POLITICS THREAD

The costs are going up because it is more difficult for them. Principle of supply and demand. Walls make it harder to transport people without getting caught. If it was cheaper to enter other ways then people would do that. However with the cost going up over 130 percent, it becomes out of the price range of most central American citizens.

https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/smugglers-up-prices-due-to-immigration-policies/

Today's Huff Post: "Just hours after declaring a national emergency on border security, President Donald Trump headed to his Mar-a-Lago resort, marking his 223rd day on one of his properties."

No more need be said.

And Mexico will pay for it.

Except the Con can't even make US citizens pay for it except by extralegal means.

What. A. Loser.

We the German people are proudly ready to help and offer our service to the American people and Sr. Trump in order to build your upcoming wall and very 'quickly'.

#Youarenotalone

https://www.thelocal.de/20170330/two-german-firms-interested-in-building-trumps-border-wall

It still isn't a bigger lie than

If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.

he had to make up for it since he spent the entire time during the shutdown in DC while the DEMs were in Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

Also, who reads Huffington Post? Talk about bubble. Its hard to imagine she worked with Andrew Brietbart

@boschepg:

I liked my doctor, I kept my doctor, how many lies did Tramp tell in that one rambling press conference?

It won't be more difficult for them once the wall goes up is what i'm saying. Right now people may prefer to cross by land because it's cheaper, but once that's taken away only air/sea remain. So, the prices for those two options cannot be prohibitive to any degree unless coyotes simply don't want to make money.

@boschepg: actually he told the truth about one thing he said "I didn't need to do this" and that my friend is the truth, and will be used against him in the courts.

you do know Obama actually apologized in an interview cuz of the loss of coverage to people. Politifact called it the lie of the decade...and he lost 1000s of seats cuz of it

And just like your Muslim ban, it will be approved by the Supreme Court

You did, I bolded it for you.

without a wall with a proper tech, you would need way more manpower, a wall with movement sensors/detection actually replaces manpower and many active drones as well, in theory, you would only need 1 satellite and when the sensors are activated, the following coordinates would be sent in order to inspect the following violated area, as already mentioned in the previous source

This literally makes the wall redundant though....if the wall isn't really stopping people, if you still need satellites to track the people who get around it (because lets be honest, it's just a wall), then what's the point of it?

not even American Special Forces could be able to scale the new wall prototypes

Interesting...why?? Because of the height? Is it gonna be like The Wall in game of thrones?? Is it made of some special material or something?

All of that would effectively stop drug trafficking through the border.

I disagree. Trump is taking money from counter-narcotics programs to fund his national security wall. It's only going to make it easier to get drugs here because the vast majority of them don't even cross "illegally". The drugs that do come in illegally are brought in by water or air.

As mentioned above, the West Bank Wall in Israel works and it looks decent, it reflects national presence over the border, I mean, if your dignity is so screwed into the bottom and you're actually proud of a fence which looks like as it was built in a shithole than rather in a developed nation, then so be it.

Luckily, the majority of the American society are people which are proud of their nation, that's why Trump was elected.

That majority didn't vote for Trump tho lmao you really don't know much about America.

When? Do you have any links?

If someone asks for asylum at a port of entry - they do not actually come into the country. The need for additional resources arises to handle those asking for asylum after they have entered the country. If fewer enter illegally and had to ask for asylum outside of the US, the number of beds needed would not be so great.

Wait, I may be wrong, but isn't this because ICE took the illegal immigrants from their homes and then just held them???

What constitutes a "national emergency" is for some judge to determine. Can the US process asylum seekers without allowing them into the US with the current resources? Probably not without judges making exceptions. Would stronger borders and more ICE agents reduce the number of Latino children being trafficked in the sex trade? Currently it is estimated that 10,000 enter each year. Are 10,000 Latino children a "national emergency"? I'd like to think so. It is estimated that 30 percent or more (Amnesty International claims 80%) of females coming into the country illegally from central American countries are raped on the journey. Are 100,000 plus rapes each year of Latino women a national emergency? I'd like to think so.

These sound like Trump numbers i.e lies. I'm gonna do some research then come back.

I do not find the logic of not putting up something because the reason is that it doesn't work. Something there works far better than something not there.

If it doesn't work, or if's only marginally effective, then there is no point in spending billions of dollars to put it up tho....

It is a deterrent. You push people to the spots you want them. (toward points of entry) It militaristic in nature. With a physical barrier that is hard to scale, you can lower patrol in that area and focus it more toward the more open areas.

This contradicts what everyone else is saying though. They claim that the wall (and the sensors) will make those areas easier to patrol, not eliminate or even greatly reduce the need to do so.

But, to play devils advocate, if the wall did force people to come through once access point, wouldn't you need more border patrol agents at those points? Which again, contradicts what everyone is saying is the point of the wall.

If you lessen the burden through across the border, than you can focus more of the security to other aspects of security. I keep hearing about more advanced technology, which is fine, but you need some stuff to go along with it. Drones a lone do not work cuz it does cost the US to fly them. But drones alone just monitor. They cannot stop anyone from actually entering the US illegally. Drug dealers do dig tunnels- which is an illegal enterprise doing stuff for illegal purposes - which makes it illegal.

Creating a choke point raises the burden of the patrol agents though. What other aspects of security do you have in mind? It will cost the US a lot more money to build this wall than it would to utilize drone tech. And lets be honest, the wall does not stop anyone from entering either. Like I told the other guy, the vast majority of drugs do not come in "illegally" i.e someone jumping the fence or even by land.

I always say to counter that illegals do jobs that no one wants with they do jobs that no one wants at the price point in which they are getting paid to do it.

You know, this is actually an aspect of "border security" I want to touch on, and it's something I think would deter people from coming over even more than a wall. We should make it illegal and punishable by jail time/heavy fines to pay undocumented people under the table. Most people come over the border to find work because they know Americans are willing to pay them to do the jobs they don't want to do. So, if you take that away, then the amount of people coming over drops dramatically.

And it will be looked back on very unfavorably, even more so than the muslim ban, because it completely changes the political landscape. Just wait for the next democratic President to "own" the SC then declare gun violence a national emergency....

@buttersdaman000: you would have to shift the border patrol agents to the area of need.

You contradict yourself cuz if we had no choke points for effectiveness we don't need the patrol agents cuz its over 600 miles of open land with one agent. It screams open borders.

Im for heavy e-verify and agree with your last statement

And yet every argument for this people do not realize what it takes to overturn a Constitutional Amendment, cuz no National Emergency is going to override the stated 2/3 Senate vote and 3/4th state vote. It actually says the government (Federal) shall not infringe. Your making an emotional argument and trying to make it a logical one, but the factor to do so slaps that theory down. Any National Emergency on climate change or gun control is not happening on the Federal level. That's a fact and would be overturned so quickly let alone would destroy the Democratic party all together if they tried to do it

you would have to shift the border patrol agents to the area of need.

You contradict yourself cuz if we had no choke points for effectiveness we don't need the patrol agents cuz its over 600 miles of open land with one agent. It screams open borders.

Huh? What do you mean? Where are you getting "one" agent from? I'm just saying if you think the wall greatly deters people from crossing, and creates choke points, then those points need vastly more agents patrolling than any crossways do now. This contradicts what everyone else is saying -- that the wall reduces the needs for agents. The way you put it actually increases it.

And yet every argument for this people do not realize what it takes to overturn a Constitutional Amendment, cuz no National Emergency is going to override the stated 2/3 Senate vote and 3/4th state vote. It actually says the government (Federal) shall not infringe. Your making an emotional argument and trying to make it a logical one, but the factor to do so slaps that theory down. Any National Emergency on climate change or gun control is not happening on the Federal level. That's a fact and would be overturned so quickly let alone would destroy the Democratic party all together if they tried to do it

That was just an example...replace it with whatever you want. Imagine if Obama declared healthcare a national emergency just to directly subvert a congress that denied it. This is going to create a bad precedent. How can you defend it??

Also, who said the amendment would need to be overturned? President could declare a national emergency and ban anything over a handgun.

You did shit, I'm highlighting the wall and patrols as a cooperative influence, do you even understand what I'm trying to imply with the term symbiosis within the subject?

It seems you have some problems, I'm not saying that satellites should directly track the people, I'm talking about a cooperation between the sensors in the wall, those sending the signals to the satellites through a specific engine or computer and from the satellites to the border patrol headquarters, it's just a very simple concept.

The wall delays the drug smuggling and illegal immigration smugglers, the famous cartel drug tunnels won't work anymore too and we are talking about a 35 to 40 feet wall and not the current mediocre border fence.

Trump clearly announced that he is going to improve the controlling protocols at the ports and at the water borders, those replacing obsolete technology in order to detect drug smuggling more efficiently, the current American infrastructure is obsolete, that's a fact and Trump wants to improve it, your current rusty third world border fence is a symbol of the American untidiness on the subject, Trump wants to actualize it.

Doing things by halves, does not express efficiency and competence, it must be done at 100% or nothing, maybe such a thing is part of your lazy standards but such a thing is not the case for the likes of Trump, those are German standards, that's why Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump, comes originally from Bavaria Germany, it's typical, at 100% or nothing, a complete work is the only thing which counts.

Of course, I'm referring myself to the voters and Trump is the president, point end, cry me a river like a proper soyboy.

You did shit, I'm highlighting the wall and patrols as a cooperative influence, do you even understand what I'm trying to imply with the term symbiosis within the subject?

Don't get cranky because I pointed out a contradiction.

It seems you have some problems, I'm not saying that satellites should directly track the people, I'm talking about a cooperation between the sensors in the wall, those sending the signals to the satellites through a specific engine or computer and from the satellites to the border patrol headquarters, it's just a very simple concept.

i.e tracking.....

The wall delays the drug smuggling and illegal immigration smugglers, the famous cartel drug tunnels won't work anymore too and we are talking about a 35 to 40 feet wall and the current mediocre border fence.

The wall delays the drug smuggling and illegal immigration smugglers, the famous cartel drug tunnels won't work anymore too and we are talking about a 35 to 40 feet wall and the current mediocre border fence.

The wall doesn't do anything to deter drugs because the vast majority of drugs don't cross illegally (like criminals jumping the border to bring in drugs), nor do they cross by land.

Trump clearly announced that he is going to improve the controlling protocols at the ports and at the water borders, those replacing obsolete technology in order to detect drugs more efficiently,

If he actually wanted to combat drug trafficking then he would focus more of his attention on on the ports instead of the wall, but he isn't. He also proposes to take billions of dollars from counter-narcotics programs to build his wall.....seems a bit counter productive doesn't it??

but such a thing is not the case for the likes of Trump, those are German standards, that's why Trump's grandfather Frederick Trump, comes originally from Bavaria Germany, it's typical, at 100% or nothing a completed work is the only thing which counts.

Lmao you're such a nationalist

Of course, I'm referring myself to the voters and Trump is the president point end, cry me a river like a proper soyboy.

You did not just call me a soyboy with a real-life profile pic like that, sounding like a 4chan reject, redpill incel with the drivel that comes out your mouth haha

Actually the Muslim ban wasnt approved. It was initially shot down by the courts, and then Trump had to change it specifically to try to make it something that could be allowed. Even then, the courts decided to ignore that the motivation for the executive order was specifically to ban Muslims from entering... which is un-Constitutional.

Also worth noting is that what was approved by the courts was not what Trump promised to "ban all Muslims from entering the US", which would have certainly and without question have been destroyed in the Supreme Court. Notice a pattern? Trump promises to commit war crimes by bombing innocent civilians, attack nations to steal their oil, and torture people... but once he's in office he realizes he cant actually do it and the military would probably refuse such illegal orders. He promises to "lock her up", and then quickly forgets it a week after the election. Promises to "make Mexico pay for it" and then actually shuts down the government and declares a non-existent emergency to try to get Americans to pay for a ridiculous wall. Promises to "repeal and replace" Obamacare... and we still have Obamacare. Trump couldnt even get other Republicans to back the half-baked health care law they tried to shove down people's throats, even though no one wanted it.

Trump is not just corrupt and a criminal, he's the most incompetent and feckless President at least in the last hundred years. He's even making Nixon look good now. And that's before we even get into all the FBI investigations, the Russia stuff and his obstruction of justice, and all that.

On the bright side, he spends 60% of his time avoiding doing any actual work... so, things could definitely be worse.

As I said, it's possible to protect the borders with just manpower, which won't be efficient and way more expensive in the long term, it not only requires a lot of personal, but vehicles, fuel, it requires way more maintenance and most importantly, it exhibits more people to danger, my point is that with a proper wall, you spare personal, it is cheaper and a more efficient way to control the borders, considering the wall will have incorporated sensors which will require far less maintenance than vehicles propelled by fuel, moreover, a wall requires basic maintenance.

A wall alone can theoretically be enough with a huge budget, with automatized weapons and so on, but it would be way too expensive.

So you introduce a proper wall and the necessary amount of patrols.

Patrols alone won't be efficient without a proper wall.

PS:

You did not just call me a soyboy with a real-life profile pic like that, sounding like a 4chan reject, redpill incel with the drivel that comes out your mouth haha

I know I look decent and young for 28 years old, you don't have to tell me that, you are welcome to despise me, nothing else left for a mediocre peasant like you, I care about my wealth something normal in my daily program, while you have to swallow the fat of your acne.

Both perfect responses to our current crisis at the border in the White House..

Another perfect response to our immigration crisis constitutional crisis.

Interesting.

SCOTUS to Decide if 2020 Census Will Have Citizenship Question

Lol like someone who's here illegally would be truthful about that. EDIT: On second thought my reaction was a bit narrow in scope.

@boschepg: you do know Obama actually apologized in an interview cuz of the loss of coverage to people. Politifact called it the lie of the decade...and he lost 1000s of seats cuz of it

Yet you continue to support someone who tells lies of infinity on a daily basis multiple times a day.

@boschepg: Politifact called it the lie of the decade...and he lost 1000s of seats cuz of it

Talking about the lie of the decade, I'll give you the lie of the decade..... tell me the last time the President spoke.

I hope that Trump and Congressional Republicans can see that if Trump's emergency wall funding works, it'll set the precedent that the president can declare a state of emergency to get what he wants, regardless of whether or not there actually is an emergency. A precedent that dangerous could lead to interesting things in the future.

@mrmonster:

You mean like DACA did?

Congress didn't give Obama the answer he looked for, so he decided to rearrange funds from the things they did already give him for other things in immigration to make DACA. Trump now has gotten an answer he didn't like, but on a worse issue that does need solved - and simply rearranged the budget from unused emergency funds.

There is very little difference. Both circumvented congress.

Also, the idea that executive orders had to be for only what is like natural disasters, etc - was always on the president's pervue anyway, declare for something you want to do. IE: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/13/letter-continuation-national-emergency-respect-venezuela - the Obama era EO declaring something INTERNATIONAL as a national emergency, and lasted quite a long while. Which cleared up the funds and power for him to do certain things on it.

True but the SCOTUS has been relatively consistent with regard to expansion of the president's discretionary power over the borders and foreign matters. Given the current makeup of the courts they may rule in his favor, and they might cite the expansion to apply only in cases of border security - which in and of itself would be interesting.

"We need a wall on our border."

"No we don't."

"Why?"

".......No we don't."

"Huh?"

"No we don't"

"Are you ok."

"No we don't."

"Ah....typical NPC. Orange Man Bad!"

"Yes! Orange Man Bad!"

Uhm, no it wont cuz the DEMs don't care about precedent - see DACA, See nuke option. No DEM President can National Emergency gun legislation or climate change so it doesn't effect the GOP. Its just a fear like them saying that millions will die or the planet is going to end in 12 years.

BINGO. Even before Trump was President the SC usually ruled that if the President could under Article Two, then he can

BTW- everyone hear the rumor that Clarence Thomas is going to retire this year?

Where did you hear that?

People like AOC and Al Gore have damage the environmental cause more than any other republican. This is from someone who has actually seen an argued based on the science that man made global warming is a real thing, it is conclusively man-made (see carbon 14 isotope ratio in our atmosphere increasing. That is from carbon fossil burning, the natural sources of C02 like volcanoes produce much larger quantities of C02 that has less of the carbon 14 in it). It is the most c02 we have had in many hundreds of thousands of years.

My issue with AoC is that just like Al Gore, she tends to inflate things. AoC is obvious though - because no one in their right mind thinks 'world will end in 12 years'. Al Gore made missteps in accelerating time tables. Very much like some people wanting to say pulling out of the Paris accord just screwed everything over beyond what it was going to be. Let me put things into perspective for you - yes, the ice caps will melt 100% even if we don't put anything in our atmosphere at all from here on out. Yes, even if we continue our trend, much of that won't be true for a couple thousand years or so (I can get the peer reviewed research papers). And no, before anyone brings it up - not from climate change denialist 'scientists' which almost always have no degree in climatology and only aggravate me hearing the "skeptics" bring them up about 'muh 30k scientists say man made climate change does not exist or is not a big deal'. That is bunk, and dishonest. There were really only 4-5 there with any actual ability to talk, and those have very different issues with it than most are talking about. Won't stop anyone from citing the 30k figure though, it never has. I don't want to hear about how a 'scientist' thinks my car isn't designed up to par from a person who is only a scientist with a PHd in Botany - which is more or less what those numbers are for the vast majority. Even the ones that aren't fake (bad degrees).

Ok, so we limit pumping where we are now, and somehow get 90% redux to old commonly touted metric of 2100, Florida underwater, etc. Ok then, sure - you saved some time. Now bump it up a decade to 15 years, and despite our best efforts, your plan still fails. But you just screwed over the economy, and may have delayed progress towards an actual fix to pull it out of the atmosphere that may actually offset those years earned, or make it worse. AoC's "12 years and going to be irreversible" is another thing, even if it is best case scenario - and the US stops 100% of it's emissions today, it won't buy that many years, but a couple. Do they care, or do they just want to use it to push their agendas? Answer: usually the agendas.

Don't get me wrong - Trump has used the insanity that has become the GOP position on it to to push his own agenda here to his base.

But don't get it twisted: conservatives are plenty out there that have rational non-socialistic policies to deal with climate change, and realize the free market is the best solution to these problems. We had people like Margaret Thatcher in the 80s - before Al Gore even, the first big name politician of either left wing or right wing to speak up and raise the alarm on the effects of climate change... And she was a conservative. And she also happened to be the only British PM who had an actual hard science degree... What happened to those sorts of conservative politicians in the climate change debate? Why has the left run with it saying 'capitalism is the fault here', shamed most people into being leftist over it (silly) - where none of it is the actual case, and we should actually be the ones in the winning position here? Instead, today we get Trump 'but climate has always changed' - yeah, and we know the hows and why, the carbon cycle, how the ice ages and deglaciation cycles have been caused, first by orbital forcing to start the trend, then with the feedback loops that is our C02 and greenhouse gases as our world's thermostat.

Granted - since I have seen the numbers, have argued the science, I know at this point there isn't too much Trump can do to make it that much worse, so I just hope he will eventually learn, and get better ones on this topic in the future, and make a push to learn on this. In the meantime, let Trump do all the wonders he can on fixing our immigration, and a lot of the other issues he is very much worth backing on.

In the meantime we will have to be ready for more ocean acidification (no, not turning to 'acid', but with the ice melt with no salinity into the oceans, changes the pH of the water - this tends to lead, with warmer oceans - things like more corral bleaching), more storms, rising sea levels (even if not a quarter of a fast as 'an inconvenient truth' tended to put things on)... Things that we will have to learn to do with or without Trump right now. And ally with the market forces and people trying to fix the problems at that level, like electric cars, and business models that seem to be doing quite a lot of things. The new developments in easy/cheap to transport Hydrogen for instance may actually be the bigger alternative fuel boom in quite a large while, the thing that held it back (unsustainable transport cost) - has largely been solved. By free market people, who had a problem, came up with a solution, to get rich... You know, unlike how people like to say 'capitalism is antique, and will never solve this' would have you believe.

The ultimate need is to learn how to pull the vast amounts of carbon and other things we put into the atmosphere... Back out. Right now most ideas for that are vastly cost prohibitive on a large scale and impractical, even if a couple proof of concepts have been done. Give it a lot more decades, but we are working on these sorts of things. And again, Trump has no influence in stopping these things here.

https://bongino.com/these-three-charts-prove-that-walls-work/

Just for starters. And keep in mind: It doesn't even have to work completely. Even if it didn't work 75% as good as any of those, it is a good investment.

Um...that's a huge difference. Congress did pass obamacare, but, IIRC, the president disagreed on funding (or something) so he used executive power to get funds from the treasury. Congress did not agree with Trump on anything concerning his wall, so he used a NATIONAL EMERGENCY to undermine their decision. Those are two very different things, and it's extremely disingenuous to say since they both "circumvented congress" that they are similar because they are not.

I disagree. In fact, from what bosche tells me, it seems that the wall will actually require more manpower to man. And with all the talk about sensors, I can't help but think the wall itself is redundant. The sensors imply that people are getting over the wall because whats the point of pinpointing people who don't???

Huh?

You sound like a redpill incel, just_sayin lol

That's not actually true. The legislation passed allocated money for the wall ("$1,375,000,000 is for the construction of primary pedestrian fencing, including levee pedestrian fencing, in the Rio Grande Valley Sector," according to H.J. Res. 31).

Technically, lawyers could argue that this little bit of Congressional approval could legitimize the declaration. In fact, that's probably why Trump did not declare a national emergency until after that bill was passed and signed.

You do realize how easy it is to flip this example around, right?

"We need a wall on our border."

"No we don't."

"Why?"

"Because there are better, less expensive ways of keeping the border secure."

"Huh?"

"Border security is good, but the wall is a waste of money."

"You just want to sneak illegal immigrants in so they'll vote for you!"

"We want better paths for obtaining legal citizenship!"

"There! Just now, you admitted it!"

"Didn't Trump promise that it'd be Mexico, not the USA, who would be paying for the wall?"

"Ah....typical NPC. Orange Man Bad!"

Yeah, there. Both of our obtuse examples really furthered the conversation. Great job. Go us!

@aros001: Funny, I haven’t heard of an actual less expensive or as effective way for our borders to be secured, have you? What you said could easily be summed up as “No we don’t” because that what they really mean. Can you please tell me these other “better ways”?

“Better paths for legal citizenship” has nothing to do with the wall. How does a wall make it harder in any way?

Who cares of who pays for the wall, as long as there is one I’m fine with it. Crying that it’s expensive doesn’t mean anything, did you cry when your home security costed a lot?

And just to mention it isn't that "expensive" at all, at least to warrant a comparison to your home security. In comparison to the rest of the government spending, it isn't even half of one percent. It is less than that... Sure, what 8 billion? Oh yeah... In just one year the military spending alone is 700+ billion. With welfare and everything else, we are talking like many trillions. But of course, we are getting hung up, on what? 8 billion more? 'It is expensive - it will bankrupt us'. Um, no it won't. Even if we got the big wall he spoke of at first, it still wouldn't be that much in comparison to the overall federal budgets.

@theonewhopullsthestrings:

And the best part about it is that these same people brought forth the Green New Deal yet still have the guts to say the wall is expensive.

Lol, even liberal CNN now is being forced to admit the Jussie Smollett 'hate crime' was a hoax...

CNN - Police sources: New evidence suggests Jussie Smollett orchestrated attack

Just more evidence that most hate crimes in the last few years seem to be hoaxes that get attention that people think the problem of racism is way worse than it is, it is hysteria at this point. Even when disproved, most don't remember, and the ones they had a harder time proving anything always get added to the list of things that build up the metanarrative in the minds of those who are obsessed with 'racism in America'/etc ism in.

Let's look over the list of recent fails that almost all got the national media attention and were believed immediately at first:

-Fake KKK claims at Mizzou

-Two members of the Oberlin College Democrats group were caught fabricating racist, homophobic, and antisemetic messages on campus to drum up fake outrage.

-A student at Grand View Valley University discovered grotesque anti-black imagery and writings on a board, yet was found out to be the very person who created the images and messages

-University of Buffalo students were outraged over 'whites only' signs and Jim Crowesque signs placed all over campus.....only to discover that yup, a black female student made them up and put them all over campus

-This one is a doozy: apparently a black high school student in new jersey received horrific racist messages while running for class president. It was later discovered that he sent the messages to himself. He had to drop out of the class president race and transferred out of the school from embarrassment.

- Montclair state university minority students drummed up fake outrage when they targeted themselves with hateful racist messages. They 'discovered' racist messages only to be outed as the authors of the messages.

-A student in Toronto claimed other students were saying racist things and were pulling off her Hijab... Broke international news, and what do you know... The girl and her parents got in trouble for that only, because it was fabricated.

- Liberal beacon Vassar College became embroiled in a racist and anti-transexual fiasco when messages were found that were racist and against transexuals. Oops. It was later discovered that a transexual student at the university authored the messages. They had to drop out of the school.

- Let us not forget that in his very first year in office, there was the outrage over the Mississippi black church burning down with a 'trump' painted on the side of it being heralded as "hateful trump supporters being racist". Later found out to be burned by a member of the church itself with very opposite views than the media jumped on with 'racist trump supporters burn churches'... Lol

-Saving the best for last, we can't not say anything about Covington... Those darn racist kids... Staring at a member of one of two groups that went out of their way to HARASS THEM while minding their own business... Bunch of racists...

Making all of this worse, is no one in the media seems to care about context anymore, if there is a hint, it is true, no looking at everything that may have led up to it, any of the people, no, nothing. Just pump it out to as many people as possible for clicks until it is proven false (if it can even be - which sometimes it can't, despite not being true)... If found to be false, just not mention it again. Even then, sometimes the short news cycle still won't.

I don't damn care what that guy writes, a wall represents and reflects a real national presence over the border, only mediocrity can conform itself with such a rusty fence which looks like it comes from a shithole, the West Bank in Israel has an actual wall, it doesn't stop some organized tries, but when it comes to individual cases it works, but it's mostly because we're talking about an 11- 20 feet wall and not a 35-45 feet wall, if it's organized, it requires time to go to the other side, furthermore you require a specialized ladder for such heights, like here.

All the time required to go to the other side is huge, the equipment is bulky, the ladder is heavy, yes, it's possible to go over the wall, but it's something not practical, with the incorporated sensors in the wall, it almost represents an impossible task, since there won't be enough time to make it far into the U.S. all the people would be catch up easily, it only requires organization.

Now, nobody says that it's impossible, there would exceptions but it would tremendously break a lot of tries if not most of them which is the main goal.

Incel? I don't have to know about your traumatic experiences, I mean there are people which experiences those cases but they have at least dignity.

There have been rumors on some sites. Here is one of them. It sounds like the Kennedy rumors, but if you followed the Kennedy rumors you weren't surprised by it. I haven't watched her in awhile, but Laura Ingraham is pretty good on this type of stuff, especially since she worked for Thomas and he has been on her show

Which Trump rejected, which nullifies any approval so his lawyers can't argue anything.

Commented without reading the entire post. I thought you were talking about the wall funding Trump rejected because it wasn't what he wanted. I just looked the law up. If that was Trumps plan, then touche, he may have successfully undermined Congress if his lawyers succeed (which I highly doubt). However, I don't think it changes my overall point. It still sets a bad precedent. It's evident that congress does not want this wall built in the same vein as Trump, nowhere close.

The worst thing about his lies is that it empowers people like you who turn a blind eye to all the real hate crimes going on in the world only to quickly point your fingers and go "See!! See!! Most hate crimes are hoaxes!" when one out of the many turn out to be fake.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/us/austin-texas-hate-crime/index.html

https://www.advocate.com/crime/2019/1/30/philadelphia-man-assaulted-attackers-shouting-antigay-slurs

http://katu.com/news/local/lgbtq-community-concerned-after-reported-assault

https://miami.cbslocal.com/video/3843389-miami-beach-men-attacked-after-gay-pride-event-thankful-for-communitys-support/

https://thedailynews.cc/articles/fourth-young-man-charged-with-baseball-bat-assault/

https://www.local10.com/news/local/miami/video-shows-armed-man-threatening-black-teens-using-racial-slur

https://www.abc27.com/news/local/police-man-screamed-racial-slurs-assaulted-state-trooper/1715933150

https://www.thedailybeast.com/alt-right-charlottesville-marcher-brandon-higgs-accused-of-trying-to-kill-black-men

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/13/fbi-data-hate-crimes-rise-us-report

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2017-hate-crime-statistics-released-111318

https://www.hrc.org/blog/new-fbi-statistics-show-alarming-increase-in-number-of-reported-hate-crimes

I guess you're gonna look at these and say they're the exception to the rule because of a few attentions seeking, race-baiting idiots???

touché???

I never understood the Trump 4degree chess master analogy that some (not you) go with. Though I lean more to the Trump/GOP side, I tend to go with even a blind dog can find water sometimes

Huh?

@buttersdaman000: you were talking about if Trumps lawyers intent to bypass Congress then you congratulated Trump. I just happen to think Trump does stuff on accident but some say he plays a different game of chess

They gonna build the wall, it only makes sense.