Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I’d really like to see this investigative reporting that discovered that Obama told them to come.
That reporter should be due a Pulitzer or something.
It wouldn't be unlikely for these migrants to interpret Obama's words and actions is an invitation to come here even if the didn't actually say it. These people aren't the brightest bulbs around you know. After all, he gave millions of illegal aliens a stay of deportation under DACA and DAPA and told Homeland Security not to deport any illegal aliens unless they were "convicted" criminals. That's kind of a welcoming sign.
Do you honesty believe that $5B will secure the border, where is this new section of wall going and will it cover all illegal immigration. How about those overstaying visas and what about the illegal drugs and human trafficking that come in through other points of entry.
Will it secure the entire border? No. And no one has said otherwise.
The wall will be on 700 miles of the border. There will be no wall in some areas because those areas are impossible to navigate.
$5B is a good start. Or, I guess, you think that it's better to do nothing if it can't be done all at once?
As for overstaying visas---yes, that's a problem that needs to be dealt with. You know darn well that the wall is for dealing with those who sneak across.
Nowhere in there did it say Trump was rethinking it.
And what nonense, there wouldn't be "years" of legal battles. By the very nature of Emergency, it would be fast-tracked to SCOTUS if not go directly there. Think Election 2000.
Nope, but there are many that you agree with in this thread that are in kindergarten...have you seen their posts? Or maybe you can tell us what a "strumf" is, since you evidently agree with those posters....
They’re referring to Trump.
I don’t approve or disapprove.
It’s certainly less offensive than referring to people by some of the nicknames Trump uses, so who cares what people call him?
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Geezus...we have been "cracking down on drug traffickers" for 40 years and it's only gotten worse, what grand plan does Cassidy have to change that?
Budget Request for 2018 Federal drug control
Treatment: $10,783.4 (38.9% of total)
Prevention: $1.339 billion (4.8% of total)
Domestic Law Enforcement: $9,235.8 billion (33.3% of total)
Interdiction: $5,022.4 billion (18.1% of total)
International: $1375.0 billion (5% of total)
Total: $25.89 billion https://www.drugwarfacts.org/node/13...le/fedspending
And every year the cost goes up and so does the demand for drugs...so, you tell me how Cassidy plans to fix a problem that has been a sinkhole for trillions of taxpayer dollars for decades?
Its all in the link.
I can't understand it for you but for the average person its fairly clear.
What is confusing is why after all this time are they only now considering it ?
We have border walls in populated areas. That's where they work and are worth the cost.
Where Trump wants to build more wall would be far less effective, cede the Rio Grande to Mexico, cut people off from part of their property, and leave a no man's land between the wall and the river.
It's a stupid idea meant to rally stupid people. Clearly, it is working.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
