometimes wish that the Youngstown cas weren't there because then President Warren or Sanders or Harris could deal with emergencies by banning some guns, ordering Medicare for all, or raising taxes on the wealthy. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.