Jump to content
downzy

US Politics/Elections Thread

Recommended Posts

With respect to the Mueller investigation and where we're likely heading in the next couple of months, there's been so much noise and daily developments that it's difficult to keep track of it all.  

This article by Lawrence Martin in the Globe and Mail does a nice job of summarizing some of what gets lost in the news cycle, though it fails to mention some of the bigger-ticket issues like the indictment and guilty pleas of at least four Trump campaign officials (Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, and George Papadopoulos).

More and more, it looks like Donald Trump has something big to hide
Lawrence Martin
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-more-and-more-it-looks-like-donald-trump-has-something-big-to-hide/

Owing to a government shutdown and a rare snowstorm, downtown Washington has looked empty the past few days. It’s quiet; the mood is sombre.

Suspicious minds might even detect an air of foreboding.

When asked about President Donald Trump’s travesties, people lower their heads and grumble. Given that the District of Columbia is heavily Democratic, there’s consolation for many in that he is failing. But it’s a matter of pride, their pride as Americans being diminished by this President.

A Republican oasis near the White House is the Trump Hotel. I drop in occasionally for a cocktail – Manhattans are a mere US$24! – to get a sense of the Grand Old Party’s mood. It’s often more upbeat than you might expect. Not this week, though: The only smiles were on the faces of the service people, almost all of whom are African-American. Asked about Mr. Trump, one of them responded, “Ain’t gonna survive.”

At the bar in the hotel’s enormous atrium, the TV screens were tuned, of course, to Fox News. But even the Fox talking heads spoke in grim tones. Polling numbers showed their hero was getting far more blame for the government shutdown than the Democrats.

Worse was the latest news on the story that never goes away: The Russian-collusion drama had reached yet another fever pitch. The word was out, although not verified, that the long-feared report from special counsel Robert Mueller would appear next month. The New York Times and Washington Post were again breaking stories damaging to the President.

A less-noticed item was tucked away in a story in Vanity Fair. It said that Rudy Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s lawyer, believed the Mueller report was going to be “horrific.” This was according to a person privy to a Giuliani conversation with a friend. “You’re already hearing people speculate Trump could do a deal and resign,” this source added.

Mr. Giuliani wouldn’t comment. The anecdote was second-hand, lacking in corroboration. But the way things are going, it would hardly be a shocker if what he said were true – and Vice-President Mike Pence becomes the new Gerald Ford, elevated after a stunning scandal in the executive branch.

The story that had the capital all worked up was an overjacked Times report that the FBI had opened an investigation into whether Mr. Trump was working at the behest of (read: colluding with) the Russians in early 2017. It was already reported that the FBI was probing Mr. Trump for obstruction of justice. It was already reported that it began an investigation into Mr. Trump’s campaign team on Russian collusion in mid-2016. And it was already suspected that the FBI was out to get Mr. Trump given his treatment of the agency. But while hardly surprising, the Times story did raise the level of alarm about the President’s deeds.

The Post’s own revelation – that Mr. Trump wanted the contents of his talks with Vladimir Putin kept secret – only made the sirens blare louder. In meetings with the Russian leader at five different locations over the past two years, Mr. Trump had gone so far as to keep even his top advisers in the dark.

It’s yet another indicator that Mr. Trump has something big to hide. The Mueller probe has found that at least 16 Trump associates had political contacts with Russians. According to the Moscow Project, a liberal group exploring the GOP’s Kremlin ties, there were 101 contacts with Russian operatives that the Trump team tried to keep under wraps.

That Russian interference in the American election was abetted by Mr. Trump and/or members of his team has become more credible than not. The number of times Mr. Trump has done Mr. Putin’s bidding – on Syria, Ukraine, the European Union, at the Helsinki summit and many more – is beyond the pale.

The Trump business empire, it need be recalled, has used Russian sources for financing. “We don’t rely on American banks,” Mr. Trump’s third child, Eric, said in 2014. "We have all the funding we need out of Russia.”

Just how serious the situation has become can be seen in the fences being put up by the White House to respond to the Mueller report. Mr. Trump’s recently arrived White House counsel Pat Cipollone has hired 17 lawyers.

With its broad mandate, the meticulous Mueller probe could wind up nailing Mr. Trump on all fronts. On collusion. On obstruction of justice. On money laundering.

If Mr. Giuliani has been telling people the report will be horrific, small wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, -W.A.R- said:

The bill was introduced 2 years ago and got no support. I just wanted to post it because its a good look for her.

 

Anyway im certainty not arguing to the contrary about the middle east being a disaster.

 

Two main reasons why the U.S. can't stay away are Israel and oil, not necessarely in that order

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I've seen it all. Back in 2015 Cohen tried to rig polls to favor Trump. On top of that he created fake accounts like WomenForCohen to praise his look and charater. What good look? The guy is far from being a sex symbol :rofl-lol:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/politics/michael-cohen-poll-rigging/index.html

These people show again and again they stop at nothing. They are all about lies, fraud, manipulation, inmorality, corruption. They made Al Capone look like an innocent baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Trump is going to be Trump with respect to the investigation in Russian interference.  Appears as though they're pivoting from the position of saying no collusion to "Trump wasn't involved in collusion." 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudy-giuliani-i-never-said-there-was-no-collusion-between-campaign-and-russia?ref=home

Basically throwing his campaign staff under the bus to save himself.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Padme said:

Make no mistake, not a single terrorist organization has been defeated. Saudi Arabia, Iran and maybe others keep finacing those groups. Conflicts in the Middle East are far from over with or without ISIS. The West keep selling weapons to the Middle East. Those weapons end up in the hands of terrorists.

You can't really defeat a terrorist organisation, these things are ideas, anyone can take em up and go and blow shit up.  Their central organisation is often tentative at best, its a fools errand, the way you defeat a terrorist organisation is to take away their cause. 

  • Like 1
  • GNFNR 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

You can't really defeat a terrorist organisation, these things are ideas, anyone can take em up and go and blow shit up.  Their central organisation is often tentative at best, its a fools errand, the way you defeat a terrorist organisation is to take away their cause. 

It was Trump who claim ISIS was defeated. It is obvious that's not the case. The only way to take their cause away is with proper education, jobs and well being. Some world leader will never do that. Because they want to use poor and ignorant people for their polical agenda. Educated people who think for themselves are "dangerous"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

DxIuc_yW0AEftGE.jpg

What is your point? This is a infantile attempt to turn the blame around and make Pelosi look bad due to what I'm assuming are diplomatic trips. The erroneous use of capitalization points to Trump originally penning this, but I'm surprised whoever proofreads these things didn't edit that. I could see Trump being viciously stubborn about his capitalization habit because I'm sure bigger letters have more meaning in his mind. I've noticed it's something his supporters like to do too - capitalize words that normally would not be capitalized, simply because they are some of the important words in the sentence.

And if you want to post random things without context to make the other side look bad, we can do that too:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/politics/michael-cohen-poll-rigging/index.html

While you're here, mind posting some evidence or data that points to a security crisis at the southern border?  And let's say there was a crisis, can you then elaborate on why a concrete wall is the best strategy to avert said crisis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, OmarBradley said:

What is your point? This is a infantile attempt to turn the blame around and make Pelosi look bad due to what I'm assuming are diplomatic trips. The erroneous use of capitalization points to Trump originally penning this, but I'm surprised whoever proofreads these things didn't edit that. I could see Trump being viciously stubborn about his capitalization habit because I'm sure bigger letters have more meaning in his mind. I've noticed it's something his supporters like to do too - capitalize words that normally would not be capitalized, simply because they are some of the important words in the sentence.

And if you want to post random things without context to make the other side look bad, we can do that too:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/politics/michael-cohen-poll-rigging/index.html

While you're here, mind posting some evidence or data that points to a security crisis at the southern border?  And let's say there was a crisis, can you then elaborate on why a concrete wall is the best strategy to avert said crisis?

My point right now is that it is newsworthy.

The CNN link has already been posted before by @Padme.

 – 

There is a security crisis at the southern border, Chuck Schumer did acknowledge that ten years ago, back in 2014, Obama warned about an actual humanitarian crisis.

There was a caravan migrants mass that stormed the border and threw rocks at US police officers months ago just in case you've forgotten.

Trump campaigned for a physical wall and he won. Elections have consequences. I'd say it's a great strategy because WALLS WORK!!!

Now even Pelosi says she wants a VIRTUAL WALL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Silent Jay said:

My point right now is that it is newsworthy.

The CNN link has already been posted before by @Padme.

 – 

There is a security crisis at the southern border, Chuck Schumer did acknowledge that ten years ago, back in 2014, Obama warned about an actual humanitarian crisis.

There was a caravan migrants mass that stormed the border and threw rocks at US police officers months ago just in case you've forgotten.

Trump campaigned for a physical wall and he won. Elections have consequences. I'd say it's a great strategy because WALLS WORK!!!

Now even Pelosi says she wants a VIRTUAL WALL!

It's newsworthy, I agree. My mistake re: the CNN article, and though I'd be happy to post other shocking revelations, I'd rather talk about substance. 

10 years ago the data was different. 10 years ago we were at a peak of undocumented immigration. However, that peak was reached and the rate of illegal immigration/illegal immigration population has steadily decreased over the past decade. And between 300,000 - 400,000 people are apprehended trying to illegally cross every year. But Trump needs to build a wall to keep out 5,000? 

Roughly 40% of illegal immigrants in the US are people who have overstayed their visas, they did not cross illegally. A wall does absolutely nothing to bring those 40% to justice or get them through the immigration process. Rate of removal for illegal immigrants also peaked during the Obama years - Obama's administration removed more illegal immigrants from this country than all president prior, combined.

I've almost forgotten about the caravan of migrants, because Republicans decided to stop talking about it right after Election Day. A few things we need to remember: some of these people are absolutely desperate because their home countries have been plagued by gang violence and coups (that can likely be traced back to American/CIA interference in these South American governments) - they are seeking a safe place for themselves and their families to live and work. Desperation leads people to do unsavory things, but it does not make them bad people. Sure, in any group of 5,000 people there are going to be less-than-ideal individuals. But there is no evidence to say the majority of or even a sizable portion of this caravan has ill-intent. And as you said yourself, most of this happened months ago when the caravan arrived. The most recent article I could find on an issue like rock throwing at the border was from December 10th.

There's been a lot of misinformation and noise about what exactly is going on at the border. As far as I can see from reputable news sources, one person has been arrested in connection with rock throwing, although I believe it's been reported to have occurred a few times. Tear gas was fired when a group of migrants attempted to exploit a supposed gap in the border fence. About 40 migrants were arrested on the US side and about 40 on the Mexican side. Moreover, the Mexican government said it will deport any migrant who violently attempts to cross the border.

As far as I can see, there have been no deaths, no serious injuries, and no indications of a malicious plot to storm the border. Where is the security crisis? Humanitarian crisis? Maybe. But you don't fix a humanitarian crisis with a wall. And if you look at what Obama's administration did in regards to addressing this issue, they did not build a wall. Because they understood (correctly) this is a humanitarian issue and not a security issue.

And, because Trump campaigned for something and won, is an awful argument in support of the wall. Campaigning on something doesn't mean it's an effective idea. Winning doesn't mean it's an effective idea. It means enough people liked the idea to support the candidate. Winning should not permit one to pursue foolhardy policy. Winning should subject policy to the trials of evidence, logic, and data.

Opinion pieces are not good sources for evidence or data. The author has carefully tailored the data and his presentation to support his view. This guy is making it sound like Democrats want to tear down every border fence/wall, that is not the case. Democrats don't want to spend $5B on a wall that won't properly address the problem. America's illegal immigration problem isn't really about figuring out how to stop new migrants from entering, it's how to deal with the millions already within the country and the thousands waiting for asylum rulings. A new, expensive wall doesn't address either of those issues. And you know what? Trump first said he wanted a bit less than $2B for the wall, and Democrats on committee said fine. Then he came back and amended it to $5B and wasn't able to give a report on the proposed breakdown of funds, so Democrats denied it. And we all know large, contracted construction projects always come in right on budget and right on time for their target finish date :rolleyes:.  

I have more to say, but this post is too long and I'm tired. And I have a feeling despite being presented with a reasoned argument backed by data and evidence, your view is unmoved. 

(Most of the statistics I quoted can be found in this article, which discusses data from two independent studies on immigration)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a paper trail of Trump/Associates suborning perjury - What. Fucking. Morons.

I didn't think it could get dumber than Nixon recording himself, but Trump is trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, -W.A.R- said:

If there is a paper trail of Trump/Associates suborning perjury - What. Fucking. Morons.

I didn't think it could get dumber than Nixon recording himself, but Trump is trying.

There is no need for a paper or a recording. Giuliani made clear that people working for the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. The only information that is needed is what Trump knew and when he knew it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Padme said:

There is no need for a paper or a recording. Giuliani made clear that people working for the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. The only information that is needed is what Trump knew and when he knew it

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

What is your point? This is a infantile attempt to turn the blame around and make Pelosi look bad due to what I'm assuming are diplomatic trips. The erroneous use of capitalization points to Trump originally penning this, but I'm surprised whoever proofreads these things didn't edit that. I could see Trump being viciously stubborn about his capitalization habit because I'm sure bigger letters have more meaning in his mind. I've noticed it's something his supporters like to do too - capitalize words that normally would not be capitalized, simply because they are some of the important words in the sentence.

And if you want to post random things without context to make the other side look bad, we can do that too:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/17/politics/michael-cohen-poll-rigging/index.html

While you're here, mind posting some evidence or data that points to a security crisis at the southern border?  And let's say there was a crisis, can you then elaborate on why a concrete wall is the best strategy to avert said crisis?

It was a diplomatic trip. She was going to meet with NATO Comanders in Belgium. And troops in Afghanistan. There was no special need of extra money. The trip was covered by Defense Department budget. So the partial shutdown was not affecting this trip. Still Trump violated security protocol because he reveled the places where she was going. She has to cancel the trip anyway

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/01/18/jake-tapper-trump-announced-pelosi-travel-plans-to-taliban-sot-the-lead-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A conservative Canadian challenges Canadian PM at one of many town halls the PM holds across the Country. Our PM politely accepts a great deal of criticism (some which doesn't make all that much sense, but whatever)

Im posting this because I just thought to myself 'what would Trump do if criticized to this degree and was laughed at?' Not sit and nod politely thats for sure! Also the arguments are, in part, about the Trade Negotiations and Tariffs with Trumps America. PM Trudeau basic travels to this area to receive this criticism at this point. And to offer his perspective. Its kinda inspiring in this day and age.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, soon said:

A conservative Canadian challenges Canadian PM at one of many town halls the PM holds across the Country. Our PM politely accepts a great deal of criticism (some which doesn't make all that much sense, but whatever)

Im posting this because I just thought to myself 'what would Trump do if criticized to this degree and was laughed at?' Not sit and nod politely thats for sure! Also the arguments are, in part, about the Trade Negotiations and Tariffs with Trumps America. PM Trudeau basic travels to this area to receive this criticism at this point. And to offer his perspective. Its kinda inspiring in this day and age.

 

It's why Trump only holds rallies with his lemmings for supporters and sits down only with Fox News.  He's the epitome of a weak leader too afraid to face criticism or have anything he believes in question in person.

He's the loudest chickenshit around.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In any other time the President would be impeached for this.  

In this day and age, I'm not so sure.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/trump-perjury-michael-cohen-compromised-russia-mueller.html

What makes the Cohen lies even worse—and yes, far worse than Watergate—is that it exposed any U.S. officials who were involved in orchestrating his false testimony subject to blackmail by Russia. As Barbara McQuade, former U.S. attorney and professor at the University of Michigan Law School, wrote at Just Security, “in the context of counterintelligence investigations, lies can also compromise national security. … A foreign adversary like Russia can use lies as leverage over government officials to coerce them into complying with its demands or else face exposure of the lies.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

Looks like Trump and Kim will meet again in Feb for more 12 min handshakes

He'll have to fly commercial. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Georgy Zhukov said:

He'll have to fly commercial. 

Trump does look like the Sort of sun burned cunt you see on the back of an Easyjet flight from Majorca

Edited by lukepowell1988

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, OmarBradley said:

It's newsworthy, I agree. My mistake re: the CNN article, and though I'd be happy to post other shocking revelations, I'd rather talk about substance. 

10 years ago the data was different. 10 years ago we were at a peak of undocumented immigration. However, that peak was reached and the rate of illegal immigration/illegal immigration population has steadily decreased over the past decade. And between 300,000 - 400,000 people are apprehended trying to illegally cross every year. But Trump needs to build a wall to keep out 5,000? 

Roughly 40% of illegal immigrants in the US are people who have overstayed their visas, they did not cross illegally. A wall does absolutely nothing to bring those 40% to justice or get them through the immigration process. Rate of removal for illegal immigrants also peaked during the Obama years - Obama's administration removed more illegal immigrants from this country than all president prior, combined.

I've almost forgotten about the caravan of migrants, because Republicans decided to stop talking about it right after Election Day. A few things we need to remember: some of these people are absolutely desperate because their home countries have been plagued by gang violence and coups (that can likely be traced back to American/CIA interference in these South American governments) - they are seeking a safe place for themselves and their families to live and work. Desperation leads people to do unsavory things, but it does not make them bad people. Sure, in any group of 5,000 people there are going to be less-than-ideal individuals. But there is no evidence to say the majority of or even a sizable portion of this caravan has ill-intent. And as you said yourself, most of this happened months ago when the caravan arrived. The most recent article I could find on an issue like rock throwing at the border was from December 10th.

There's been a lot of misinformation and noise about what exactly is going on at the border. As far as I can see from reputable news sources, one person has been arrested in connection with rock throwing, although I believe it's been reported to have occurred a few times. Tear gas was fired when a group of migrants attempted to exploit a supposed gap in the border fence. About 40 migrants were arrested on the US side and about 40 on the Mexican side. Moreover, the Mexican government said it will deport any migrant who violently attempts to cross the border.

As far as I can see, there have been no deaths, no serious injuries, and no indications of a malicious plot to storm the border. Where is the security crisis? Humanitarian crisis? Maybe. But you don't fix a humanitarian crisis with a wall. And if you look at what Obama's administration did in regards to addressing this issue, they did not build a wall. Because they understood (correctly) this is a humanitarian issue and not a security issue.

And, because Trump campaigned for something and won, is an awful argument in support of the wall. Campaigning on something doesn't mean it's an effective idea. Winning doesn't mean it's an effective idea. It means enough people liked the idea to support the candidate. Winning should not permit one to pursue foolhardy policy. Winning should subject policy to the trials of evidence, logic, and data.

Opinion pieces are not good sources for evidence or data. The author has carefully tailored the data and his presentation to support his view. This guy is making it sound like Democrats want to tear down every border fence/wall, that is not the case. Democrats don't want to spend $5B on a wall that won't properly address the problem. America's illegal immigration problem isn't really about figuring out how to stop new migrants from entering, it's how to deal with the millions already within the country and the thousands waiting for asylum rulings. A new, expensive wall doesn't address either of those issues. And you know what? Trump first said he wanted a bit less than $2B for the wall, and Democrats on committee said fine. Then he came back and amended it to $5B and wasn't able to give a report on the proposed breakdown of funds, so Democrats denied it. And we all know large, contracted construction projects always come in right on budget and right on time for their target finish date :rolleyes:.  

I have more to say, but this post is too long and I'm tired. And I have a feeling despite being presented with a reasoned argument backed by data and evidence, your view is unmoved. 

(Most of the statistics I quoted can be found in this article, which discusses data from two independent studies on immigration)

Quoting factchecking-dot-com and CNN. That's the gift that keeps on giving. Thank you.

I'll obviously not rant against you because it's ridiculous and way over the line but also there is no doubt Trump is living rent free in your head.

You genuinely don't think there is a security crisis at the southern border, that's crazy.

You get it all out in the open because a single picture triggers you. I am not Trump's advocate by the way. I like him because he is the champion of the people.

The wall isn't just about preventing illegal immigration, it's a way to effectively prevent human trafficking, drug trafficking and much crimes in america's communities.

The democrat obstruction is about putting politics over policies, they have no real solutions or better solutions than the wall. They know damn well it will work.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Silent Jay said:

The democrat obstruction is about putting politics over policies, they have no real solutions or better solutions than the wall. They know damn well it will work.

Errr, until it doesn't. :lol: 

Largest single group of migrants ever tunnels under border wall in Arizona, says Border Protection

border-tunnel-ho-mo-20190118_hpEmbed_4x3

Seven tunnels were dug underneath the border wall near Yuma, Arizona, on Monday, Jan. 14, 2019, as a record group of migrants entered the U.S.

The largest single group of asylum seekers ever to cross into the U.S. tunneled beneath the border wall near San Luis, Arizona, on Monday, voluntarily turning themselves into Customs and Border Protection, according to the agency.

Migrants can be seen marching toward Border Patrol agents by the hundreds, according to video obtained by ABC News. Smugglers dug a series of seven holes, only a few feet long beneath the steel border fence, with hundreds going beneath the wall and a smaller number clambering over it, according to CBP.

The fresh sand and scuff marks of shoes on the rusty steel were still there when ABC News visited the site on Thursday.

The agency says 179 of the record 376 people who crossed were children, including over 30 unaccompanied minors -- children under 18 traveling on their own.

The overall number of unauthorized crossings has plummeted since its peak in the 2001, when CBP logged about 1.6 million apprehensions, according to government statistics. However, the demography of those crossing has changed dramatically.

(MORE: Leaked memo shows Trump administration weighed separating families at border, despite saying it was never policy)

Parents with children now comprise over 80 percent of the total apprehensions of those crossing the 2,000-mile long border with Mexico. The vast majority of them, like the group near Yuma Monday, surrender immediately or seek out Border Patrol agents in order to begin the asylum process.

CBP Yuma Border Sector Chief Anthony Porvaznik said his unit needs better border barriers, but more urgently it needs funding to provide for these families.

"That's our No. 1 challenge that we have here in the Yuma sector, is the humanitarian problem," Porvaznik said. "As I mentioned, 87 percent of the apprehensions here are family units and unaccompanied alien children."

Seven tunnels were dug underneath the border wall near Yuma, Arizona, on Monday, Jan. 14, 2019, as a record group of migrants entered the U.S.more +

The mass crossing this week took place in a sparsely populated stretch of the border -- where an old model of border barrier rises about 12 feet from the sandy ground. The stretched agency only had three agents patrolling that 26-mile-long section of the border.

It took hours to process the families, most of which were sent to the area’s chronically overcrowded central processing center in Yuma.

"In my 30 years with the Border Patrol, I have not been part of arresting a group of 376 people," Porvaznik said. "That's really unheard of."

On Thursday, hundreds of asylum seekers were being held in cinderblock cells with thick glass windows that overlooked a central bullpen where CBP agents worked to process them and provide humanitarian needs. The asylum seekers were separated into cells: fathers with sons, fathers with daughters, unaccompanied minors and mothers with children.

As in all such facilities, the CBP said it works to process them as quickly as possible, and provides basic medical care. Still, detainees eat, sleep and use the bathroom in the same room. Scraps of food mingled with silvery space blankets on the floor. In one cell, several boys had balled up the blankets into a makeshift soccer ball they were kicking around.

A record large group of 376 migrants tunneled under the border wall near Yuma, Arizona, and turned themselves in to Border Patrol officials for asylum.more +

One man in the group said he left Guatemala eight days ago and made most of the trip by bus along with his 12-year-old daughter. They were planning to leave the processing center destined for San Diego -- plane ticket in hand.

The father said he saved about $5,000 to pay a coyote to quickly get them to the border. He left a wife and two younger daughters back in Guatemala. Next to them were a mother and two daughters on their way to Cincinnati, also from Guatemala. They too traveled by bus and the journey took about eight days.

Just two days after the group tunneled under the border wall in Yuma, the Border Patrol took in another huge group of migrants in New Mexico. The 247-person group, including unaccompanied minors, crossed near the Antelope Wells Port of Entry and immediately surrendered to authorities for processing.

The CBP said 24 large groups -- quantified as 100 or more -- have crossed the border near Lordsburg, New Mexico, just since Oct. 1, 2018.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/largest-single-group-migrants-tunnels-border-wall-arizona/story?id=60462672

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Silent Jay said:

Quoting factchecking-dot-com and CNN. That's the gift that keeps on giving. Thank you.

I'll obviously not rant against you because it's ridiculous and way over the line but also there is no doubt Trump is living rent free in your head.

You genuinely don't think there is a security crisis at the southern border, that's crazy.

You get it all out in the open because a single picture triggers you. I am not Trump's advocate by the way. I like him because he is the champion of the people.

The wall isn't just about preventing illegal immigration, it's a way to effectively prevent human trafficking, drug trafficking and much crimes in america's communities.

The democrat obstruction is about putting politics over policies, they have no real solutions or better solutions than the wall. They know damn well it will work.

 

 

 

 

 

I did not quote factcheck.org or CNN. I discussed data figures in a factcheck.org article that were compiled by two independent studies from two independent, nonpartisan organizations. 

"Trump living in your mind", "triggered by a picture," "that's crazy" - all of those are irrelevant sentences in a genuine debate. But it's clear you aren't willing or able to have a genuine debate. "Triggered by a picture" is reductionist - I was "triggered" by the letter in the image. Triggered is a nice buzzword to imply others are weak-minded, easy to anger, or a variety of irrelevant accusations people like to make when they or their views are met with (often legitimate) criticism. If you post nonsense, yes that will "trigger" me to respond with reason. I also happen to like debate, data, and policy discussions - what a terrible thing! 

There is not a security crisis at the southern border. Any border in any country has security issues, but that is different from a crisis. Inflammatory and exaggerated language like Trump uses is effective in riling the emotions of his supporters, but it is rarely an accurate reflection of reality. You want to talk about human and drug trafficking? Great, that would actually be a worthwhile direction for this debate to go, but you need to back it up with facts and data.

:lol: Again with this Trump is a "champion of the people" nonsense. The guy owns a gold-plated Manhattan high rise, routinely did not pay contractors what he initially agreed to pay them, has a superiority complex tied to his alleged wealth, routinely disrespected half the population (women) during the campaign, promoted a tax bill which favored the wealthy, and I bet he spends more money on his haircut than most of us do on a week's worth of food. He was born into wealth and lived his entire life incredibly comfortably without ever having to deal with real hardship (those bone spurs are killer, all the Vietnam vets I've talked to are glad they never had to deal with bone spurs). Of the people? He is the enemy of the people, but he and the Republican Party have effectively duped 1/4th of the population.

Again with Tucker's hot takes. It's theatrics. Pelosi clearly used the dog line as an analogy - quite obviously the technology is far more advanced than a machine that fetches balls and licks your feet. But Tucker sarcastically examines it and singles out the dog line instead of discussing the substance of the tech, because it makes Pelosi look stupid and it makes Tucker look smart - and to add to this, it makes the viewer feel empowered and like they're smart too. Your emotions are being manipulated. 

Edited by OmarBradley
  • Like 2
  • GNFNR 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see or hear the speech today. So did Trump make any compromise to stop the government shutdown?

People are still suffering through this shit while the big cats in Washington are still getting paid.

The whole world is fucked up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×