US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Skybird]

Voting for somebody who sells such lousy coffee really shows... some bad taste. :D



Serious, that "coffee" as a gift still would be overpriced. Starbucks should be listed as part of the petrochemical industry. And their plump behaviour of calling each and every stranger and guest "du" and per first name, just is embarassing. Ikea does it, too, and I hate them as well. We are no buddies you any I, you Ikeas and Starbucks of the world.


No, I am no friend of Starbuck. Their - liquids often are insane calorie-bombs, super-easily become insanely sweet, very expensive, their rush to be intimate with you in my perception just is an unpolite affront.


And worst of it: their coffee simply tastes super-dooper-bad. I would not even call it coffee, that lousy I found it the two times I had it. The tubs got emptied very quickly for sure: into the grass, and into the sink.


I saw a TV documentation on them some months ago, 90m minutes. Did not like what I saw. Ironically they got founded by two or were it three, men who found that the stuff that at that time was sold to american citizens as "coffee" was so bad that they thought they must improve the supply with better coffee for the civil society. Considering the awful brew they still sell today and calling that an imrovement, I wonder why so many Americans still survived while drinking what there was in these older times. :D


No Starbuck for me, please. :haha: I survived the first two attempts,yes: but I do not want to press my luck.

[Skybird]

Just what we need. Another businessman with no experience running for president. :nope:

The office of PotUS is not an entry level position.
There are plenty of skilled egos out there who are fully qualified for bringing it down to their niveau. Have a little faith. :03:

[em2nought]

Less than $2.00 if you don't go fancy:

They only time I've ever been was with friends over ten years ago. I asked for coke, and they don't serve it so I asked for pepsi. lol

[mapuc]

Qualified politicians

You should not be so worried whether a politician is qualified to take place in the Oval Office or not.

What you should be worried about is the voters.

Markus

[Skybird]

You should not be so worried whether a politician is qualified to take place in the Oval Office or not.

What you should be worried about is the voters.


That there even still are voters, to be more precise. ;)

[FullMetalADCAP]

Just what we need. Another businessman with no experience running for president. :nope:

The office of PotUS is not an entry level position.

Yes, because we all should all keep voting for the same old liars and thieves in D.C. who have experience lying and stealing from us. :nope:

The economy has gotten stronger under Trump and unemployment is way down. Damn those businessmen! What do they know about such matters?

[FullMetalADCAP]

They only time I've ever been was with friends over ten years ago. I asked for coke, and they don't serve it so I asked for pepsi. lol

It was probably laced with soy knowing that place. :haha:

[Buddahaid]

Nobody's forcing anyone to buy it.

[August]

Just what we need. Another businessman with no experience running for president. :nope:

The office of PotUS is not an entry level position.
No but you'd have to define experience because in some ways a businessman is more qualified than a party politician with just a term or two in the Senate or HoR. The former has to meet expectations, manage deadlines, make decisions and motivate subordinates. The latter is just one of a large group where authority and responsibility are shared. That's no preparation for being Commander in Chief.

I believe the biggest challenge for party outsiders like Trump or Schultz, Perot, Nader, Johnson, etc. be they businessman, societal nag or whatever, is that they do not have the army of senior and mid level managerial subordinates already standing by the day after the election ready to help him take up the reigns of government. He must start from scratch picking from a very shallow pool of comparative unknowns whereas the party candidates have often several choices of ideologically vetted people for every post.

[em2nought]

It was probably laced with soy knowing that place. :haha:


No, the joke is that they don't serve pepsi either. They don't serve any soda. lol


The hardest part for an outsider is that ALL the insiders, even your own party, are acting against you. If an outsider were to be really successful what would happen to the insiders? :hmmm:


How dare an outsider actually try to fix things that we peons have been told can't be fixed. Prime example: "Those jobs aren't coming back, no siree." :hmmm:

http://ourfuturesucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/IMG_8517-1.jpg

[eddie]

Well, here we go. Trump pulls us out of the Nuclear treaty and now Russia is pulling out. Yay!! A new arms race!!:doh:

[Rockstar]

It wouldn't have anything to do with China not being a signatory of the treaty nor obliged to participate would it?


Let me guess the reply:. Ya but Trump.

[Mr Quatro]

I read somewhere that Russia has reserved the right to reload their missile silos , but the USA does not have that ability and on top of that the extra missiles were not counted against Russia.

They say Trump doesn't listen to his military advisors he sure got this inch to increase the military might of America from somewhere.

Does anyone understand what happens next? Do our FBM's in service no longer have to be converted to cruise missiles?

[mapuc]

A question on Trumps relation to the countries military abilities and the countries abilities when it comes to gather information about other countries military abilities.

Some days ago I could read Trump had "made nonsens" of a report on Iran's military strength.

Does Trump have such a huge knowledge on what Iran can or can't, that he can do so ?

Markus

[eddie]

It wouldn't have anything to do with China not being a signatory of the treaty nor obliged to participate would it?


Let me guess the reply:. Ya but Trump.


I give up, is that the reply? Or do you think that this is a good thing?:haha:

[Onkel Neal]

It almo$t make$ $en$e that $omeone who think$ a cup of covfefe $hould be $4.00 would want to run "our" government. :D

Hmm.. actually, someone who can sell the coffee for $4, pretty capable.

Qualified politicians

You should not be so worried whether a politician is qualified to take place in the Oval Office or not.

What you should be worried about is the voters.

Markus

Wow, that's the truth, man.

[ikalugin]

I read somewhere that Russia has reserved the right to reload their missile silos , but the USA does not have that ability and on top of that the extra missiles were not counted against Russia.

They say Trump doesn't listen to his military advisors he sure got this inch to increase the military might of America from somewhere.

Does anyone understand what happens next? Do our FBM's in service no longer have to be converted to cruise missiles?
The (quick) silo reload is a cold war era myth and is contradicted by evidence, for example proportion of produced ICBMs to launchers.


That said however the new START treaty does have it's own problems, from development of new systems that do not fall under it (ie HGVs) to compliance. You can read the list of some of the compliance issues in the attached PDF.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hbCclWr7FfOmPS5GQRAbcBoAORqnV7DW/view?usp=sharing

[ikalugin]

Well, here we go. Trump pulls us out of the Nuclear treaty and now Russia is pulling out. Yay!! A new arms race!!:doh:
In his meeting with Shoigu (MoD) and Lavrov (MfFA) Putin supported Shoigu's suggestion to develop intermediate range land based weapons and ordered both of his ministers to not initiate any further work on arms control.

[Catfish]

^ "In his meeting with Shoigu (MoD) and Lavrov (MfFA) Putin supported Shoigu's suggestion to develop intermediate range land based weapons and ordered both of his ministers to not initiate any further work on arms control. "

Oh i think Putin will need money for this.. and he has just recently raised the retirement age, a sign that the sanctions against Russia show some result.
"Putin supported.. " are you sure it is this way round ? :03:
Like his (in)famous discussions with Russia's other .. president live on TV.

Fact is that Russia has already undermined this treaty for some time, so cancelling it only means that something obvious is now official, and the weapons industries will have a good time ahead.

[ikalugin]

^ "In his meeting with Shoigu (MoD) and Lavrov (MfFA) Putin supported Shoigu's suggestion to develop intermediate range land based weapons and ordered both of his ministers to not initiate any further work on arms control. "

Oh i think Putin will need money for this.. and he has just recently raised the retirement age, a sign that the sanctions against Russia show some result.
"Putin supported.. " are you sure it is this way round ? :03:
Like his (in)famous discussions with Russia's other .. president live on TV.

Fact is that Russia has already undermined this treaty for some time, so cancelling it only means that something obvious is now official, and the weapons industries will have a good time ahead.
The rearmament of Tochkas to Iskanders is nearly over, so the funding stream would be moved towards making new INF non compliant weapons by the same people.
Pension reform has been over a decade in the making, is driven by demographics and if anything is late. Unless US sanctions have some hidden retrospect affect on the Russian demographics I do not see how they are related to the reform.


Yes, it could be theatrics to illustrate the decisions mades.


There is no public evidence of the Russian INF non compliance that I am aware of. There are only US allegations. Note that there are also reasonable Russian allegations of the US INF and new START treaty non compliance, I have linked the document discussing the later above.

[Catfish]

And i thought Putin was running out of money to support his accomplices and the old, and funding arms build-up :hmmm:
I have to admit your campaigns to sow doubts and support destabilization everywhere from Trump to brexit have been successful, but they have not gone unnoticed.

[ikalugin]

And i thought Putin was running out of money to support his accomplices and the old, and funding arms build-up :hmmm:
I have to admit your campaigns to sow doubts and support destabilization everywhere from Trump to brexit have been successful, but they have not gone unnoticed.
Ironically what you describe is more of a western campaighn to generate the cult of personality for Putin (the narrative that he is everywhere etc) vs what we are actually doing as a concerted state level effort.

[Platapus]

I am not in favor of dumping treaties and still am not sure that the President has the authority to unilaterally withdraw from a ratified treaty.

But, that being written, The INF treaty going away is not cause to start building fallout shelters or stocking up on suicide pills.

The INF treaty served a good and well defined purpose, 20-30 years ago. Technology has advanced to the point where both countries were well capable of killing massive amounts of people in the "intermediate" range without using the banned weapon systems.

It is not much of a concern for the US as we are outside of the "Intermediate" range from the people who don't like us. Russia does not have that advantage.

Banning specific types of weapon systems only by two parties made sense when only those two parties were stockpiling and deploying them. These days there are more than the original dance team on the floor. The INF treaty does not apply to them.

Imagine a local situation where you have two neighbors in a rural area who don't like each other.

Neighbor 1 and neighbor 2 agree that while they don't like each other, neither of them will stockpile machine guns.

Then you have a new neighbor who also hates both of you, but does not agree not to stockpile machine guns.

How would you feel about that? Well it might depend on whether you are in machine gun range of this new neighbor. :up:

If we are going to attempt to ban a specific type of weapon, it should be banned by more than just two countries.

As drone and Cruise Missile technology continues to advance, the distinct ranges of missiles becomes more variable unlike the older ballistic missile technology.

Back in the ol days, rockets and missiles had design range bands. It made it easier to characterize and easier to document in a treaty. These days, fixed range bands overlap.

The days of characterizing rockets and missiles based on range bands may be obsolete.

In any case, the withdrawal from the INF treaty, regardless of the wisdom or legality of that withdrawal does not mean that the world is suddenly more likely to turn in to Fallout4.

We still have plenty of non Intermediate range weapon systems to make every in to a Supermutant.

If the INF treaty were to survive, it would have to be redefined to recognize the changes in weapon technology and the number of players. That was probably not going to happen.

I may not like the way the INF treaty is going away, but I am not especially fearful that it is going away.

Rest assured, that all sides still have the capability of killing people, regardless of the range, and after all, that's what's important.

[ikalugin]

The issue with the way INF died is not the military balance in Europe (though deploying Pershing-III like weapons to Poland and Baltics would see to that) but the way it affects other arms control treaties. For example I do not see new-START staying alive after this.

[Dowly]

How dare an outsider actually try to fix things that we peons have been told can't be fixed. Prime example: "Those jobs aren't coming back, no siree." :hmmm:Obama said "Some of those jobs of the past are just not going to come back."

[Mr Quatro]

The INF treaty served a good and well defined purpose, 20-30 years ago. Technology has advanced to the point where both countries were well capable of killing massive amounts of people in the "intermediate" range without using the banned weapon systems.

It is not much of a concern for the US as we are outside of the "Intermediate" range from the people who don't like us. Russia does not have that advantage.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rest assured, that all sides still have the capability of killing people, regardless of the range, and after all, that's what's important.

I have long suspected that the next major use of nuclear weapons would be between Pakistan and India both countries are in disagreement with each other. Pakistan has amassed over 300 short range nuclear tipped missiles to be used in case of war against India.

A nuclear war between these two countries could bring the other nuclear capable countries to the peace table for a treaty no one ever keeps anyway.

Gentlemen war is hell :yep:

I have departed from the US Politics thread however and I will only add one more thought I look forward to Putin's retirement :up:

[ikalugin]

That may happen to an extend in 2024. But I doubt that demonisation would stop.

[Catfish]

^ why "demonisation"? I openly admit Mr. Putin is an intelligent and - when it comes to Russia's interests - a reasonable, dependable and calculable man.
Still, have a close look at what he does, and how. (https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2019/02/russia-attacking-us-system-within/154609/?oref=d-mostread)

[ikalugin]

^ why "demonisation"? I openly admit Mr. Putin is an intelligent and - when it comes to Russia's interests - a reasonable, dependable and calculable man.
Still, have a close look at what he does, and how. (https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2019/02/russia-attacking-us-system-within/154609/?oref=d-mostread)
This article is a good example of demonisation.


But because that narrative has been consistent for over a decade you don't see it that way I guess.
The irony is that by demonisation you create a cult of personality for Putin and through that undermine trust into your own institutions.

[Catfish]

It is just about trying to influence. So you are asserting that Russia does nothing of the kind?
Why do you call a reaction to Russia's meddling with other nations "demonisation"?

[ikalugin]

It is just about trying to influence. So you are asserting that Russia does nothing of the kind?
Why do you call a reaction to Russia's meddling with other nations "demonisation"?
Influencing is quite common in the modern world, especially by politically motivated individuals and private organisations (I do not need to remind you of how some people view Soros and what he does).

The issue I have with the current situation is how the nature and scale of this influence is blown out of proportion in the US (some other countries too for that matter, this is not US specific) to create a demonisation narrative of the external (and internal) groups.
One can for example remember the reporting about political ad campaighns on social media and how they were so small that even I could fund them yet presented as something apocalyptic.


The 2016 influence story is only a part of the lengthy demonisation effort of Putin specifically and Russia in general. There are many other obvious examples of this, but to stay within my favourite military-technical area, one could remember the initial coverage of 080808 war.
In a way that coverage was very much the same as the article you have linked, they only interviewed one side for example.

[Catfish]

Yes, influencing (or trying to influence) is common and everyone does it. Also Putin.
The issue I have with the current situation is how the nature and scale of this influence is blown out of proportion in the US (some other countries too for that matter, this is not US specific) to create a demonisation narrative of the external (and internal) groups.I would not say it is "blown out of proportion" when you look at how effective they were, if you only look at Trump and brexit. It is not only about influencing a direct opinion, it is about general destabilizing, and Russia does a good job at that.

You would not suggest that neutral or especially western media report favourably about the Russio-Georgian war, or about the annexation of the Krim? Of course, after those 'social' media (lmao) campaigns all big news agencies that do not support a certain president are fake news.. which is why the general effort of destabilization may indeed be regarded as successful.

[ikalugin]

I am not talking about how western media should have been covering 080808 war positively, I am talking about how that war was covered negatively and one sided when for example compared to the post war EU investigations report.

It was amusing at the time though, as it t was possible to troll online Americans who believed that the US state of Georgia was invaded by evil Russian aggressors.

[Catfish]

I am not talking about how western media should have been covering 080808 war positively, I am talking about how that war was covered negatively and one sided [...]
So .. you just said it was covered negatively, while it should have been different

It was amusing at the time though, as it t was possible to troll online Americans who believed that the US state of Georgia was invaded by evil Russian aggressors.So Putin missed a perfect opportunity to invade the american Georgia :D

[em2nought]

My bet is that Russia is being vilified today because it is a predominately Caucasian country. :03: The left in the USA preferred them as communists. The thing the left most worry about would be if the USA became allies with Russia dropping soon to be Islamic Europe in the process. :hmmm:

[ikalugin]

My bet is that Russia is being vilified today because it is a predominately Caucasian country. :03: The left in the USA preferred them as communists. The thing the left most worry about would be if the USA became allies with Russia dropping soon to be Islamic Europe in the process. :hmmm:
Caucasian

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/dwC-Kd0MTZc/sddefault.jpg

[Catfish]

..the left preferred them [the Russians] as communists.."

I would have betted my life that it was the politically right wing that thought of Russians as the evil communists. Learning something new every day here .. :hmmm:

Of course in theses day, information does not seem to be worth a penny anymore. Thanks to Russia, i might say :03:

[Subnuts]

The ethnic background of the majority of Russians is actually insane complicated, and it's basically impossible to describe most of them as belonging to a single monolithic ethnic group, but since the forum's chief geneticist has gone ahead and decided they're actually white, I'll just go to bed now.

[August]

The ethnic background of the majority of Russians is actually insane complicated, and it's basically impossible to describe most of them as belonging to a single monolithic ethnic group, but since the forum's chief geneticist has gone ahead and decided they're actually white, I'll just go to bed now.




Actually "white" is neither monolithic or mono-ethnic but I think it does describe the majority of modern Russians no?

[vienna]

It actually depends on what you'd consider "Russian" as opposed to what the Russians consider "Russian". Since Russia, proper, without all the territories laid claim to by the Russian government(s) over time, extends from Eastern Europe to Asia, the mix of ethniciies and races is wide: if you add in all the Slavic countries and any other areas Russia has claimed over the years, the mix is even greater and the size of the "Russian/Caucasian/etc." majority lessens...


Here is all you you need to know about the Russian population:

Demographics of Russia --


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia


Te real thing about definitions of 'white' or 'Caucasian' is the definitions are fungible, usually to fit whatever political, social, or other axe is being ground; early in the history of US immigration growth, Italians were sometimes considered to not be 'white' or 'Caucasian', strictly speaking an, more, recently, those from Latin American origins, who once were lumped into the 'white' category, now find themselves being parsed out of the stats. Kind of makes you wonder if maybe the next step is to "de-white" the Scots and Irish... :03:














<O>

[ikalugin]

What I find amusing is that "Caucasian" in sounds like a person from Caucasus and those tend to be viewed as non white by ethnic nationalists.

[Onkel Neal]

State of the Union, are you ready for more another step back? I am bracing for it. Trump, the Dems, someone likely to embarrass the people again....

[Catfish]

What I find amusing is that "Caucasian" in sounds like a person from Caucasus and those tend to be viewed as non white by ethnic nationalists.

True, but then "ethnic nationalists" are not exactly known for a scientific approach, critical perception or modern education. Which is why they can be so easily instrumentalized.


@Neal will be interesting what T. has to say, about the state :yep:

[Mr Quatro]

State of the Union, are you ready for more another step back? I am bracing for it. Trump, the Dems, someone likely to embarrass the people again....

Pelosi blowing her nose in a hanky and making shocked smug funny faces whenever President Trump makes a reference to the wall he wants to build.

Lots of comedy material from both sides for Saturday Night live to work with :D

[August]

"ethnic nationalists" are not exactly known for a scientific approach, critical perception or modern education. Which is why they can be so easily instrumentalized.


The arrogance of the above statement is breathtaking. What are your credentials that makes you such an authority over how people think and act?

[Buddahaid]

Whatever.

[Mr Quatro]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6672337/Stone-faced-Nancy-Pelosi-READS-way-Trumps-State-Union-lectures-Democrats.html

Stone-faced Nancy Pelosi

READS her way though Trump's State of the Union as he lectures Democrats on Mueller,
illegal immigration and 'socialism'

Speaker Nancy Pelosi was visibly unamused during President Donald Trump's State of the Union speech Tuesday night

She bit her lips and pursed her lips when he mentioned ideas she disagrees with

At other times she read along with the president's remarks, holding up her print out of his speech in view behind him as he spoke on the dais before her

She did applaud some of his lines, particularly when he mentioned high employment for women

She drew almost more attention than Trump for her reactions to his remarks

[Catfish]

The arrogance of the above statement is breathtaking. What are your credentials that makes you such an authority over how people think and act?

It is (not only) my opinion that "ethnic nationalism" is nothing else than good old racism. Yes indeed, wanting to get rid of people who aren’t the same ethnicity as you is racist. Do you need to be told that?

And it is also my opinion that a modern, rational and well educated person is mostly non-racist. With a few exceptions – though those exceptions do not really believe in "ethnic nationalism"/racism, but rather use it to instrumentalize others who do.

[ikalugin]

My personal opinion is that ethnic nationalism does not work for empires, as you want to promote people within institutions based on their merit, on their service to the country and not the ethnic group.


But then I do not like the "progressive" ideological groups like Greenpeace either.
https://i.imgur.com/oD9Wh.jpg
(picture is mirrored for extra comic effect)

[Catfish]

Environmental concerns in Russia? How funny :O:

[ikalugin]

Environmental concerns in Russia? How funny :O:
Those are quite real, they are just not served by the organisations such as Greenpeace.

[Rockstar]

It is (not only) my opinion that "ethnic nationalism" is nothing else than good old racism.
I think the word you (they) are looking for is good old discrimination.

[Catfish]

State of the Union, are you ready for more another step back? I am bracing for it. Trump, the Dems, someone likely to embarrass the people again....
So what do you all think about Trump's speech? :hmmm:
I thought it to be (relatively) reasonable, if not on all topics. I just wonder whether the call for uniting the nation will be followed by himself..

[u crank]

So what do you all think about Trump's speech?

It was the usual blah blah.

The reactions of some of the Democrats though was priceless. :O:

[Platapus]

I was surprised at some of the factchecking. Trump lied a lot less than I thought he would. I guess he had some real good speech writers who knew how to skirt close to the edges.

[eddie]

I couldn't understand where he got his info on El Paso being such a crime ridden city. Never hear much in the news about that place, I'm sure they have their share of crime just like every other city in the country, but to make it sound like it was worse then Chicago or Detroit is one heck of a stretch.

[Subnuts]

I couldn't understand where he got his info on El Paso being such a crime ridden city.

Their crime rate has been steadily dropping for the last 20 years and is actually lower than the Texas state average now. :hmmm:
https://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/texas/el-paso.html

[mapuc]

I use to about a day after see the this Speech of the Union.

This time I haven't-I see this type of speech directed towards the Citizens in USA and countries connected to USA.

Not towards citizens in Denmark, Sweden or Germany.

Markus

[August]

It is (not only) my opinion that "ethnic nationalism" is nothing else than good old racism. Yes indeed, wanting to get rid of people who aren’t the same ethnicity as you is racist. Do you need to be told that?
Of course not but then again you didn't mention racism.
but then "ethnic nationalists" are not exactly known for a scientific approach, critical perception or modern education
Maybe you don't realize that even racists can be scientists, critical thinkers and can be found on every college campus in the world.

[Mr Quatro]

I watched the whole thing and I really liked it even the sugar coating of the handicap and ex-cons and veterans turned me on ... I thought he did quite well ... Trump just might make a good President after all.

Did you see those ladies in white react negatively to everything Trump said and then positively to their ranks being increased? I even saw a few looking at each other on what they should think :yep:


So what do you all think about Trump's speech? :hmmm:
I thought it to be (relatively) reasonable, if not on all topics. I just wonder whether the call for uniting the nation will be followed by himself..

It was the usual blah blah..

The reactions of some of the Democrats though was priceless. :O:.


[/QUOTE]
Instant polls taken by CBS and CNN after Tuesday night’s speech found that Mr. Trump’s call for bipartisan compromise on programs for the middle class struck pay dirt with voters.

The CBS survey showed 76 percent of people who watched the speech approved of Mr. Trump’s performance, including 82 percent of independents and even 30 percent of Democrats. Among Republicans, 97 percent liked the his speech.[/QUOTE]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/feb/6/donald-trumps-state-of-the-union-speech-pleases-vi/

[Dowly]

Trump just might make a good President after all.I think that ship has sailed. :haha:

[Catfish]

[...] Maybe you don't realize that even racists can be scientists, critical thinkers and can be found on every college campus in the world.

Well, of course. I still think that the numbers are not quite as high there, last not least because contact and associating among people of different nations on college campuses is self-evident and encouraged.

[ikalugin]

https://thebulletin.org/2019/02/russia-may-have-violated-the-inf-treaty-heres-how-the-united-states-appears-to-have-done-the-same/

[Onkel Neal]

So what do you all think about Trump's speech? :hmmm:
I thought it to be (relatively) reasonable, if not on all topics. I just wonder whether the call for uniting the nation will be followed by himself..


Too long, the usual political laundry list.

Build the wall and I'll take it seriously.

Did anyone see Ruth Ginsberg?

What's more interesting is the Virginia state implosion. https://www.apnews.com/a88e83e13291432795ae0377c012af2c

[u crank]

What's more interesting is the Virginia state implosion.

Wow that's a dumpster fire. How's this for an ironic twist. Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax has hired the law firm which previously represented Brett Kavanaugh after he was accused by Christine Ford. The alleged victim of Fairfax, Dr. Vanessa Tyson has also lawyered up. Yep, she will be represented by the law firm who represented Christine Ford. You can't make this stuff up. :D

[eddie]

Let's not forget the Republican Congress, along with Trump raised our debt by 2 trillion dollars through his first 2 years in office. So much for the Republican Contract with America, another load of nonsense from the Party who promised to lower the deficit.

[Mr Quatro]

Let's not forget the Republican Congress, along with Trump raised our debt by 2 trillion dollars through his first 2 years in office. So much for the Republican Contract with America, another load of nonsense from the Party who promised to lower the deficit.

Trump has a plan to cancel the debt we owe to China, but he can't get the Pentagon to agree :D

[Dowly]

Trump's speech was fine, but what bothered me is that he didn't own it. It was a speech he read, that was written to him. Obama had his speeches wrote to him too, I'm sure, just as was the case with GWB. But hearing those sounds from Trump's mouth, it was obvious it was not him speaking.

Source: Past two years.

[u crank]

Trump's speech was fine, but what bothered me is that he didn't own it. It was a speech he read, that was written to him. Obama had his speeches wrote to him too, I'm sure, just as was the case with GWB. But hearing those sounds from Trump's mouth, it was obvious it was not him speaking.

Source: Past two years.

:D

Where was President Donald Trump during Tuesday’s State of the Union address? The racist, sexist, immigrant-hating, cruel, anti-Semitic, divisive monster who is denounced continuously by his Democrat/media/Left critics was AWOL. My theory? He was sequestered in an undisclosed location and replaced with an advanced animatronic device. Unlike the Trump whose dark portrait the Left paints daily, this amazingly lifelike invention offered stirring words that should soothe blacks, women, immigrants, the infirm, Jews, and millions of Americans who desire national unity.


https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/donald-trump-delivers-heartwarming-sotu-address/

[vienna]

...

What are your credentials that makes you such an authority over how people think and act?



Reading some of your prior posts and the way you so handily make the same sort of value judgements about others' thoughts and acts, both on and off this forum, I'd venture to guess he might have gotten his 'credentials' from a source similar to where you got yours... :haha:









<O>

[Schroeder]

Trump has a plan to cancel the debt we owe to China, but he can't get the Pentagon to agree :D
Maybe you can make the Mexicans pay it off....:O:

[August]

Trump's speech was fine, but what bothered me is that he didn't own it. It was a speech he read, that was written to him. Obama had his speeches wrote to him too, I'm sure, just as was the case with GWB. But hearing those sounds from Trump's mouth, it was obvious it was not him speaking.

Source: Past two years.


What do you have against the ancient and honorable profession of speech writing? :)


Personally I don't see a problem with it as long as the speech giver has read the speech beforehand and approves of what it says. Oratory skill is a wonderful natural talent but not everyone has it.

[mapuc]

A question on this writing speeches to the President.

Have there been any President in the history who have done this by himself ?

Markus

[August]

A question on this writing speeches to the President.

Have there been any President in the history who have done this by himself ?

Markus


Abraham Lincoln wrote the Gettysburg Address. But that would be the only one I am sure of. I would hazard to guess that every State of the Union speech, whoever wrote it, is looked at by multiple people beforehand.

[Dowly]

I've nothing against written speeches, just in this case it was Trump saying things we all know he doesn't himsel believe in.

[ikalugin]

Things such as?

[Dowly]

Such as calls for compromise. Trump doesn't compromise unless he wins.

[u crank]

Such as calls for compromise. Trump doesn't compromise unless he wins.

I don't think that politicians and especially the President are elected to compromise. They were elected to carry out the political agenda that they campaigned on and were voted into office for. Making deals is part of the process but requires good faith on the part of both parties involved. Have we seen that good faith compromise on the part of the Democratic party and their dealings with the President?

[Catfish]

[...] They were elected to carry out the political agenda that they campaigned on and were voted into office for. [...]


OMG! Better not!

[Dowly]

I don't think that politicians and especially the President are elected to compromise.Well, Trump called for compromises. Does that make him a bad President? :O:

Have we seen that good faith compromise on the part of the Democratic party and their dealings with the President?Dems have been willing to fund Trump's stupid wall in exchange for proper a DACA solution (i.e. not an extension, but a permanent solution). Think the highest Dems have gone was $25B?

[u crank]

OMG! Better not!

So you are opposed to the democratic process?:hmmm:

[u crank]

Well, Trump called for compromises. Does that make him a bad President? :O:

:haha: I guess that depends on which side of the argument you are on. Obviously Trump needs to get things done. And just as obvious are his political opponents desire to prevent that. It's a fine line that Presidents have to walk. Getting things done but not disappointing the people that elected him. If this was Trump's second term or he wasn't running in 2020 things would probably be different.

Dems have been willing to fund Trump's stupid wall in exchange for proper a DACA solution (i.e. not an extension, but a permanent solution). Think the highest Dems have gone was $25B?


And he probably should have taken it but again the disapproval from his base would have been quite severe. The other side of the argument is that Dems are now against a position on border security that they were in favor of just a few years ago. Politics.

[Dowly]

The other side of the argument is that Dems are now against a position on border security that they were in favor of just a few years ago.Democrats were in favor of a fence. Trump wants a wall.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jan/09/donald-trump/trump-democrats-reverse-border-wall-position/

[u crank]

Democrats were in favor of a fence. Trump wants a wall.

Their position wasn't just about a wall or fence. It was about illegal immigration on the southern border. Their past position is remarkably similar to Trump's present position.

Democratic Party platform 1996:

“We cannot tolerate illegal immigration and we must stop it … (At the border before Bill Clinton) drugs flowed freely. Illegal immigration was rampant. Criminal immigrants, deported after committing crimes in America, returned the very next day to commit crimes again. … We continue to firmly oppose welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. We believe family members who sponsor immigrants into this country should take financial responsibility for them, and be held legally responsible for supporting them.”


Barack Obama, 2005:

“We simply cannot allow people to pour into the U.S. undocumented, undetected, unchecked, circumventing the people who are waiting patiently, diligently, lawfully to become immigrants in this country.”

Hillary Clinton, 2014:

“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in and I do think you have to control your borders.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer, 2009:

“People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who enter the U.S. legally. The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe that their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 2008:

“We do need to address the issue of immigration and the challenge we have of undocumented people in our country. We certainly do not want any more coming in.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, 2007:

“I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into the country who will work for lower wages than American workers and drives wages down even lower than they are right now.”

[Dowly]

Their position wasn't just about a wall or fence. It was about illegal immigration on the southern border. Their past position is remarkably similar to Trump's present position.How have their position changed with regards to border security? (honest question)

[u crank]

How have their position changed with regards to border security? (honest question)

Trick question. :O:

A couple of things. Any present day Democrat or progressive who spoke like the people in those quotes would be run out of town. It appears to me that Democrats are saying one thing but not backing it up with 'concrete':D action. If their position hasn't changed (I think it has) then they would be in favor of a wall/fence/barrier that would actually work at least better than what is there now. I believe that their position has changed because no one in the Democratic leadership is saying or would dare say "We cannot tolerate illegal immigration and we must stop it". Quite the opposite. Walls are immoral but illegal immigrants are not. This is all about Trump and the game is quite apparent. Even a minor victory here for the President is an intolerable option. 2020 is coming fast.

The truth is Dowly that eventually a wall that actually works will be built. The present situation can't go on forever. Eventually the flow of poor, uneducated, low skill workers and their families will become a crisis inside the USA. How that actually plays out I do not know but there is a limit to everything. It would be quite ironic if a future Democratic President had to do this. Position change #3.

[Onkel Neal]

Things such as?

Building a wall

Dowly, you can say it's a stupid wall, but I guarantee if your country faced a massive influx of illegal aliens, you would be supporting a wall too. And don't let the race issue color your thinking. Just because it's Mexico on our southern border does not mean we do not like Mexicans. We just like it when they stay in their country and we stay in ours. try to imagine if your country was being flooded with illegal aliens from Texas like me, you would not like that at all, :)

[Rockstar]

"Finland is not to make everybody happy in the world. Finland should take care of the Finns first."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f9/True_Finns_logo.svg/200px-True_Finns_logo.svg.png :Kaleun_Wink:

[August]

Dems have been willing to fund Trump's stupid wall in exchange for proper a DACA solution (i.e. not an extension, but a permanent solution). Think the highest Dems have gone was $25B?


This is where the Democrats lack of good faith comes into play. Trump offered a temporary stay during the shut down that the Dems could certainly have bargained up to a permanent one had they been willing to seriously negotiate with Trump over border security.

[Buddahaid]

There are asses on both sides in this mega game of chicken. Only the common man loses.

[Dowly]

Dowly, you can say it's a stupid wall, but I guarantee if your country faced a massive influx of illegal aliens, you would be supporting a wall too. And don't let the race issue color your thinking. Just because it's Mexico on our southern border does not mean we do not like Mexicans. We just like it when they stay in their country and we stay in ours. try to imagine if your country was being flooded with illegal aliens from Texas like me, you would not like that at all, :)

Majority of your illegals are due to overstaying their visas. As I already said before in this thread, maybe you guys should look into making it harder for illegals to live in America. I'm not against border security, I'm simply against the wall. It's stupid.

This is where the Democrats lack of good faith comes into play. Trump offered a temporary stay during the shut down that the Dems could certainly have bargained up to a permanent one had they been willing to seriously negotiate with Trump over border security.Dems did try to negotiate with Trump and I am sure the question of DACA came up more than once.



In other news,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h810bO-4LIs

[Platapus]

I don't think that politicians and especially the President are elected to compromise....

I am only one voter, but that is exactly whats I am looking for when electing a representative and president.

“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best”― Otto von Bismarck


Politics is about negotiating consensus and cooperation between factions.

The effective politician is pragmatic and pragmatism welcomes compromise.

One could modify Bismarck's comment to read "Politics is the art of the compromise.

[Platapus]

The Arizona Legislation is trying to pass a law proclaiming that porno is a public health crisis in Arizona.

I wonder where they get off saying that.

:03:

[Skybird]

I am not against border security, I am only against that wall, said Dowly.



Assuming for the monent the wall would be an effective border security measure. And not even a lethal one, like the Germna wall was that was build to keep people in, not to keep unwanted foreigners out (although that was what the SED regime claimed when labelling it the anti-fascist protection wall).



Then the quote would be, in brief: I am against effective border security, i only want a strawman alibi to claim I have border security, while de facto I have none.


I am not certain whether that wall will work the way it is inteded. Many border protectors say it will be a shift towards the positive (=the wanted intention), some borde rprotectors say it will not make much difference.



So why not trying it. Fact also is the American people have all right one could imagine whether or not they want foreigners coming in and walkign on their land. Its not the Mexicans' land, they have zero claim for anything in all this. They can and muist ask for permission, and if the answer is no, they have to accept it - unconditionally.



Walls and fences can be good to keep the bad guys out, or to keep people who cannot live together, apart. Only walls that keep apart people that want to live together, and walls keeping innocents locked in, are bad. But this wanting to live together, must be mutual. And if the one side does no share the desire of the other, then a wall is absolutely legitimate, and morally fine. Its the same reasoning why we have doors in our houses and usually locking them.



Walls are demonised in general today. that is absurd. Walls protect, can give shelter, provide cover and security and help law and order. Ask the Israelis whether they compare their walls to the German wall and its death strip, that killing zone of mines and self-shooting installtion. They will say no and prove you black on wide and empirically that where they have build wals, the number of violent incidents and terror attacks by border-crossing terrorists have drmaatically, substantially dropped.



I am a fan of walls and fences, if erected for the right reasons. It helps to keep things sorted, and helps to declare clearly what goes and what not, how far the other can move forward, and where the line in the sand is. Becasue we are not all the same bunch, we are not all the same kind, and not everybody can and wants to live peacefully together with just everyone and everybody else.



Walls provide safety in the generla menaing of keeping unwanted people out. And who is unwated and who not gets decided by just one side: the owner of the place.

On this there can and shall be no compromise.


Whether a wall between the US and Mexico works or not, remaisn to be seen. When it works and empricaly counting things out shows it drops illegal border crossings signfiicantly, then it works. If it doe snot cntrbute to this intention, then it works not. Just one thing is clear: the desire of froegners to corss the border, play absoutely no role here. Not at all.



Else Dowly would need to accept to let me in and give me a third of his garden if I move there and say I want to build a small blockhouse to live there. I cannot imagine he would accept that without setting up a fight. Because its his garden - not mine.

[Dowly]

Then the quote would be, in brief: I am against effective border security, i only want a strawman alibi to claim I have border security, while de facto I have none.No. The quote remains the same. Do not put words in my mouth.


Why not try the wall? Because it is fudging expensive and there are no guarantees that it works!

[u crank]

I am only one voter, but that is exactly whats I am looking for when electing a representative and president.

Politics is about negotiating consensus and cooperation between factions.

The effective politician is pragmatic and pragmatism welcomes compromise

I am not suggesting that the President should not compromise. There is a difference between compromise and capitulation. In regards to the border security debate it would seem that this is what Pelosi and Schumer want. Capitulation. We saw that after the shut down ended. To deny the President some success on a campaign promise is just that. Trump wants $5.7 billion for his wall. In less than a decade the interest on the national debt will hit the $1 trillion mark and then become a consistent $1 trillion outlay each year. What Trump wants is peanuts and to deny him that is pure political warfare by Nancy and Chuck. The fact that they are not trying to extract a good deal here when one is possible says a lot.

This situation and others are problematic because giving into Trump on any issue is anathema for the Democratic leadership. Trump's reelection chances just keep going up.

A compromise is the art of dividing a cake in such a way that everyone believes he has the biggest piece.

Ludwig Erhard

[Mr Quatro]

Majority of your illegals are due to overstaying their visas.

Cite! This is simply not true :hmmm:

[Skybird]

No. The quote remains the same. Do not put words in my mouth.


Why not try the wall? Because it is fudging expensive and there are no guarantees that it works!
The money argument is a thing the Americans have to settle with all by themselves. The efficiency of the wall as a tool to cut illegal migration must be tested. As I said, walls in other parts of the world and throughout history has proven to be very effective for their tasks. Today in the west people already go hysterical if you juts say the word "wall". It should all be a rosy-red pony farm instead where all are smiling and be happy and nobody does nobody else any harm.



You want guarantees? And do nothing if no guarantee is given? Best lay still and be dead then. Life has no guarantees for nothing.



Be empirical, test and experience. Test it, see the results, and then one knows. Many border patrolling officers seem to say it works. Some say it works not and is a waste of money. Let the US go in full with this and then learn for sure what it is about.



What else should be done? Legalising migration and making illegal migration dissappear this way? Or the Australian model? Sure I like the Australian model, it is super-efficient and apparently the most successful attenmpt to tackle migraitpon and cut it to a low one digit percentage value of its former volume, but it raises even more antipathy in the public than the wall model. And the social-cultural unity by which the Han and the Japanese refuse any call to mix their ethincity and culture with foreigners is an option that is unrelastic in the West since such an ammount of collective unity does not exist over here.



The simple truth is this: migration can be digested by Western countries only to a certain level and not beyond, else migration takes over the hosting country. And cutting migraiton back cannot be done in a nice and "humane" way, but only by saying "No!" and acting dirty and unkind. Nobody wants to be seen like that, but thats how it is. They keep coming - either you kick them out and slam and then guard the door, or you give up and let them come in. These two options. Anything else is just egg-dancing and babbling.

[Platapus]

To the optimist, a compromise is the result where both sides win
To the pessimist, a compromise is the result where both sides lose
To the pragmatist, a compromise is the result of doing the best you can with what you have.

All three are correct.

Capitulation only works in an environment where these is a quid pro quo exchange.

I allow you to get everything you want in this area and you agree to give me everything I want in another area. Unfortunately, that only works when each side does not care that much about one of the issues.

One of the skills for a good negotiator is being able to recognize that which the opposing party is willing to negotiate and that which the opposing party is not willing to negotiate. They can then focus on the possible instead of wasting time on the improbable.

There are times, rightfully or not, where the concept of "everything is negotiable" may not apply. That's when you reach an impasse and that's when the skill of negotiation becomes apparent.

[Skybird]

There are things that are unnegotiable per se. When somebody wants you to take a lethal poison. What should a compromise be then? That you can opt for a sweet versus a sour taste? Can take the poison over three evenings instead of all in one drink? That you can opt for pill format and choose the pill colour freely? You are dead, no matter your negotiating skill.

Its not all and everything negotiable.

Also when the other has no right and claim to raise demands against you, and you owe him nothing. Why should you then even agree to hold negotiations - if the other does not use violence as a threat and you are too weak to resist to that? In which case it is no negotiation anyway, but a mere dictate of conditions.

[ikalugin]

https://www.stripes.com/news/europe/navy-missile-defenses-in-eastern-europe-could-push-back-against-russia-cno-says-1.567918

[Dowly]

Cite! This is simply not true :hmmm:
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/16/686056668/for-seventh-consecutive-year-visa-overstays-exceeded-illegal-border-crossings

[Jeff-Groves]

A wall will not work no matter how much money is thrown at it.
I'll use the Invasion of the Moles as an example.
My property runs 330 feet behind my house. There is a lot of moles at the back 60 feet near the woods.
Over the years they have been moving closer to the house so I dug a ditch, poured a footer 3 foot deep and built a wall.
Guess what? They dig tunnels!
With mouse traps I have caught those illegal Moles INSIDE my home!
So the wall was a waste of money and time.
Reality is that no wall ever works perfectly and mostly becomes a wasted effort.

[Skybird]

I stick with the Israeli example. Wehre they have build walls, they have tunnels and moles, yes, but even with these the number of incidents with Arabs trying to in filtrate Israel and committing acts of terror and crime in Jewish settlements have dramaticlaly delcined. It becomes more difficult to poeneteate into israel wherte therew are walls, and this has significantly reduced the number of border penetrations.



Imagine the number of migrants gets cut down to one third due to a wall. That would already be a big success, I would say. One third is three times less than the previous state.



What else should be done to protect a border? There, or here, or anywhere? A border can be protected. Of course it can. But it might need a level of determination and willingness to make tough decisions that many people do shy away from. Welcome culture, we say in germany. The Australians formed another concept: deterrance. Its absolutely clear to see what concept of these two works, and what concept works not at all.



You cannot demotivate people to come to your place if you welcome them and ask them friendly to leave, and you even pay them money if they leave.

[Catfish]

This wall will never be built.

[Dowly]

Here's an article from 2006 on Haaretz that talks about the reasons for reduced Hamas activity:
https://www.haaretz.com/1.5301742

(Spoilers: it's not the wall... which is actually more of a fence)


Here's another from 2008:
https://www.haaretz.com/1.5051525

[August]

A wall will not work no matter how much money is thrown at it.
I'll use the Invasion of the Moles as an example.
My property runs 330 feet behind my house. There is a lot of moles at the back 60 feet near the woods.
Over the years they have been moving closer to the house so I dug a ditch, poured a footer 3 foot deep and built a wall.
Guess what? They dig tunnels!
With mouse traps I have caught those illegal Moles INSIDE my home!
So the wall was a waste of money and time.
Reality is that no wall ever works perfectly and mostly becomes a wasted effort.


Well, prisoners can tunnel walls and barriers as well but prisons still have walls around them so they are hardly a waste of time.



Walls serve as barrier to mobility. They may not stop everyone but it sure takes a lot longer to secretly dig a tunnel under, or scale over, or break through, a wall than it does just to walk over an invisible line drawn the sand. That delay gives border control a chance to respond and without walls their job becomes a lot more difficult.

[eddie]

I wonder if ICE has deported all those illegals who have worked for the Trump Organization since 2002, building hotels and golf courses, and work as maids at his hotels? He sure talks out of both sides of his big mouth,lol
How many of those illegals were members of MS-13, or were involved with human trafficking, selling drugs, raping and murdering Americans in their beds!:D

[Buddahaid]

Well, prisoners can tunnel walls and barriers as well but prisons still have walls around them so they are hardly a waste of time.



Walls serve as barrier to mobility. They may not stop everyone but it sure takes a lot longer to secretly dig a tunnel under, or scale over, or break through, a wall than it does just to walk over an invisible line drawn the sand. That delay gives border control a chance to respond and without walls their job becomes a lot more difficult.

I prefer the wire barrier and National Guard troops rather than the undefined open ended wall. Choose what the wall will be and I might get on board, but not when it's just money thrown at the concept. At least with troops there are boots geared toward a ground force.

[u crank]

In other news,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h810bO-4LIs

Ocasio-Cortez’s storytelling may have been persuasive to the uninformed. But it was also wrong.

https://www.ifs.org/blog/aoc-doesnt-let-the-facts-get-in-the-way-of-a-good-story/

1) You cannot use campaign funds for non-campaign related expenses. That includes “paying off folks.”

2) “Dark-money funded campaigns” are not a thing. The source of all donations to candidates over $200 are fully disclosed to the FEC, which then publishes that information online for the world to see.

3) “Special interest” money does not dominate campaign coffers, even of the candidates you don’t like...

Ocasio-Cortez, like most politicians, is a Manichaean. There are the good guys and the bad guys; the goal is to stop the bad guys and help the good guys. If someone disagrees with you about a bill or policy, the only reason must be that they are the bad guy, or at least paid for by the bad guys. It also must mean that your bill will hurt those bad guys! That’s why they’re opposing it, and that confirms that the bill is good!

The world doesn’t work that way. Opponents of H.R. 1 are not bought by the fossil fuel industry, or big pharma, or some other nonsense. There are many legitimate gripes with how this 570-page monstrosity of a bill hurts the fundamental First Amendment rights of all Americans. Ocasio-Cortez and supporters of the bill may think that those costs are outweighed by the benefits, or that it is more important to cast the symbolic anti-corruption vote than to deal with the policy ramifications of their proposal.

But they should at least learn how the system actually works now before they become so certain of how to fix it.

[Rockstar]

I think its been shown time and time again guarded barriers work. As it is now migrant routes simply move where there are no barriers or guards. If a wall, barrier, fence or whatever you want to call it is finally built that spans the entire border. The next path of least resistance will be by sea.

Cant imagine how the government could provide continued funding for active patrolling of a barrier anyway. Unless of course electronic sensors could be used but it is my understanding that funding was cut because of cost over runs and nothing was ever produced.

[Skybird]

Of course there must be guards and patrols at any kind of border. You have guards before surveillance on monitors, pilots in surveillance aircraft and crews in surveillance vehicles. But no patrols along a tool of perimeter defences - a fence or wall?



That even a wall needs boots on the ground is so natural a concept to me that I did not figure that one would need to explicitly mention it.

[Catfish]

The border will - if it will ever be built (i take it the state of national emergency has been swept under the carpet?) - 3.144 kilometers long. Will take some people to guard it. Along with those billons to build, maintenance and all that.
https://www.businessinsider.de/us-mexico-border-wall-photos-maps-2018-5?r=US&IR=T
Mexico will not pay for it.
Wouldn't it be better to admit failed politics and get a grip on drug comsumption in the US? (hint: main problem, but too much US money involved of course)
Or punish those who let illegal migrants work for them, to spare taxes, and not hiring US citizens for those jobs (as if the latter were ever keen on those special jobs).
Or assume control on visa papers when it comes to its length of validity.

And in 20 to 30 years there will be crowds of people tearing down the wall (if it is built) and the presidents in charge will be celebrated for getting back freedom for the world, and along the border.

Still, i think it will not be built.

[Rockstar]

Wouldn't it be better to admit failed politics




Failure? Ha! This is by design, this is U.S. politics at its best! :doh:


Buy the way I'm doing my part about the drug problem and looking to buy some OTC pot stocks.

[Skybird]

The border will - if it will ever be built (i take it the state of national emergency has been swept under the carpet?) - 3.144 kilometers long. Will take some people to guard it. Along with those billons to build, maintenance and all that.
Technology has made some advancements over the past 2000 years. A lighthouse or watchtower with 20 archerseavery 200 meters is no longer needed.


Wouldn't it be better to admit failed politics and get a grip on drug comsumption in the US? (hint: main problem, but too much US money involved of course)
The war on drugs is the textbook exmaple of a failed policy. And why should citizens not have the right to consume drugs, btgw? I only am against the public needeing to pay fore the cosnewquence sof their consummation. Finally, corrupoting a detemrined effort to stop illegal migration , is not failure due to unavoidable fat or something. It simply is a delibverate and wanted saboptage of a determined border proteciton regime.



It cna be done. Israel shows it. Australia, in the past severla state sin the East Block in Germany. Thje problem in case of stopping illegal migraiton is not ability or money. Its lacking will to do what must be done. We see this inEurope ourselves, too. Its not as if we could nopt stop illegal crossing of the Med or European opute rborders. But our politi8cians and chief ideologists reuse to do what must be done for that goal. They want mirgants coming in, still, like the Democrats in America want them comi8ng to gain new voter pools from people sympathising with doing this, or sympathsiing with the idea to overcome the nationla state and its identity itself.





Or punish those who let illegal migrants work for them, to spare taxes, and not hiring US citizens for those jobs (as if the latter were ever keen on those special jobs).
Employing illegal aliens already is punishable, they said on TV. Even more seriously lounsiable than in Germany and most of Europe were it is punishable as well.



Or assume control on visa papers when it comes to its length of validity.Forged or lakciong papers do not stop aliens in Germany dropping below the radar and dissappearing, forever. A very big and completely unbsovled problem her ein Germaqny. Why do you think NMexicans tick diferfrenbtly and will be shy to beocme insivisnble just becasue the yhave no papers? And what about those who9 come with no valid papers anyway, since years and decades?




And in 20 to 30 years there will be crowds of people tearing down the wall (if it is built) and the presidents in charge will be celebrated for getting back freedom for the world, and along the border.

Freedom for the world...? The world is only free if the US, or Europe for that matter, gets owned by the rest of the world, and no sovereignty of nations and their native and original populations exist anymore? Whats next - socialist world revolution and the emerging of the global peace of the new Aquarian era?


Whatever weed it is that you are on - get off it. History shows were dreaming like this leads to. And it never was nice, but always miserable. Always.

[Catfish]

^ you have your opinion, and others have others.
Regarding this "free world" i thought it was obvious i was being sarcastic.

[Aktungbby]

Or punish those who let illegal migrants work for them, to spare taxes, and not hiring US citizens for those jobs (as if the latter were ever keen on those special jobs).
c'mon NOW! HOMBRE IF I FIRE MY ILLEGAL HOUSEKEEPER, GARDENER, AND ARBORIST, MY WIFE WILL KILL ME. MOREOVER THE CHEROKEE BRANCH OF THE FAMILY HOLD THAT ALL BLACK AND WHITE AMERICANS ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SO ITS WHERE U DRAW THE LINE; NOT WHICH BASTARD PASSES A LAW IN WASHINGTON....PLUS THE NAPA VALLEY DEPERATELY NEEDS GRAPEVINE WORKERS AN WAIT-PERSONS IN ITS FAMED RESTAURANTS
‘What kind of life is this here?’”https://s.hdnux.com/photos/71/50/31/15107693/3/460x1240.jpg <Bucio says. During the fall — harvest time, a vineyard worker’s busiest season — her days felt like an endless reel of waking up at 3:30 a.m., commuting to Napa in traffic, toiling for 12 hours in the vineyards and returning home just in time for four hours of sleep, to do it all over again. The heat, the exhaustion, the pressure of faster, faster, faster....On one hand, these women are the lucky ones: Vineyard work offers higher wages, more autonomy and more job security than many other employment options available to them in California — and certainly more than in rural Mexico, where many women, like Bucio, say they couldn’t find jobs at all. Here, as the men who traditionally worked in vineyards have left for jobs in restaurants, construction or cannabis fields,looking to buy some OTC pot stocks. women are in high demand in the wine industry.
Yet life for these women, virtually all from rural Mexico, is built on fragile foundations....It’s a liminal existence that Bucio can’t quite come to terms with: one foot in Mexico, one foot in California, at home in neither. HAVING HELPED HARVEST ONIONS COMMERCIALLY IN '71-'72 SUMMERS FOR MY GEN. MGR. DAD'S LARGE ONION PLANTS FROM LEASED FIELDS IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY WITH HISPANIC CREWS AND FLUENT IN SPANISH WHICH HELPED LATER IN THE 90'S AS SECURITY AT IMMIGRATION IN SAN FRANCISCO, MY VIEW IS NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S VIEW; TRUMP IS INHERENTLY WRONG, SOUNDS RASCIST AND WE NEED THESE PEOPLE TO FILL LOW LEVEL JOBS OR THOSE 'PERCEIVED AS SUCH' AS NATIVE-BORN YANKEES DON'T WANT THE WORK. WHO ARE WE GONNA GET TO CUT UP ALL THAT TYSON CHICKEN IN THE DEAD OF IOWA WINTERS??!! I EAT CHICKEN 4 TIMES A WEEK BBY! https://www.huffingtonpost.com/catherine-ruckelshaus/tyson-foods-wage-theft_b_8557862.html (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/catherine-ruckelshaus/tyson-foods-wage-theft_b_8557862.html)
Wage theft is a persistent problem that hurts workers and their families struggling to make a living, as well as law-abiding companies that don’t make it a business practice to steal. National and state-level studies paint a dire picture. A seminal 2009 study[unprotectedworkers.org] (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.unprotectedworkers.org_index.php_broken-5Flaws_index&d=CwMGaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=Et5YdIyy-C0W2BTIH62ehqB-arbKzolU7qDKR2mCSoY&m=UUxXu53WNGpHSaLa5iFa7vI92fbNwjPZggFVqeynn9k&s=x9xOFyI4n5hc9TcbrQVmzhv2piCk2sEP2MPQhiBo69s&e=) of 4,307 low-wage workers found that more than two-thirds experienced at least one pay-related violation in their previous work week, including one-fourth paid less than minimum wage, three-quarters denied overtime pay they had earned, and nearly three-fifths not receiving paystub information about their hours and pay. This theft adds up quickly: low-wage workers in just the three cities of New York, Chicago and Los Angeles lost over $56 million per week in unpaid wages.

Violations and losses are even more egregious in the meat industry[hrw.org] (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.hrw.org_en_&d=CwMGaQ&c=RAhzPLrCAq19eJdrcQiUVEwFYoMRqGDAXQ_puw5tYjg&r=Et5YdIyy-C0W2BTIH62ehqB-arbKzolU7qDKR2mCSoY&m=UUxXu53WNGpHSaLa5iFa7vI92fbNwjPZggFVqeynn9k&s=1rypalrSrUxCLCpTxcJCUdMIfvCDZ4nfTkaTK-GhhNQ&e=), where Tyson is a leader...

HAVING TRUCKED STYROFOAM CONTAINERS TO CHICKEN & EGG PLANTS:k_confused:: A LITTLE PROPAGANDA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-lmSIoUoRM BON APETIT!:hmmm:

[mapuc]

I say there's two types of illegal immigrants/refugees

Those who are accepted
and
Those who aren't

Markus

[Catfish]

@Aktung well.. i'm not Trump so i will not accuse you, or anyone :03:


I say there's two types of illegal immigrants/refugees

Those who are accepted
and
Those who aren't

Markus

Accepted or rejected by whom? If you go back long enough in time, everyone is "illegal" where he or she lives now. Someone being "illegal" can only exist if there are "nations", with more or less artificial boundaries changing over time, segregating people from each other. So borders are generally declared by militarily stronger nations, and they then decide who is "illegal."
All this is a theoretical construct by mankind, that could be entirely different if history would have took another turn. And think of that: Can any person born and living indeed be declared as "illegal"? I mean, by any ethical standard? By whom, by what justification? Answer: By sheer power, and nothing else.

What about California, Texas, Wyoming, New Mexico - US-Mexican war anyone :O:? "Cultural integration" by US president Polk? General Ulysses S. Grant called the Mexican War "one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation".
"On February 2, 1848, Mexico ceded 55 percent of its territory, including what is now Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas, and parts of Colorado, Nevada and Utah after the war, in exchange for fifteen million dollars in war compensation. After the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, Mexicans living in the new United States territory had to adapt to becoming Americans. Many Mexicans who lived in the territory lost to the United States decided to stay and become American citizens. Integration proved difficult. The U.S. government refused to accept land claims based on tradition or limited documentation, and many Mexicans lost their holdings."
https://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-war/mexican-american-war

[Skybird]

^ you have your opinion, and others have others.
Regarding this "free world" i thought it was obvious i was being sarcastic.
I dont care for others having opinions. Whether they can rationally found them so that I can see reason in them - thats what decides for me what opinions disagreeing with me I nevertheless respect. Just claiming something out of the blue of falling into ideological clichées does nothing for me. It just kills everybody's time, and especially my nerves (and often my money).

[Mr Quatro]

You've made a good point Aktungbby, but that only works for the ones you know and have pointed out. What about the ones with bales of mariuana on their backs, the rapiest, the murderers, the ones that steal and rob (and that includes their own countrymen). Plus it's not just men and women from Mexico ... also includes China, Central & South America, etc, etc ...

I say build the wall and then the numbers will go down ... Many will give up and say "What's the use":yep:

[vienna]

MOSTLY TRUE: Visa overstays account for ‘half’ of all people in the country illegally --

https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2018/aug/24/kevin-mccarthy/mostly-true-visa-overstays-account-half-all-people/


Demographics of Immigrants in the United States Illegally --

https://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000845#states


Note in the above how the numbers for California have decreased by some 310,000 between 2000 and 2016; in the same period, New York State has had an increase of 165,000 and it has no border with Mexico; marauding Canucks, maybe?... :D

Also note Texas had a whopping 510,000 increase over the same period...

As far as CA is going, the high cost of living in CA is chasing out and keeping out larger numbers of illegals than any effect the southern barrier has been having; its just becoming too expensive to be an illegal in CA...

Added to the cost of living is the effect the rise in minimum wages in CA has had on the ability of businesses who have traditionally used illegals to now attract US citizens to work for them, cutting down of the jobs available for the illegals; if the Federal Govt. were to actually require and enforce the use of the E-Verify system and, also, to pt some real teeth in the penalties against employers who violate hiring laws, rather than the 'wrist slaps' given currently, I think you'd see a real effect on illegal immigration; if there aren't any jobs available to people, they won't bother to come...




BTW, here is a link to the report in the NPR link cited by Dowly in his reply to Mr Quatro; Some interesting facts in here...:

US Undocumented Population Continued to Fall from 2016 to 2017, and Visa Overstays Significantly Exceeded Illegal Crossings for the Seventh Consecutive Year --

http://cmsny.org/publications/essay-2017-undocumented-and-overstays/


Here in CA, the overstays are now the largest portion of the illegal population. Remember: these are people who actually applied for and received visas to enter the US and who did so, not by furtively sneaking across the border, but by entering ports of entry (airports, harbors, etc.) in a fully legal manner. This is why a wall is not the panacea Trump, his minions, and his Trumpettes are trying to sell to a rightfully skeptical nation. Bottom line: if you really want to seriously deal with the problem, a fully comprehensive and well-planned, well-thought out solution is required, not some self-serving, costly PR campaign stunt designed to get Trump brownie points with his lemmings...









<O>

[Mr Quatro]

Thank you vienna and Dowly for corecting my mistake, but the numbers of over stayed are avaiable and the numbers of illegalls that crossed over and did not get caught yet are not known and can only be estimated ... Many illegals that get caught say they have gone home to Mexico and crossed back over again several times. A wall would've helped prevent that.

Perhaps we should discuss the value of a modern carrier task force and the ever increasing cost to our defense budget to build them ... Would that satisfy everyone?

I don't think so :o

[Rockstar]

Then we have others publicly proclaim themselves sanctuary states and get their hackles up when federal officials try to round up and deport those who have overstayed their welcome. Yes a thoughtful plan would be nice but I think the current state of affairs has everything to do with the future political careers of party officials than what is the best and thoughtful plan to control immigration.

[Mr Quatro]

Then we have others publicly proclaim themselves sanctuary states and get their hackles up when federal officials try to round up and deport those who have overstayed their welcome. Yes a thoughtful plan would be nice but I think the current state of affairs has everything to do with the future political careers of party officials than what is the best and thoughtful plan to control immigration.

I think your right, plus it looks like the left wing Democrats are drunk with power and have 2020 in their sights. :yep:


http://sites.middlebury.edu/trump/files/2015/10/trump-and-immigration-cartoon-mckee.jpg

[August]

Then we have others publicly proclaim themselves sanctuary states and get their hackles up when federal officials try to round up and deport those who have overstayed their welcome.


Amazingly these officials seem not to feel any responsibility or guilt at all when an innocent citizen is murdered because of those policies.

[Buddahaid]

Apparently neither does the federal agent who failed to secure his gun which was stolen from his vehicle.

[August]

Apparently neither does the federal agent who failed to secure his gun which was stolen from his vehicle.


Don't get me started. I always thought that a crook had to actually have a gun on him for a police shooting to be justified. There has been like a million crime dramas which centered on that very question, usually involving frantic searches by a pal to find out what had become of it as the cop in question is looked at with increasing suspicion. Excuses like "I thought she had a gun" or "He made a move that made me think he was going for a gun" would never have been acceptable if the dead guy didn't actually have a gun on or near him (hence the old time cop practice of carrying "drop guns") but now apparently that's all they need to say in order to get away with executing people.

[u crank]

Trains, planes and nitwits.

It's funny, kinda sad but unfortunately true.

Under the auspices of the Green New Deal, a group of ordinary people with no special knowledge or ability believes that it can deputize itself to radically overhaul — from first principles of its own distillation — everything from the way soybeans are grown to how people get from New York to Los Angeles. That they couldn’t even figure out how to get people from Los Angeles to San Francisco while burning through $77 billion — an amount that exceeds by many billion dollars the market capitalization of BlackRock, Inc., a financial behemoth that is — take note, here — the world’s largest asset manager.


https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/california-bullet-train-boondoggle-central-planning/

When Donald Trump says something that may be construed as less than true or somewhat ridiculous he is fact checked ad nauseam by the left wing media. When the rising Democratic Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her supporters say something equally ridiculous...not so much. In fact they cover for her.

Ordinary market processes (in air travel, a heavily regulated industry) created the system by which anybody who wants to travel between Los Angeles and San Francisco can do so in less than two hours for the cost of a few dozen cups of coffee. The central planners failed to create an alternative even with enormous sums of money at their disposal and enormous power to command.

With the state of California and all its splendid glories as their model-train set, they couldn’t even best Alaska Airlines.

Put these po-faced generalissimos in charge of reinventing the U.S. economy from the ground up?

Hard pass.

[em2nought]

Looks like the dims are going to run their canoe aground on the rock that is their ridiculous "green new deal". Thanks so much for the gift! :up:


Now about that money California needs to give back to the Federal government from their spectacularly failed high speed rail system. We've got a better idea where to spend it already. :03:

[August]

Trains, planes and nitwits.

It's funny, kinda sad but unfortunately true.


"po-faced generalissimos" I just have to find a use for that name! :salute:

[Buddahaid]

Looks like the dims are going to run their canoe aground on the rock that is their ridiculous "green new deal". Thanks so much for the gift! :up:


Now about that money California needs to give back to the Federal government from their spectacularly failed high speed rail system. We've got a better idea where to spend it already. :03:

California gives more back to the Feds than it ever receives. How about your state?

[August]

California gives more back to the Feds than it ever receives. How about your state?


Even more now that the Feds have limited your state tax deductions. :)

[em2nought]

Even more now that the Feds have limited your state tax deductions. :)


Them that want big government should be them that pay for it, just as it should be. :03: Oh, except a wall. They don't want a wall, but a train tunnel to Hawaii that's just the ticket. :D

[Buddahaid]

Them that want big government should be them that pay for it, just as it should be. :03: Oh, except a wall. They don't want a wall, but a train tunnel to Hawaii that's just the ticket. :D

I didn't think you'd answer the question. Just more smarmy rhetoric.

[u crank]

I know that 2020 is a long way off but we already have a crowded Democrat field of candidates vying for that sure thing that they think will happen. No predictions from me yet but Ed Rogers of The Washington Post asks a very good question in this article.

What Trump policies are Democrats running against?

https://www.postandcourier.com/opinion/commentary/what-trump-policies-are-democrats-running-against/article_f05b3a14-2fd2-11e9-8171-53313898ad50.html

It's a good question.

As the Democratic race for the 2020 presidential nomination gets underway, the contenders are trying to determine how to best distinguish themselves. So far, the only unifying theme among all candidates is that President Donald Trump is unfit and he and his Republican policies must go.


That's pretty thin.

So, the vain, vindictive “enfant terrible” president is doing more than just energizing the Democrats. By fostering bothersome economic prosperity and making foreign policy moves that no one will want to undo, Trump is effectively rendering much of the traditional debate about peace and prosperity off limits to Democrats.


Right now it seems like all they have is to out 'Trump' Trump. Think building a wall and getting Mexico to pay for it was dumb. How about the 'Green New Deal'? Equally absurd.

[Onkel Neal]

Looks like the dims are going to run their canoe aground on the rock that is their ridiculous "green new deal". Thanks so much for the gift! :up:



Yeah, no joke. Hearing about this idea that we can end fossil fuels in 10 years, I just have to shake my head. No grasp of reality. Has this woman ever worked a job in a chemical plant or refinery? Probably never even toured one. She must imagine our economy is built on hipsters, iPads, Starbuck and Amazon.

After reading this, I was amazed I never heard Sen. Moynihan's phrase, “leakage of reality from American life.” But I like it, it's appropriate, and I have said for a long time, that's the biggest problem with Liberals, they really have no grasp on reality. Wishing things would work a certain way is nothing but wishful thinking when reality rules it out. May as well accept reality, that's what you'll get.

Reality Continues to Leak from American Life (https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/green-new-deal-reality-leaks-from-american-life/)

n 1994, the Clinton administration decreed a bright shining future for education. Its Goals 2000 legislation proclaimed that by that year America’s high-school-graduation rate would be 90 percent and American students would lead the world in math and science achievements. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D., N.Y.) was unimpressed: “That will not happen.” It didn’t, to the surprise of no one with an inkling of reality’s viscosity.

Bill Clinton’s (then Congress’s) goals, which Moynihan compared to the Soviet Union’s penchant for delusional grain quotas, illustrated what the senator called the “leakage of reality from American life.” Speaking of which:

Democrats, including many presidential candidates, have endorsed something that makes Goals 2000 look like the soul of sobriety. The Green New Deal’s FAQ sheet says:

In ten years America will have only non-carbon renewable energy. (Exxon Mobil plans to produce 25 percent more oil and gas in 2025 than in 2017.) By then, “every building in America” will be environmentally retrofitted, “farting cows” (methane gas; say goodbye to hamburgers) will be on the way out, fast electric trains will make airplanes unnecessary, “every combustion-engine vehicle” will be gone (but relax: charging stations will be “everywhere”).

That's just stunning.

[Rockstar]

Any word how that 25 million dollar boondoggle is going? What can we expect from all of this beside more piles of political hay? I heard that little pop-eyed weasel from California has put together a team of analysts and started his own investigation. Did the all powerfull OZ Mr. Mueller miss something? But I suppose that in itself tells me they just pissed away 25 million U.S. taxpayer dollars. GUBN'T BOONDOGGLES lawyers walk away with millions and we get stuck with the bill AGAIN.

Wheres all the Schiffettes to tell us how it was all worth it?

[eddie]

Remember when that jackass in the White House signed an executive order that no one from his administration can get into lobbying for 5 years after they leave? Funny, 33 of them are in DC as lobbyists or work for lobbying firms. Including that other jackass Zinke! Told you he talks out of both sides of his arse,lol Donnie boy says says nothing about it. Total walking POS!!

[Rockstar]

Remember when that jackass in the White House signed an executive order that no one from his administration can get into lobbying for 5 years after they leave? Funny, 33 of them are in DC as lobbyists or work for lobbying firms. Including that other jackass Zinke! Told you he talks out of both sides of his arse,lol Donnie boy says says nothing about it. Total walking POS!!

The executive order is pasted on the White House website
(n) “Lobbying activities” has the same meaning as that term has in the Lobbying Disclosure Act, except that the term does not include communicating or appearing with regard to: a judicial proceeding; a criminal or civil law enforcement inquiry, investigation, or proceeding; or any agency process for rulemaking, adjudication, or licensing, as defined in and governed by the Administrative Procedure Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.

No doubt its a loop hole but it should have been no surprise to you. Its there in black in white for anyone with access to the internet to read. Looking at history almost every administration in some form or fashion has done this. Thanks to the us'in agin' them'ins party fanboys it just keeps repeating itself.

Instead of 'We the people..' it should be changed to 'We the party...' because it appears to me these days it's all that matters.

My question remains after 25 million tax payer dollars and climbing was it worth it? I know what we the party got from it but what did we the people get besides picking up the tab?

[Jimbuna]

Democratic and Republican politicians have sharply criticised President Trump's plan to use emergency powers to pay for a border wall with Mexico.

The rarely-used move would enable Mr Trump to bypass Congress, which has refused to approve the money needed.

Senior Democrats accused the president of a "gross abuse of power" and a "lawless act". Several Republicans also voiced concern at the plan.

Building a border wall was a key campaign pledge of Mr Trump's campaign.

Declaring a national emergency would give Mr Trump access to billions of dollars for his project.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47247726

Looks like his patience is about to come to an end.

[vienna]

Interesting Tweet on the subject of a President's use of executive action, emergency orders, etc., from a prominent Republican...



Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress.


Gee, I wonder who said that?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 20, 2014


I guess what's good for the Obama is not good for the Trump...


...and then there's this; another prominent Republican shares his opinion on the misuse of presidential poweres:



“Issues of this magnitude should always be resolved with the consent of the governed. Signing an executive order, giving a speech, barnstorming around the country defending that executive order is not leadership.”

“I would implore the president to reconsider this path and to demonstrate the kind of leadership that the American people long to see. And that this administration would sit down with ... Congress and find genuine common ground on border security. There’s a series of piece-by-piece reforms that I believe that could be advanced in this Congress that would be in the long-term interest of the American people on this issue.”


Source here:

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/430139-bill-kristol-resurfaces-video-of-pence-calling-obama-executive-action
















<O>

[Mr Quatro]

This problem is not going to be solved over night ... this security for our border will last all the way to the 2020 election cycle, which has already started for the democrats.

You can't believe the polls, you can't trust the drummed up news media, you can't trust your prejudism for or against the men and women running for POTUS ... :hmmm:

What can you trust? I trust my intuition that their are more people for President Trump than the men and women running against him have for them.:yep:

This wall problem is a made up democrats hatred of President Trump and it will back fire on them. Only a nerd can't see the hatred of the democrats against the President.

Trump will win again in 2020 and this border security prolem will play a big role. :yep:

[Buddahaid]

I'll never support a wall project that doesn't have a plan beyond Trump wanting one.

[mapuc]

I'm against the wall and the only reason why is nature.

There are some species who take the trip two times per year from south America to North America and Vice-Versa.

They will be prevented to take their normal trip.

Most of them are birds so here's no problems

Markus

[vienna]

...


You can't believe the polls, you can't trust the drummed up news media, you can't trust your prejudism for or against the men and women running for POTUS ... :hmmm:

What can you trust? I trust my intuition that their are more people for President Trump than the men and women running against him have for them.:yep:

...



Interesting is the fact a recent poll of voters regarding a possible 2020 reelection run by Trump showed 57% of the respondents stated they definitely will not vote for Trump in 2020; not might not, not may not, not probably won't, but definitely will not vote for Trump; that level of animus is hard to overcome...


57% of voters will 'definitely vote against Trump' in 2020 election, poll says --

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-voters-will-not-support-trump-election-20190117-story.html

Note also that only 30% of the pol's respondents said they would definitely vote for Trump; its hard to get reelected with only 30% support...




...

What can you trust? I trust my intuition that their are more people for President Trump than the men and women running against him have for them.:yep:

...







Again I point to the poll cited above, and many, many others, from both sides of the political spectrum, that show Trump does not, and has not since he took office, have the support of the majority of the people; he couldn't even muster enough to earn more votes than a weak candidate like Hillary Clinton. Trump has never been "the people's choice" by any metric and, as time goes on, he only loses support...

As far as trust goes, I don't know about any one else, but I make it a practice of good sense not to put any trust or faith in anyone who is a proven liar and cheat; maybe its just me, but I have found, by life long experience, that persons who don't continually lie or cheat are better persons to trust and support; that way I can have pride in my support and not feel the shame of being taken as a fool by some dishonest huckster...

Let's take those immigration stats you seemed to find 'not true'; the cites of actual study results you still tried to minimize, even though the source is an entity that has been studying immigration statistics, field reports, and conducting actual observations for many, many years; if there are any who may be called subject matter experts on the issue, they are among the top of the list; even Federal and state governments go to them for statistical data and affirmation; all-in-all, a pretty well proven source...

Now, let's look at Trump, who seems to just pull whatever data he wants to lie about from his ample behind (might explain why its so big: takes a lot of room to store lies and dishonesty); you claim the figures cite in the links was wrong, yet you seem to want to convince us thet Trump's data is correct; well, let's have a fact check:


Donald Trump's false claim about the cost of illegal immigration --

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/dec/05/donald-trump/donald-trumps-false-claim-about-cost-illegal-immig/

Note that the above link includes data from conservative sources and even they can't back Trump's hand; yet another lie by Trump...


Let's look at the whole tweet by Trump in question:



“We are not even into February and the cost of illegal immigration so far this year is $18,959,495,168. Cost Friday was $603,331,392. There are at least 25,772,342 illegal aliens, not the 11,000,000 that have been reported for years, in our Country. So ridiculous! DHS”

— President Trump, in a tweet, Jan. 27, 2019



Any even merely adequate liar/conman knows you never get very specific about stats and numbers when you're telling a lie. Why? Because the overwhelming odds are that someone is gonna call you on it:

President Trump tweets nonsensical figures on illegal immigration --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/29/president-trump-tweets-nonsensical-figures-illegal-immigration/?utm_term=.892ab30ac6d3


The really glaring problem/fault with Trump's claims is there is absolutely no backup for the figures cited ($18,959,495,168, and, 25,772,342 illegals); no one, not the media, not the White House, not the ardent minions and Trumpettes, have been able to find any source at all to back up Trump's claims; the numbers obviously came from the same orifice he gets all of his harebrained "facts" and stinks as high as what usually comes out of said same orifice...

But, hey, go on believing his lies; and be sure to send in you money to that Nigerian prince when he send you that email...


My statements are not born out of DEM hate (I'm not a DEM), it is a review of actual, verifiable date; but then, again, I can see how some persons who have been spoon-fed a steady diet of lies, deception, and dishonesty for so long might not be able to discern between clean vitttles and a steaming pile...





...


Trump will win again in 2020 and this border security prolem will play a big role. :yep:





You are probably right about immigration policy (Trump actually making it to a reelection bid is looking weaker by the month), but most likely not in the way you intended: border security will be an issue, just, mainly, how badly, and at great wasted cost and effort, Trump screwed it up...














<O>

[Dowly]

January 2017 - GOP Majority
January 2017 - Wall not an emergency
February 2017 - Wall not an emergency
March 2017 - Wall not an emergency
April 2017 - Wall not an emergency
May 2017 - Wall not an emergency
June 2017 - Wall not an emergency
July 2017 - Wall not an emergency
August 2017 - Wall not an emergency
September 2017 - Wall not an emergency
October 2017 - Wall not an emergency
November 2017 - Wall not an emergency
December 2017 - Wall not an emergency
January 2018 - Wall not an emergency
February 2018 - Wall not an emergency
March 2018 - Wall not an emergency
April 2018 - Wall not an emergency
May 2018 - Wall not an emergency
June 2018 - Wall not an emergency
July 2018 - Wall not an emergency
August 2018 - Wall not an emergency
September 2018 - Wall not an emergency
October 2018 - Wall not an emergency
November 2018 - Wall not an emergency
November 2018 - Democratic majority elected in House
February 2019 - EMERGENCY!!!1!!1!

[u crank]

How Congress and President Obama Made Trump’s Wall Possible

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-congress-and-president-obama-made-trumps-wall-possible

Six weeks after his (Trump) election in November 2016, Congress overwhelmingly passed a statute—codified as 10 U.S.C § 284—that authorized the secretary of defense to support the “construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.” On Dec. 23, 2016, a month before leaving office, President Obama signed the 973-page bill into law without any objection to this provision.


..the Trump administration has invoked this express statutory delegation of authority to do what the statute says: “construct ... fences ... across international boundaries of the United States.”

This provision does not turn on the declaration of a national emergency pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2808, which the president also invoked in a proclamation issued today. Critically, the White House stated that “these funding sources will be used sequentially and as needed.” The “emergency” funds may not be tapped till the other, less controversial funds are depleted.

This episode illustrates how Congress has long ago relinquished its lawmaking powers. The legislature enacts omnibus bills that few members actually read. Often, these super-duper-statutes contain nearly-limitless delegations of authority to the executive branch, with only the flimsiest guidelines of how and when that authority should be executed. Other times, Congress gives the president the exact authority he needs, with few strings attached. Such is the case with §284: Obama signed a bill into law that gave his successor the very precise power to “construct . . . fences . . . across international boundaries of the United States.”

Obama. :D

[mapuc]

Are the Dems against it because it's Trump and the Republican and thereby against it on automatic.

I know many from his own party are against this wall.

Markus

[Mr Quatro]

Are the Dems against it because it's Trump and the Republican and thereby against it on automatic.

I know many from his own party are against this wall.

Markus

Yes as discerned from the news conferences alone (they) the Democrats hate Trump and plan on taking the WH back over using this hate with the voters :yep:

How Congress and President Obama Made Trump’s Wall Possible

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-congress-and-president-obama-made-trumps-wall-possible

Obama. :D

Good find :up:

[Platapus]

Some of us are against it as it is a waste of money. It will be very expensive to build and especially maintain. The O&M costs are something Trump is not concerned with as he will be long gone out of office, but we will be paying for it.

A fence with appropriate ground and tethered airborne sensors will be cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain, and more importantly easier to upgrade when new technology is developed.

More money needs to be spent in updating out inadequate visa monitoring system. The greatest problem may not be people crossing the border illegally, but people crossing the border legally but illegally overstaying. Fixing that, in my opinion will do more to address the illegal alien problem quicker than some wall that may take a decade to build.

We also need to make coming to the US illegally less attractive. One way is to start throwing some business owners/CEOs in the slam for violating employment laws.

We also need to redefine our refugee/asylum laws.

The issue I have with Trump is that he is not a critical thinker. He has been focused on implementing a solution instead of focusing on solving the problem.

There is a lot that needs to be done and a lot of it will cost a lot of money. We need to spend our time and money wisely.

In my opinion, I do not feel that a wall is the optimum use of our time and money.

[vienna]

How Congress and President Obama Made Trump’s Wall Possible

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-congress-and-president-obama-made-trumps-wall-possible







Obama. :D


Just because you can do something doesn't mean have to do something; and, if you do choose to do something you can do, it doesn't mean you have to do it stupidly, irresponsibly, recklessly, foolishly, thoughtlessly, carelessly, or any other -ly you might wish to add...

Basically, just because you can walk through a minefield blindfolded, doesn't mean you have to, or that it is even a good, rational idea...


Oh, and by the way, are you, who so relentlessly decry Obama, are you saying he was right?... :03: :D


...and I'm rather sure if Obama (or Bush, anyone else for that matter) would have initiated a project like a new border barrier, it would have been done with a whole hell of a lot more common sense and maturity and a whole lot less stupidity and childishness than Chump...












<O>

[Hawk66]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/19/two-charts-demolish-the-notion-that-immigrants-here-illegally-commit-more-crime/?utm_term=.cb2fe6fa0a87

Any questions left if the wall should be a number 1 topic in US politics ? I think I do not need to refer to the fact that a more restrictive gun control would bring much more real security...

But I guess it is clear what the real motives of the wall are...

By the way Mike Pence's show at the Munich Conference was disastrous. That is not my personal view but of the participants. He talked like being a city halter in ancient Rome, giving orders to be fulfilled and threatened the audience (especially my country, which is (still) supposed to be an ally).

This administrations really manages to destroys so many things, domestically and on the international level. This is also an achievement by its own.

[vienna]

What was really amusing about Pence's exhibition of unctuous sycophancy was when he started out his presentation with greetings for Trump, where a US Presidential greeting would normally be met wit at least polite applause, was met instead with a long, awkward, stony silence:


WATCH: Pence Met with Icy Silence in Munich, Praising Trump and Attempting to Bully Leaders on Foreign Policy --

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/02/16/watch-pence-met-icy-silence-munich-praising-trump-and-attempting-bully-leaders










<O>

[u crank]

Just because you can do something doesn't mean have to do something; and, if you do choose to do something you can do, it doesn't mean you have to do it stupidly, irresponsibly, recklessly, foolishly, thoughtlessly, carelessly, or any other -ly you might wish to add...

...and I'm rather sure if Obama (or Bush, anyone else for that matter) would have initiated a project like a new border barrier, it would have been done with a whole hell of a lot more common sense and maturity and a whole lot less stupidity and childishness than Chump...


You make it sound like securing the border between the USA and Mexico is a complicated thing and only really smart people like Pelosi and Schumer could do. It is something that they were certainly in favor of not that long ago. It's a fence that needs patrolling by the Border patrol. It's not hard. Nations around the world do this all the time. In this case it's a political argument. Your comments bear that out. The people who say they are for securing the border but against a physical barrier are trying to perform a magic trick.

Oh, and by the way, are you, who so relentlessly decry Obama, are you saying he was right?... :03: :D

Are you saying he was wrong? After all no one was holding a gun to his head. Perhaps he neglected to read all 973 pages before he signed it. One of the points of that article was to show that Trump doesn't need the declaration of a national emergency to start securing the border. Obama. :D

Was the declaration of an emergency a political ploy. Of course. So is Nancy (I have a wall around my house) Pelosi saying walls are immoral. So are all the other ridiculous political arguments for and against it. The question going forward is fairly obvious. Is this situation sustainable? I'm going to say it isn't. We've seen politicians in the last administration and Congress change their minds. Will they be forced to do it again?

[Buddahaid]

You make it sound like securing the border between the USA and Mexico is a complicated thing and only really smart people like Pelosi and Schumer could do.

Maybe that is the case, or maybe not. What is apparent to me is there is no plan beyond just doing some wall thing because "walls work". Make a plan and then sell it! Trump is all sales blather and just trying to get his foot in the doorway with no product to hock. All hat and no cattle!

[u crank]

Maybe that is the case, or maybe not. What is apparent to me is there is no plan beyond just doing some wall thing because "walls work". Make a plan and then sell it! Trump is all sales blather and just trying to get his foot in the doorway with no product to hock. All hat and no cattle!

I would say that the opponents to any wall are equally unable to sell their product. Walls don't work, they're too expensive, they're immoral, and the real dandy 'there is no problem'. Those arguments are based more on emotion than facts.

There is no doubt that both sides of this argument are trying to distract from any meaningful discussion of the real problem, the inflow of people across the southern border. I think the reason is because the solutions are probably unacceptable to the extremists on both sides.

[Mr Quatro]

Congress has never really been a real work horse ... Taking time off for campaigning, investigation commenties, holidays, weekends off, etc

In my estimation they should work like the crews of USN FBM submarines work with two (2) crews blue and gold for (90) days at a time. They would at least be in one place together long enough to get something done.

For the next (20) months or so it's going to be even worse with a hateful, spiteful, get even with Trump and the GOP. Trump won't sign anything that his party does not approve of and if he does he can send it back for revisions.

Slower and slower till the 2020 election of one side or the other wins the bragging rights of the votes the American people give them.

Right now my mail box is full of don't let America gone down the socialists road of ruin the way Venzula has gone down.

See where I'm going ... It's a battle for what we think with fear being used on both sides.

My soap box needs some coffee ... Have a nice Sunday :up:

[Rockstar]

It is the lack of rational thought from either party which makes this the political circus it is today.

As someone once said ' votes' are the coin of the realm. The political bigtop is where those precious coins are minted.

[mapuc]

….and suddenly is ordinary people who are either for or against trump are expert on walls and its purpose.

Markus

[August]

….and suddenly is ordinary people who are either for or against trump are expert on walls and its purpose.

Markus


Hey it's hard not to be at least knowledgeable about such a basic element of our human existence. After all we encounter walls, fences and barriers all throughout our lives from our cribs to the walls of our coffins. As my dad would say "it ain't like it's rocket surgery".

[Buddahaid]

Then why isn't a plan being forwarded for what the wall will be? All I've seen are design prototypes that vary considerably in cost.

[August]

Then why isn't a plan being forwarded for what the wall will be? All I've seen are design prototypes that vary considerably in cost.


Because one side of our government won't even acknowledge that a barrier is moral. Until we settle that basic question they can't get beyond the prototype stage. I'm guessing that several designs will eventually be used varying according to the local terrain.

[Mr Quatro]

It is the lack of rational thought from either party which makes this the political circus it is today.

As someone once said ' votes' are the coin of the realm. The political bigtop is where those precious coins are minted.

You do realize that your post was 6660, right? :o

[em2nought]

….and suddenly is ordinary people who are either for or against trump are expert on walls and its purpose.

Markus


I'm pretty sure a good many ordinary people are more familiar with building walls or fences than any politician you can name. I personally, with my own hands, put up around 1000 ft of industrial chain link eight feet high with three strands of barbed wire at the top, and I haven't seen anyone tunnel under or climb over since. My forearms hurt for two years afterwards. Some of those post holes were brutal. :oops:


If a wall ever goes up it won't be with the help of either side in Congress.

[Rockstar]

You do realize that your post was 6660, right? :o


Did I win?


https://media.giphy.com/media/AiJdC0dPoPmg/giphy.gif

[Rockstar]

I'm pretty sure a good many ordinary people are more familiar with building walls or fences than any politician you can name. I personally, with my own hands, put up around 1000 ft of industrial chain link eight feet high with three strands of barbed wire at the top, and I haven't seen anyone tunnel under or climb over since. My forearms hurt for two years afterwards. Some of those post holes were brutal. :oops:


If a wall ever goes up it won't be with the help of either side in Congress.


That's right barriers are relatively easy to build. 1000 feet of chain link fence? No problem.



How much did it cost? Who paid for it? What was the projected cost to maintain it? Was it placed on what was once some else's property? If so how did you go about taking that property from them. Why didn't you use ELINT/SURVEILLANCE instead?



The money being demanded today is 5 billion dollars. What exactly are we to get for that? Anyone know?

[August]

The money being demanded today is 5 billion dollars. What exactly are we to get for that? Anyone know?


https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/border-issues/2018/12/21/some-100-new-miles-border-fencing-planned/2388281002/


Homeland Security officials say they have plans to build 215 miles of new and replacement border fence, using the billions of federal dollars at issue in the budget fight that could shut down the government.

[Platapus]

Then why isn't a plan being forwarded for what the wall will be? All I've seen are design prototypes that vary considerably in cost.

Perhaps because Trump does not understand the different process involved in building a commercial building and the process of the government building something.

For one, commercial construction does not need to follow the Federal Acquisition Regulations and the processed mandated therein.

In the commercial world once you get the funding and the permits, you can start digging. In the federal world, it is not that easy.

A major construction project like this has to go through a pretty extensive acquisition process of multi level reviews and evaluations before any construction can even be started.

The Defense Acquisition University has some nice datasheets on this process that anyone can download. Be warned, it will make your head hurt!!

Anyone who has worked government procurement can tell you the horror stories about the steps that the regulations require.

Declaring a national emergency streamlines some of the regulatory steps, but not even most of them.

[mapuc]

A clarification is needed.

I didn't mean the way wall is build, hundrede of thousand if not millions of ordinary people know how to do that.

What I meant was that ordinary people suddenly have been expert on this specific wall and its purpose-The reason to why Trump want this wall.

Maybe it will work as Trump have planed, maybe it will be a total failure=billions of dollars down the drain.

Those of my friends who support Trump say the wall will work
And those who don't say things like, it's vast of taxpayers money.

Markus

[Mr Quatro]

A clarification is needed.

I didn't mean the way wall is build, hundrede of thousand if not millions of ordinary people know how to do that.

What I meant was that ordinary people suddenly have been expert on this specific wall and its purpose-The reason to why Trump want this wall.

Maybe it will work as Trump have planed, maybe it will be a total failure=billions of dollars down the drain.

Those of my friends who support Trump say the wall will work
And those who don't say things like, it's vast of taxpayers money.

Markus

Don't take this wrong Markus, but my friends don't talk about Denmark :D

[em2nought]

Don't take this wrong Markus, but my friends don't talk about Denmark :D


My friends fondly mention "certain" places in Denmark occasionally. :03:


We should build our wall on the Mexican side of the border. Much easier to do I'm thinking. Get Mexico on board by giving them all the jobs, or maybe working on the wall as a pathway to US citizenship? :up:


I've never seen democrats more worried about blowing $5.7 billion dollars than they are over this. I think they just threw away much more than that in NYC. :hmmm:

[Catfish]

Don't take this wrong Markus, but my friends don't talk about Denmark :D

But you should. While you are talking all the time, Denmark just does it.
Denmark builds wall. (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/denmark-german-border-fence-wild-boar-out-44-miles-a8268391.html)

[mapuc]

Have an another question about the American politics and the elected President.

Today I read in the news that

Republican Senator Lindsey
Graham will initiate an investigation by US senior officials sorts of discussions about toppling President Donald Trump.

US Deputy Secretary of State, Rod Rosenstein, discussed at a 2017 meeting the opportunity to dismiss the president, Donald Trump.

Says the former acting director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, who was present at the meeting.

"The meeting was about Rod Rosenstein discussing how many would support such a proposal," he said.
to CBS program '60 Minutes'

Is this possible ?

Try to remember what Platapus have written about impeachment and other things about Presidency and the Federal law I US.

If I remember correctly the only way to remove Trump from office is through this Impeachment, or he resign himself or he leave earth.
Only after his time as President, Mr. Trump can be accused if he have done something illegal

And then I read this….
Now if The republican do dismiss him, will this mean he have to leave the White house or is he by the election granted this job until the next President take over ?

Markus

[Platapus]

A legitimate question deserves a legitimate answer.

Me being me, this means a long legitimate answer so you might wanna get comfortable. :)

There is another way to transfer authority from the president to the Vice President. Notice the carefully chosen words I used.

The 25th Amendment of the constitution addresses this.

There are four sections to this amendment. The first two do not pertain to your question.

The third section pertains to the President voluntarily ceding presidential authority to the Vice President. This section also does not pertain to your question.

Then there is the forth section and it is a big one

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.


Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office."


That's a whole lotta words. Let me see if I can translate it into human readable terms.


First let's look at the intent of this section. The intend was to formalize a process where presidential authority can be transfered to the Vice President in the situation where the President is unable to fulfill the duties AND is unable to voluntarily transfer presidential power. Voluntary transfer of presidential power is handled in the third section of this amendment.



Why would we need this?


Suppose the President is in a coma or is missing? Under these circumstances there is no way the President can voluntarily transfer presidential power to the Vice President. There needed to be a formal process for handling this situation. Hence the convoluted process described in the forth section of the 25th.



there are, however, four critical elements here.



1. There needs to be a process where presidential authority can be involuntarily transfered from the President to the Vice President.

2. There needs to be safeguards to prevent this from being abused or improperly implemented.

3. The President needs to be able to challenge this involuntary transfer of presidential authority.
4. There needs to be a formal process where this challenge can be overridden.


As you can see, this is a very delicate issue. In the USA we do not depose presidents we don't like, but there needs to be a process where we can, in effect, depose the president.


Mine field over thin ice. :o


Here is what needs to happen.


1. the Vice President and the "majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide" have to agree that the President " is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office".


Yikes! what does that mean in English?


The Principal Officers of the Executive Branch are defined under 5 U.S.C. section 101 and consists of the following Secretaries


State, Treasury, Defense, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veterans Affairs, Homeland security. Also included is the Attorney General who serves as an equivalent "Secretary of the Department of Justice. This represents all of the 15 departments of the Executive Branch.



So the Vice President and at least 8 Secretaries have to be in agreement


" is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office".


Here is the Constitutional sticking point and it is an important one. The Amendment states that the the provisions of section 4 of the 25th Amendment can only be implemented in cases where the President is "unable" to discharge the powers.....


This brings up some interesting questions that probably only the Supreme Court of the United States can answer


Does this apply to a situation where the President is unwilling to discharge the powers...? Unable and unwilling are not the same. Just because the President does something we don't like or is dangerous or does not do something we like, despite the danger is not the same as the President being unable.



Who decides what is "unable" and whether the President is truly unable? Initially, it will be the Vice President and at least 8 Secretaries.



OK so the VP and the 8 decide that the presidential power needs to be transfered to the VP. What's next?



2. The VP and at least 8 Secretaries have to send notification to the President pro tempore of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. As soon as this declaration is received, the President immediately loses presidential authority and the Vice President becomes Acting President. The VP does NOT become President.



If the President is unable or unwilling to respond, it is a done deal until President is able or willing to respond.



3. However, if the President disagrees with this declaration, the President sends a challenge to the same two people. The Vice President retains the Presidential authority for a period of 4 days.




Four days??



Let's assume that the VP and at least 8 Secretaries are still concerned. They have four days to transmit back to the same two people a declaration that the President is really really really unable to..... For sure this time... really. During this four day period the VP is still the acting President.



I can imagine there will be some awkwardness between the President and the Vice President.




If congress is not in session, they have 48 hours to get their butts back to DC and get in session!


4. Congress then has 21 days to decide. During this time, the Vice President is the Acting President. Congress decides based on a 2/3rds majority in each house whether the President is or is not unable to perform....


If they do, the President loses presidential authority and that presidential authority is transfered to the Vice President who will then be the Acting Vice President. We would then be in a position of having a President with no presidential authorities.



The chances of section 4 being successfully applied against an uncooperative President is approximately zero.



Proving that someone is unable to discharge the duties... is extremely difficult especially if the someone is there and able to defend themselves.



Remember that the intent of the 25th was to have a process to handle when the President was incapacitated or missing.



It is easier to simply impeach and remove the President than try to remove the President under the 25th amendment.


Impeachment requires simple majority from the House and a 2/3rds of the senators present.



Removal under the 25th requires 2/3rds majority from both the House and the Senate and requires a full Senate vote.



I hope this explains the very complex and complicated issue of the 25th Amendment.



Section 3 (voluntary transfer of presidential authority) has been used a few times. Since the enactment of the 25th Amendment in 1967, we have had only two Acting Presidents.



George H W Bush 13 July 85 1128-1922 yes it gets down to the exact minute


Dick Cheney 29 June 02 0709-0924 and 21 July 07 0709-0921


All three of these instances were because the President was undergoing a medical procedure.

Now if The republican do dismiss him, will this mean he have to leave the White house or is he by the election granted this job until the next President take over ? The Republicans can't dismiss him nor can the Democrats. Congress has the authority to either remove the president by the impeachment process or they can remove the President's authority and he or she remains in office until the end of the term, but without any presidential authority. If this ever happens, it is expected that the powerless president would resign.

If you have any other questions, please let me know and I will be happy to answer them.

[Jimbuna]

Bernie Sanders announces second US presidential bid.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46965281

[Mr Quatro]

Bernie Sanders announces second US presidential bid.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46965281

I'm so excited ... I spilled my coffee :D

[Schroeder]

Bernie Sanders announces second US presidential bid.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46965281
There should be an age limit for that...

[u crank]

There should be an age limit for that...

There is.

35 years of age or older. :D

[mapuc]

^ Platapus

I'm so grateful for your in deep explanation.

Thank you.

Edit: Forgot something.
You mentioned the Vice President. From what I understand Mike Pence isn't exactly going to stab his boss Mr. Trump in the back, but I do not know him personally, so who knows what he is thinking or capable of.


Markus

[Platapus]

You are most welcome.
I think it would require some pretty clear evidence before the VP would agree to invoke the 25th. Evidence like the President being in a coma for instance.

As long as the President is present and functioning, I doubt that any VP would start 25th proceedings. And it can only be started by the VP. Congress has no authority to initiate proceedings under the 25th. They only have authority at the end.

So all the talk about invoking the 25th either in the news or on the Internets Tubes is meaningless unless and until the VP makes a decision.

Even if 100% of the cabinet is in favour of invoking the 25th, it goes no where without the VP. There is no provision for compelling the VP to take action with regard to the 25th.

[vienna]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffYbNaNl9Lw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf12RwSDKKA










<O>

[Catfish]

Foreign cars are also a national emergency, "Threat to the USA's national security":

https://i.imgur.com/G68EwtFl.jpg

[Schroeder]

Foreign cars are also a national emergency, "Threat to the USA's national security":

https://i.imgur.com/G68EwtFl.jpg
Especially since most of those "Missiles from Germany" are actually manufactured in US plants...:damn:

[MaDef]

Bernie Sanders announces second US presidential bidThat guy is a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

[u crank]

That guy is a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

Sanders has the same problem that all the other declared and undeclared Dem hopefuls have. The constant reminder of the positions they once held that are no longer 'woke' enough. Or no longer 'left' enough. If the MSM or the group-think socialist types don't do it you can be assured that Trump will.

[Rockstar]

Especially since most of those "Missiles from Germany" are actually manufactured in US plants...:damn:

If its cheaper to build those BMW's, Volkswagons and Mercedes here then so be it. We mustn't let national pride and patriotism get in the way of whats best for the world economy. :D :03:

[Catfish]

Exactly. When we want to go to the stars we have to bury nationalism, patriotism and the concept of "nations". We can see how well already all this works in Russia, China, North Korea, Romania, England and the US...
If its cheaper to build those BMW's, Volkswagons and Mercedes here then so be it. We mustn't let national pride and patriotism get in the way of whats best for the world Germany's economy. :D :03:
Fixed. :O:

[Rockstar]

That would mean one world government.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/81/a9/92/81a99233434b0ad1f5ef3750618666c4.jpg


:hmmm::yep::haha:

[MaDef]

That would mean one world government.
Good luck with that.

[August]

Now we know what Ginsburg has been working on. Well done.Unanimous Supreme Court rules states are subject to seizure limits


In a historic first from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Justices ruled unanimously on Wednesday that the Eighth Amendment ban on excessive fines does apply to state and local governments, ruling in favor of an Indiana man who had his expensive car seized by police after he was arrested for a small amount illegal drugs.




Writing for the High Court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said "the protection against excessive fines guards against abuses of government’s punitive or criminal law-enforcement authority" found in the Eighth Amendment.



https://www.ajc.com/blog/jamie-dupree/unanimous-supreme-court-rules-states-are-subject-seizure-limits/Nj1qkUYWKsY1bZvT6sIudM/

[Mr Quatro]

Now we know what Ginsburg has been working on. Well done.[B]


https://www.ajc.com/blog/jamie-dupree/unanimous-supreme-court-rules-states-are-subject-seizure-limits/Nj1qkUYWKsY1bZvT6sIudM/

I agree August :up:

I didn't even know it was a problem till it came up for review by the Supreme Court ... some people have really been taken advantage of by the no limits to what the state can take.

I knew an unnamed government agency employee who had a tow truck and a hide away shop garage with some pretty exotic cars in the fenced in area. :o

[Onkel Neal]

This is Liberals, a 75 year old Senator getting schooled by greenie kids. Priceless.

"We've come to a point where our Earth is dying, literally." Yes, it's that awesome.

https://www.facebook.com/BayAreaSunrise/videos/2101109139978731/

Best part: they are intellectuals equals, but Feinstein has the edge with blinding bureaucracy. "But you don't understand, we put a lot of work into our letter".

[em2nought]

This is Liberals, a 75 year old Senator getting schooled by greenie kids. Priceless.

"We've come to a point where our Earth is dying, literally." Yes, it's that awesome.

https://www.facebook.com/BayAreaSunrise/videos/2101109139978731/

Best part: they are intellectuals equals, but Feinstein has the edge with blinding bureaucracy. "But you don't understand, we put a lot of work into our letter".


My response. :D



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEi5PAFkiNI

[em2nought]

This is Liberals, a 75 year old Senator getting schooled by greenie kids. Priceless.



We make fun of AOC, but this demonstrates how absolutely dangerous her brand of crazy is. This video is absolutely frightening, and worth watching to see what's being drummed into your children's heads on a daily basis. What comes$ after trillion? :wah:

[Buddahaid]

Every generation looks to make the world better as they see it. For those kids, ten years is an eternity, after all, it's pretty much their whole life so far but to seniors, ten years is just a short span of time.

[Georg Lassen]

This is Liberals, a 75 year old Senator getting schooled by greenie kids. Priceless.

"We've come to a point where our Earth is dying, literally." Yes, it's that awesome.

https://www.facebook.com/BayAreaSunrise/videos/2101109139978731/

Best part: they are intellectuals equals, but Feinstein has the edge with blinding bureaucracy. "But you don't understand, we put a lot of work into our letter".


They are revolutionary, they are ignoring the democratic process in favor of their ideology, very dangerous.

[u crank]

Every generation looks to make the world better as they see it.

There are some questions that need to be asked here. I have the suspicion that these kids are being used and they are too young and uniformed to know it. Who gave them the information that they are presenting? My concern would be that the left/progressive/Marxist indoctrination that pervades the universities has migrated down to the grade school level. I'm not trying to say that their concerns aren't real but the question has always been what to do about it. In its entirety the GND is not just about climate change. It is a political document that requires a radical increase in the power and scope of the Federal government. I would have to question whether these young people understand what it is that they are asking for.

[Buddahaid]

...My concern would be that the left/progressive/Marxist indoctrination that pervades the universities has migrated down to the grade school level....

Very likely but I would think it more due to modern ideas of child rearing that eliminate competition and create safe places so no one is left out, or feels bad, instead of some secret agenda.

[u crank]

Very likely but I would think it more due to modern ideas of child rearing that eliminate competition and create safe places so no one is left out, or feels bad, instead of some secret agenda.

Not to belabor the point but I don't think it is a secret agenda. It is pretty much out in the open.:yep:

But I would agree with your first point. The lack of critical thinking and the one sidedness of modern education is startling. And it comes in part from parents who are all to happy to allow educators free rein in the world view of their children. I have had conversations with teenagers and young adults that have left me shaking my head in disbelief.

Goes back to rocking chair. :O:

[Onkel Neal]

Every generation looks to make the world better as they see it. For those kids, ten years is an eternity, after all, it's pretty much their whole life so far but to seniors, ten years is just a short span of time.

True, and with everyone telling them the planet will be inhabitable before they turn 30... I sympathize with them. They're children, after all, they will believe anything they're told.

[Catfish]

And now back to cold war rhetorics ..

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-nuclear-russia/after-putins-warning-russian-tv-lists-nuclear-targets-in-u-s-idUKKCN1QE1DS

We do not want war but if you want war we will wage war but we won't if you don't, but if... :doh:

[Catfish]

There are some questions that need to be asked here. I have the suspicion that these kids are being used and they are too young and uniformed to know it.

Yes they are much too young to understand anything.. but maybe there has been some recent research about science that were plain not known at the time of your school days. But this cannot be!


Who gave them the information that they are presenting? My concern would be that the left/progressive/Marxist indoctrination that pervades the universities has migrated down to the grade school level.
A left conspiracy!

I'm not trying to say that their concerns aren't real [...]
No, never. And why even think about it.

I guess it suits the environment and pollution prevention much more to put someone like Pruitt at the head of the EPA :hmmm:

What strikes me is that anything having to do with with saving the environment* from further pollution, is immediately downplayed or destroyed by someone who usually belongs to the right wing. Why? They should embrace it, there's money in it! If they don't understand the background they could understand at least that?


B.t.w. the "environment" always sounds as something detached from us, independent from us, while we all have to live in it and in what it develops to be. Especially those who do not sit in rocking chairs (aka kids) today :O:

[u crank]

Yes they are much too young to understand anything.. but maybe there has been some recent research about science that were plain not known at the time of your school days. But this cannot be!

Could be. But you are ignoring the possibility that these children are being used by political operatives to further an agenda which they probably don't understand. They are asking for Feinsteins' endorsement of the Green New Deal. Have you read it? It is an impossibility. They probably agree with without any knowledge the environmental part of the GND, but what would they know about economics, engineering and world trade. This so called 'deal' is a fairy tale that does more harm than good. It shows quite clearly that some people (not all) involved in the climate change debate cannot be taken seriously. It also exposes the true nature of some peoples' agenda. I don't believe for a second that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gives two figs about the environment. What she and people like her care about is political power. And that goes for people on the left and the right. Everything that politicians do is tainted by....politics.

A left conspiracy!

I think I am a fairly open minded person. When people find something that they disagree with and have no answer for...conspiracy.., even in a joking way.. But facts tell a different story and they are not hard to find out. Internet baby!:O:

Here is a pretty interesting article by someone with a bit of experience. Worth a read. Patrick J. Deneen has taught at Princeton, Georgetown, and now Notre Dame. These are some of the more liberal universities in the US. It should be noted that this was written 3 years ago. It hasn't gotten any better.

My students are know-nothings. They are exceedingly nice, pleasant, trustworthy, mostly honest, well-intentioned, and utterly decent. But their minds are largely empty, devoid of any substantial knowledge that might be the fruits of an education in an inheritance and a gift of a previous generation. They are the culmination of western civilization, a civilization that has forgotten it origins and aims, and as a result, has achieved near-perfect indifference about itself.

https://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2016/02/res-idiotica/

This is the end game of the current Liberal universities. Highly educated know nothings who cannot ask a meaningful question or refuse to think in a critical way. Which brings us back to the GND. Even the slightest application of logic and common sense would and should produce a comedic response. But I'll bite my tongue.

What strikes me is that anything having to do with with saving the environment* from further pollution, is immediately downplayed or destroyed by someone who usually belongs to the right wing. Why?

:hmmm:All generalizations are wrong. :D

They should embrace it, there's money in it! If they don't understand the background they could understand at least that?

Here we may actually agree. My belief is that if anything meaningful is going to be accomplished it has to be profitable. And it can't have any involvement from the governments. That is the kiss of death and the magnet for corruption. The most innovative solutions always come without political interference. Keep the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs as far away as possible.

But what do I know....I'm just an old guy in a rocking chair.:03:

[Mr Quatro]

Could be. But you are ignoring the possibility that these children are being used by political operatives to further an agenda which they probably don't understand.

They are asking for Feinsteins' endorsement of the Green New Deal. Have you read it? It is an impossibility. They probably agree with without any knowledge the environmental part of the GND, but what would they know about economics, engineering and world trade. This so called 'deal' is a fairy tale that does more harm than good. It shows quite clearly that some people (not all) involved in the climate change debate cannot be taken seriously. It also exposes the true nature of some peoples' agenda. I don't believe for a second that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gives two figs about the environment. What she and people like her care about is political power. And that goes for people on the left and the right. Everything that politicians do is tainted by....politics.

I think I am a fairly open minded person. When people find something that they disagree with and have no answer for...conspiracy.., even in a joking way.. But facts tell a different story and they are not hard to find out. Internet baby!:O:

Here is a pretty interesting article by someone with a bit of experience. Worth a read. Patrick J. Deneen has taught at Princeton, Georgetown, and now Notre Dame. These are some of the more liberal universities in the US. It should be noted that this was written 3 years ago. It hasn't gotten any better.

This is the end game of the current Liberal universities. Highly educated know nothings who cannot ask a meaningful question or refuse to think in a critical way. Which brings us back to the GND. Even the slightest application of logic and common sense would and should produce a comedic response. But I'll bite my tongue.

My belief is that if anything meaningful is going to be accomplished it has to be profitable. And it can't have any involvement from the governments. That is the kiss of death and the magnet for corruption. The most innovative solutions always come without political interference. Keep the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs as far away as possible.

But what do I know....I'm just an old guy in a rocking chair.:03:

I tried to edit it, but I agreed with too much of what you said :yep:

If all thinking is just a matter of deductions how did these left wing people come up with such crazy ideas? Are they trying to fool us by fooling themselves?

[Dowly]

Michael Cohen's opening testimony:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics/cohen-testimony-read/index.html


Public hearing today at 10am EST. This ought to be interesting. :hmmm:

[Georg Lassen]

Michael Cohen's opening testimony:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/27/politics/cohen-testimony-read/index.html


Public hearing today at 10am EST. This ought to be interesting. :hmmm:


He claims Trump never intended or expected to win the primary or the general election, that is total bull ****.


I followed the campaign closely and he was out to win, maybe partly to get back at Obama, Clinton and the media or any other "wrong" motivation, but he was all in.

[Catfish]

Nothing happening here, move on. :03:

[Dowly]

@Georg Lassen: Trump not wanting/expecting to win has been brought up before by others as well. Remember, it was Trump who claimed the elections were rigged; he was fully expecting to lose.

[Georg Lassen]

Nothing happening here, move on. :03:


The man is clearly a hitman for the Clintons and the democratic party.


What ever faults Trump might have this just shows what type of people are in the other side pulling strings.

[Georg Lassen]

@Georg Lassen: Trump not wanting/expecting to win has been brought up before by others as well. Remember, it was Trump who claimed the elections were rigged; he was fully expecting to lose.


I personally watched him collect those votes in rural America and other places he did not have to tour, he was trying to win.


Dont believe the narrative you are fed but make you own observations.
Trump is no saint but there is something much more worrying in his opposition.

[Dowly]

The man is clearly a hitman for the Clintons and the democratic party.


Dont believe the narrative you are fed but make you own observations.


You should take your own advice. :03:

[Georg Lassen]

You should take your own advice. :03:


Who is benefitting from Cohens testimony?

It will be interesting to see where he lands, might not even do jail time if there is a Democrat in the White House.


If he is right Trump will be easily persuaded to leaving office by his testimony and surely he would not run for a second term?


Much of the time the accusations against Trump are not logical and are very diverse, all hallmark signs of propaganda.
Propaganda campaigns are not impromptu affairs, they are planned and coordinated.
That means someone is behind it.



I am sure many Republican politicians despise Trump but the most logical suspect would be the Clintons and the Democratic party using all their power across US society.



Propaganda is information that is not objective (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(journalism)) and is used primarily to influence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influence) an audience and further an agenda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_agenda), often by presenting facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_language) to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is presented. Propaganda is often associated with material prepared by governments, but activist groups, companies, religious organizations and the media can also produce propaganda. In a 1929 literary debate with Edward Bernays (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays), Everett Dean Martin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everett_Dean_Martin) argues that, "Propaganda is making puppets of us. We are moved by hidden strings which the propagandist manipulates."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

[Georg Lassen]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF0TO0yU834

[Georg Lassen]

It really feels at times that US is one caning away from something serious.

[Mr Quatro]

Based on what I am watching right now on ABC special Michael Cohen's testimony before Congress ... what I see is the reverse of organized crime.

I guess you could in effect call this unorganized crime :D

He looks shady to me :yep:

[Dowly]

Republicans are acting like children, what an embarrassment.

Maybe they should try to catch Cohen in a lie now instead of trying to discredit him with crimes Cohen has already pleaded quilty to and taken responsibility for.

Like someone from the Dem side said, if prior crimes discredit a witness then most of Mafia sentences should be overturned since many of them were based on witness testimonies by people who did much worse crimes than Cohen.

[Georg Lassen]

Republicans are acting like children, what an embarrassment.

Maybe they should try to catch Cohen in a lie now instead of trying to discredit him with crimes Cohen has already pleaded quilty to and taken responsibility for.

Like someone from the Dem side said, if prior crimes discredit a witness then most of Mafia sentences should be overturned since many of them were based on witness testimonies by people who did much worse crimes than Cohen.




Cohen is looking for a reduced sentence or even pardon from a Democrat president.
The man behind him is lawyer Lanny Davis, a Clinton operative, who by coincidence, as they claim, is representing him.

The Clinton clan crimes are actually out in the open so the hypocrisy is hilarious.



What has Cohen produced in you opinion that is credible?


You dont agree that there is a propaganda campaign going on against Trump?
Or do you think there is one but it is justified as he represents pure evil?

[Dowly]

You talk a lot about propaganda, yet you parrot the 'Clinton crime clan' nonsense. Republicans had two years to look into it, they didn't. Why? Perhaps because there's nothing there, but they keep it up because their base swallows it.


Again, I'd advice you to take your advice:
Dont believe the narrative you are fed but make you own observations.

[STEED]

Dear American's

I live in the UK and have no interest with the latest bing bash bosh call it what you like. Please contact SKY News and the BBC News and tell them we Brits are not interested in non stop coverage of the latest goings on over there.

Thanks. :) :03:

PS I have have tried and they ignored me. Maybe you guys will have more sway.

[Georg Lassen]

You talk a lot about propaganda, yet you parrot the 'Clinton crime clan' nonsense. Republicans had two years to look into it, they didn't. Why? Perhaps because there's nothing there, but they keep it up because their base swallows it.


Again, I'd advice you to take your advice:




Nonsense?



Anyone else would be in prison for having a private server for classified communications.

The Clinton foundation worth billions by donations from dictators and criminals has been the subject of several criminal investigations regarding suspected financial crimes and political corruption.
How these have been buried is very interesting.



Bill is a sexual predator by the feminist classification of today.

[eddie]

Nonsense?



Anyone else would be in prison for having a private server for classified communications.

The Clinton foundation worth billions by donations from dictators and criminals has been the subject of several criminal investigations regarding suspected financial crimes and political corruption.
How these have been buried is very interesting.



Bill is a sexual predator by the feminist classification of today.


Then why aren't Jared Kushner and Ivanka in prison, they had private email servers when Trump was first elected! Why did they get a free pass?


How is the Trump Charity doing these days, And Trump University?


I don't stand up for Bill Clinton and his affair, but how come you give Trump a free pass when he paid nearly a quarter of a million dollars after having sex with 2 women, while his wife was pregnant and about to give birth to their youngest son? Quarter of a million dollars, LOL That from the clown who wrote the book on "The Art of the Deal":haha::haha:

[Dowly]

Anyone else would be in prison for having a private server for classified communications.The FBI and the Inspector General of DoJ disagrees with you.

The Clinton foundation worth billions by donations from dictators and criminals has been the subject of several criminal investigations regarding suspected financial crimes and political corruption.Which bodies have investigated the Clinton Foundation? I never really followed that much.

[Georg Lassen]

Then why aren't Jared Kushner and Ivanka in prison, they had private email servers when Trump was first elected! Why did they get a free pass?


How is the Trump Charity doing these days, And Trump University?


I don't stand up for Bill Clinton and his affair, but how come you give Trump a free pass when he paid nearly a quarter of a million dollars after having sex with 2 women, while his wife was pregnant and about to give birth to their youngest son? Quarter of a million dollars, LOL That from the clown who wrote the book on "The Art of the Deal":haha::haha:


Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, the Kushners had no such clearence or access at the time and I doubt they have now.


Has the now dispanded Trump fund received funding from foreign nations?
I dont know, but at least it was dispanded, Clintons refuse to take down theirs.

I am sure the Democrats have turned every stone to find something

[Georg Lassen]

The FBI and the Inspector General of DoJ disagrees with you.


No they dont, they disagreed in the case of Secretary of State Clinton, a regular State Department employee should not try doing the same.



Which bodies have investigated the Clinton Foundation? I never really followed that much.


FBI, they have had internal disputes about the investigations, pointing to political interference.

[Dowly]

No they dont, they disagreed in the case of Secretary of State Clinton, a regular State Department employee should not try doing the same.Whether the outcome would have been different had it been just a regular State Department employee was, to the best of my recollection, not discussed in those reports. You're simply making an assumption.

[Georg Lassen]

Whether the outcome would have been different had it been just a regular State Department employee was, to the best of my recollection, not discussed in those reports. You're simply making an assumption.




No, I am accusing her of a crime, a case where anyone else would have been sentenced.

[Dowly]

No, I am accusing her of a crime, a case where anyone else would have been sentenced.Accuse all you want. The FBI cleared her and the IG report backed the FBI's result.

[Armistead]

For me, this seems to be one large organized crime family, the Democrats, trying to take down a petty thief ring - Trump.

[August]

Then why aren't Jared Kushner and Ivanka in prison, they had private email servers when Trump was first elected! Why did they get a free pass?


So? Did they use them to transmit and receive classified material like Clinton did? You know that makes a very big difference Eddie.

[August]

Accuse all you want. The FBI cleared her and the IG report backed the FBI's result.


Cleared does not mean found innocent. Nothing would stop her being charged with mishandling classified information and she should be.

[nikimcbee]

For me, this seems to be one large organized crime family, the Democrats, trying to take down a petty thief ring - Trump.


This.:Kaleun_Salute:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Wow, so you're talking about Cohen's testimony before Congress, today?

*crickets*

EDIT: you have!! yay!!

[em2nought]

Politicians do not put politicians in jail. Trump is not a politician. He's the guy that everyone gets mad at because he makes them look like lazy good for nothing "politicians". :03:

[Onkel Neal]

For me, this seems to be one large organized crime family, the Democrats, trying to take down a petty thief ring - Trump.


haha, post of the year territory :Kaleun_Applaud:

[Rockstar]

Yes sooo very interesting isnt it, our bloviating congress calling on a witness who was just recently convicted of having lied to the SAME congress. Wow :har:

CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin did not mince words in his critique of the hearing, saying he was struck by "the breathtaking incompetence of the questioning" that did not lead to any valuable information from Cohen.


"I am struck by the breathtaking incompetence of the questioning," @JeffreyToobin says about Michael Cohen's public testimony, adding that the line of questioning was "endless bloviating and not actually getting information out of the witness"Even the New York Times weighs in

In a running online commentary, reporters and editors from The New York Times noted that several of the Republicans' tactics have not panned out, including attempts to "show that Cohen is doing this for financial gain" (several questions revolved around whether the former lawyer is pursuing a book or movie deal). The Times' White House correspondent also noted some hypocrisy surrounding that topic, as Trump "often promotes such books when they flatter him."

At the same time, Times reporter Nicholas Fandos asserted that the Republicans "actually have a clearer sense" of what they are hoping to achieve — "muddy the waters around Cohen" — than the Democrats, who "continue to overreach a bit" and "seem to be having a much harder time choosing which targets are worth their time."From the beginning I said it was a BOONDOGGLE AND NATIONAL EMBARRASSMENT. Brought to you by and thanks to our hard earned money they tax and just piss away with this political tripe. And some think this is supposed to be interesting and neccessary, what a joke.

[Skybird]

A duck swims home, wet and pissed. The pond in the wonderful place names Washington D.C. already is waiting. With many sharks in it.


:har:

[u crank]

The chance that Trump was going to get a deal in Hanoi that would result in a clear and irreversible commitment to the ‘denuclearisation’ of North Korea was pretty much zero. Trump did the right thing in insisting on more than Kim was offering. There is a long way to go yet. My suspicion is that way at the bottom of the US briefcase is a realization that Kim won't and doesn't have to give up all of his nukes. His fear is that would lead to a Gaddafi type take down. The question is what to get for that. The only real solution is a type of political deal that greatly reduces tensions with a kind of mutual nuclear deterrence. That has worked for a long time with other countries. Bringing NK back out of the stone age economically and socially would be the goal I would think.

Carrot and stick.

[Skybird]

I'm laughing because your beloved great dealmaker stepped into the sam trap that several Us presidents before him stepped into who got ridiculed and attacked for it by him.


Its also said that the summit was incredibly dilettantically prepared by the American preparation team. While the Northkorerans apparenmtly got coldly surprised by the ammount of American intel about their alternative nuclear facility thy hoped to let slip by under the Amercans' radar.


However, the Donald ran a strategy of maximum demands - and crashed down early, totally. No dealmaking, thus no peace Nobel. Poor duck.



And me? I say again what I said last year after Singapore already: Northkorea will NEVER give up their nuclear weapons. NEVER. Kim too has seen what happened in Libya. Murderous unscrupulousness (before he left the country, he should have let executed 50 cadres in the party and military to secure his safe return) should not be mistaken with stupidity.

[Armistead]

Not sure what we should do about N. Korea, but the blockade of the South worked pretty good!

[em2nought]

"Trump fails to disarm North Korea's nuclear program." Finally some news that democrats will celebrate! :har:

[eddie]

"Trump fails to disarm North Korea's nuclear program." Finally some news that democrats will celebrate! :har:


Doubt they will, but sure are looking forward to the SDNY investigation results,lol Especially if they can hang that spineless big mouthed Donald Junya!

[vienna]

A few points...

Cohen is looking for a reduction of sentence: Nonsense. Once a person is convicted, especially for a crimes to which they plead guilty, the only way to get a reduction of sentence either by appeal of their conviction or commutation (reduction) of their sentence by an overseeing executive. Setting aside no appeals court would entertain an appeal by someone who has admitted to their crime, an appeal can only be made over technical, procedural issues, such as prosecutorial misconduct or malfeasance. Since Cohen didn't oppose his conviction and there is no claim or misconduct, he has no recourse...

As far as a commutation is concerned, the only executive who can issue a commutation for a Federal crime is the POTUS. I think it s a pretty safe bet to say Cohen is not going to ever see that happen. The argument Cohen would lie now to get a reduced sentence is utter nonsense...


Cohen is looking for a pardon: Again, nonsense. Unless you think Trump is a very, very forgiving guy who doesn't hold grudges, the idea of a pardon, which only the POTUS can issue, is ridiculous. There was a prior post in this thread where the idea was put forth Cohen could be lying in hopes of gaining a pardon from a future DEM President; it would appear there is a question if Trump will even be around for a second term inherent in that argument. Cohen's current prison sentence is three (3) years; he would be out of prison long before a DEM President could take office if Trump had a second term, rendering this argument moot. If a DEM does win in 2020, the net reduction via pardon would be so small as to be negligible...

Lying isn't worth the risk for Cohen. Again, nonsense and I dare say, balderdash...

Oh, and thanks for admitting Trump probably won't be around for a second term... :03: :haha:


Cohen is lying again during the current hearings: Why? If he has no chance of commutation or pardon, what is his motivation? The potential downside far out weighs any truly logical, or even plausible, rationale. Cohen already has three year sentence, and is still under an agreement with the Special Counsel (SC) that imposes further prosecution and/or penalties if violated. Does anyone really think this guy is going to risk a heaping helping of further prosecution or prison time for logically no reason at all? What could he possibly gain by lying that would be worth the risk? Again, nonsense...

Then there is the issue of the documentation accompanying Cohen's testimonies over the last three days. We don't know what he is presenting in terms of testimony and/or evidence during the closed door hearings with the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, but Cohen did provide documentation to the House Oversight Committees, much of which appears to have come from Trump Organization record and/or Trump's personal dealings via Cohen; its not like he's merely referring to vague inferences of possible documents, he's actually turning over real paper; its hard to refute items such as actual bank records, checks, etc. as not being actual, solid evidence. And, again, what would Cohen gain by submitting false or misleading evidence. Does anyone really think, given the scrutiny a case such as this gets both by law enforcement, the media, and the public, that Cohen would reasonably believe eh could get away with it? Cohen may have been a fool to get involved with a conman and liar like Trump in the first place, but he couldn't be that much of a fool...


Finally, it should be noted tee GOP members of the committee never once actually materially challenge, on a specific basis, any of the evidence regarding Trump and his alleged wrongdoings. All the harpies did was to raise a chorus of "Liar!!" and piously and righteously decry how would anyone dare to lie...

...yet these are the self-same who have no problem at all espousing and defending someone like Trump who has lied, openly and blatantly during his entire life and, most notably and criminally, during his tenure as POTUS.. I guess for those paragons of virtue and defenders of morality, theirs doesn't stink...





(Yes... it does... and to high heaven...)...











<O>

[August]

Apparently the Dems latest great white hope to bring down the Trumpster has gotten caught lying to Congress once again.


https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/28/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-white-house/index.html


Oh well keep trying Dems. Maybe by 2024 you'll come up with something that actually damages Trump.

[vienna]

Apparently the Dems latest great white hope to bring down the Trumpster has gotten caught lying to Congress once again.


https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/28/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-white-house/index.html


Oh well keep trying Dems. Maybe by 2024 you'll come up with something that actually damages Trump.


Yeah, right, an article with a lot of "ifs" and not one solid, provable fact: 'if they have the emails', etc. None of this, in any way, explains away, or negates, any of the documentation presented at the hearing yesterday, nor does it let Trump off the hook of responsibility fr his actions. And this is without even knowing what Cohen has presented to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees Tuesday and today, respectively...

Once again, a big "Meh..."...

OH, well, keep trying Trumpettes; maybe the Big Yellow Screw-Up you follow will find something to pull out of his copious behind...


...and if he does, there is little doubt it will be a lie; you know "lies", thsoe things you get so self-righteous and morally indignant about all the time... selectively...










<O>

[Armistead]

I think we all know Trump paid off the ho porn girl. Even the worse case here he cut a few checks after being pres, it's really a petty charge. Oh, the Dems gonna impeach on anything, but the senate won't find him guilty and it will probably work to his favor in the next election considering all the stupid stuff Dems do. Basically, it's Bill Clinton all over again, start with one thing, way down the line we spent millions to find out a president got his winky wet and tried to cover it. Winkygate!

[Armistead]

You forgot what Cohen is really concerned about in this....what leading male will be playing him in his upcoming movie....To think he wouldn't lie, mislead, make accusations, cause drama, etc...considering his history would be a little naive. He's backed by the Dems and the Clinton Crime Syndicate. He's not that worried.



A few points...

Cohen is looking for a reduction of sentence: Nonsense. Once a person is convicted, especially for a crimes to which they plead guilty, the only way to get a reduction of sentence either by appeal of their conviction or commutation (reduction) of their sentence by an overseeing executive. Setting aside no appeals court would entertain an appeal by someone who has admitted to their crime, an appeal can only be made over technical, procedural issues, such as prosecutorial misconduct or malfeasance. Since Cohen didn't oppose his conviction and there is no claim or misconduct, he has no recourse...

As far as a commutation is concerned, the only executive who can issue a commutation for a Federal crime is the POTUS. I think it s a pretty safe bet to say Cohen is not going to ever see that happen. The argument Cohen would lie now to get a reduced sentence is utter nonsense...


Cohen is looking for a pardon: Again, nonsense. Unless you think Trump is a very, very forgiving guy who doesn't hold grudges, the idea of a pardon, which only the POTUS can issue, is ridiculous. There was a prior post in this thread where the idea was put forth Cohen could be lying in hopes of gaining a pardon from a future DEM President; it would appear there is a question if Trump will even be around for a second term inherent in that argument. Cohen's current prison sentence is three (3) years; he would be out of prison long before a DEM President could take office if Trump had a second term, rendering this argument moot. If a DEM does win in 2020, the net reduction via pardon would be so small as to be negligible...

Lying isn't worth the risk for Cohen. Again, nonsense and I dare say, balderdash...

Oh, and thanks for admitting Trump probably won't be around for a second term... :03: :haha:


Cohen is lying again during the current hearings: Why? If he has no chance of commutation or pardon, what is his motivation? The potential downside far out weighs any truly logical, or even plausible, rationale. Cohen already has three year sentence, and is still under an agreement with the Special Counsel (SC) that imposes further prosecution and/or penalties if violated. Does anyone really think this guy is going to risk a heaping helping of further prosecution or prison time for logically no reason at all? What could he possibly gain by lying that would be worth the risk? Again, nonsense...

Then there is the issue of the documentation accompanying Cohen's testimonies over the last three days. We don't know what he is presenting in terms of testimony and/or evidence during the closed door hearings with the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, but Cohen did provide documentation to the House Oversight Committees, much of which appears to have come from Trump Organization record and/or Trump's personal dealings via Cohen; its not like he's merely referring to vague inferences of possible documents, he's actually turning over real paper; its hard to refute items such as actual bank records, checks, etc. as not being actual, solid evidence. And, again, what would Cohen gain by submitting false or misleading evidence. Does anyone really think, given the scrutiny a case such as this gets both by law enforcement, the media, and the public, that Cohen would reasonably believe eh could get away with it? Cohen may have been a fool to get involved with a conman and liar like Trump in the first place, but he couldn't be that much of a fool...


Finally, it should be noted tee GOP members of the committee never once actually materially challenge, on a specific basis, any of the evidence regarding Trump and his alleged wrongdoings. All the harpies did was to raise a chorus of "Liar!!" and piously and righteously decry how would anyone dare to lie...

...yet these are the self-same who have no problem at all espousing and defending someone like Trump who has lied, openly and blatantly during his entire life and, most notably and criminally, during his tenure as POTUS.. I guess for those paragons of virtue and defenders of morality, theirs doesn't stink...





(Yes... it does... and to high heaven...)...











<O>

[vienna]

You forgot what Cohen is really concerned about in this....what leading male will be playing him in his upcoming movie....To think he wouldn't lie, mislead, make accusations, cause drama, etc...considering his history would be a little naive. He's backed by the Dems and the Clinton Crime Syndicate. He's not that worried.


Got any actual, solid proof for those statements, or is this just a parroting of Hannity, et. al.? Particularly the DEM backing bit and the Clinton backing bit: any solid proof the DEMs are actively backing him, at all, other than hoping Cohen's testimony and evidence will get the job done for them? Any proof of payments, coaching, etc.? Would really be interested in seeing it, if it exists...

As far as Clinton is concerned, all Cohen did was look around for the best lawyer with experience handling political cases and he settled on one with a good track record; that he happened to be a counsel for Clinton does not necessarily mean Cohen is in the Clinton camp or in any other way associated with Clinton. So, any actual proof Cohen is in the sway of Clinton?...

It seems to me, Cohen finding a good attorney is something Trump should have done long ago; Trump's track record in hiring lawyers, advisers, etc., is really very poor and is highly indicative of extreme bad judgment. Just in the two years in office so far, Trump's managed to to go through a rogue's gallery of losers in his administration; so much for being a real stable genius...

BTW, both Trump and Roger Stone began their long friendship and partnership when they became protégés of their mutual mentor, Roy Cohn; Cohn, in fact was the personal attorney for Trump form 1973 to 1985, until Cohn was disbarred for breaches of ethics and criminal activity. Cohn was also representing several mob bosses, including John Gotti, at the same time he was representing Trump. Seems like Trump sure can pick'em when it comes to being a judge of character...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Cohn


An interesting article about Trump/Stone/Cohn that explains a lot...

How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn’s Ruthless Symbiosis Changed America --

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-roy-cohn-relationship









<O>

[Armistead]

Well, a handful of GOP congressmen sent a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr referring Cohen for investigation for perjury today

"We write to refer significant evidence that Michael D. Cohen committed perjury and knowingly made false statements during his testimony before an Oversight and Reform Committee"

When you look at the comparative facts of their claims, I bet he's in more trouble... for perjury.

The Clinton structure, and I agree, she ain't the head anymore, are just using him as a sacrificial goat. I notice today many said in closed hearings he stuck more to script, was more careful in wording, relied more on his lawyer and stayed away from all the liberal drama talking points...racist, sexist, criminal, con man, etc...

Got any actual, solid proof for those statements, or is this just a parroting of Hannity, et. al.? Particularly the DEM backing bit and the Clinton backing bit: any solid proof the DEMs are actively backing him, at all, other than hoping Cohen's testimony and evidence will get the job done for them? Any proof of payments, coaching, etc.? Would really be interested in seeing it, if it exists...

As far as Clinton is concerned, all Cohen did was look around for the best lawyer with experience handling political cases and he settled on one with a good track record; that he happened to be a counsel for Clinton does not necessarily mean Cohen is in the Clinton camp or in any other way associated with Clinton. So, any actual proof Cohen is in the sway of Clinton?...

It seems to me, Cohen finding a good attorney is something Trump should have done long ago; Trump's track record in hiring lawyers, advisers, etc., is really very poor and is highly indicative of extreme bad judgment. Just in the two years in office so far, Trump's managed to to go through a rogue's gallery of losers in his administration; so much for being a real stable genius...

BTW, both Trump and Roger Stone began their long friendship and partnership when they became protégés of their mutual mentor, Roy Cohn; Cohn, in fact was the personal attorney for Trump form 1973 to 1985, until Cohn was disbarred for breaches of ethics and criminal activity. Cohn was also representing several mob bosses, including John Gotti, at the same time he was representing Trump. Seems like Trump sure can pick'em when it comes to being a judge of character...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Cohn


An interesting article about Trump/Stone/Cohn that explains a lot...

How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn’s Ruthless Symbiosis Changed America --

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-roy-cohn-relationship









<O>

[Rockstar]

Its fun watching a party implode. What do they have to offer? Entertainment of course.


https://www.lmtonline.com/news/article/House-Democrats-explode-in-recriminations-as-13653983.php