Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-23-2018, 05:46 AM
 
59,021 posts, read 27,290,738 times
Reputation: 14270

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist View Post
Here's more background on trump's giving up on his border wall:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.d5cb3acc5a6a

The president wanted $25 billion of funding for the project. He only got $1.6 billion to construct defenses on the U.S.-Mexico border, but most of the money is earmarked for specific projects that would have probably gone forward even if Hillary Clinton was president. “The biggest catch is this: The barriers authorized to be built under the act must be ‘operationally effective designs’ already deployed as of last March, meaning none of Trump’s big, beautiful wall prototypes can be built,” Ed O’Keefe notes in a story with Mike DeBonis and Erica Werner.

Trump nearly derailed the whole package Wednesday because there was not more wall funding, but he relented after Paul Ryan paid an emergency visit to the White House residence. Mitch McConnell dialed in and was on speakerphone. “They argued that he was getting money for the border wall at a level the White House had been signaling was acceptable,” per Robert Costa and Josh Dawsey. “In recent days, he has insisted to associates that congressional Republicans ‘owe’ him more money for the wall since he has raised them millions for their reelection bids and signed the GOP-authored tax bill into law. Tuesday’s dinner gala for the National Republican Congressional Committee — the $32 million that event raised for House lawmakers, in particular — was on the president’s mind.”
" was on the president’s mind.”

As IF they KNOW what is on is mind!

I see a LOT of "opinion" and "speculations".

Not surprised it IS the Wash Post!

 
Old 03-23-2018, 05:48 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,108,168 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist View Post
If it is so obvious that a wall would work, why was it not approved?
It won't work, it just moves the problem to another area. But the trumpettes went for it.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 05:49 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,108,168 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
As anyone who does negotiating at all KNOWS you ALWAYS ask for a LOT MORE then what you really want.

Sometimes you actually get MORE then what you wanted after you "compromise" during negotiating.


It's a small extension of the fence already in place, and repairs to the existing fence. It's not a compromise.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 05:59 AM
 
Location: Central Mexico and Central Florida
7,150 posts, read 4,902,831 times
Reputation: 10444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
" was on the president’s mind.”

As IF they KNOW what is on is mind!

I see a LOT of "opinion" and "speculations".

Not surprised it IS the Wash Post!
OK, here's what the conservative media is saying about the funding:
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-spent-fencing
Quote:
The $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill supported by President Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell provides almost $1.6 billion for “fencing” and “levees” on the Southwest Border.
But the bill is very specific on how the money must be spent in the next six months, ruling out any concrete barriers such as the prototypes Trump visited in California on March 13
.

Freedom Caucus Letter to Trump: Omnibus 'Outright Rejects' Promises We Made to Voters

Quote:
• This bill does not provide adequate funding for border security. $1.5 billion will be minimally effective in delivering not just our promise, but your promise, to build a wall and keep our country secure. Sanctuary cities also continue to receive federal funds.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 08:56 AM
 
62,931 posts, read 29,126,415 times
Reputation: 18574
Quote:
Originally Posted by carterstamp View Post
It won't work, it just moves the problem to another area. But the trumpettes went for it.

That's the point, geez!!! They will be forced to try and enter at more difficult and dangerous areas. Fewer will try and fewer will succeed, duh. Stop with the childish "trumpettes" nonsense also.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Sonoran Desert
39,077 posts, read 51,218,516 times
Reputation: 28322
The bill is for only 6 months spending. A wall is years away from breaking ground in most places. The big blow is that they can't build it in the wildlife refuge as that was considered low hanging fruit for building it as land is owned and the engineering is easy. There's always next years appropriation. Then again, a blue tsunami and changing demographics should sweep away any bi wall dreams for a generation at least.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 10:11 AM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,218,061 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist View Post
Far short of his request, less than 10% of the $18 billion he wanted. And even though he visited those prototypes...he is prohibited from using ANY of them. All will be fencing. And guess who's paying for it....NOT Mexico, but US taxpayers. More winning!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.77eac6c05f3f
But no DACA. Good trade off. Trump still got $1.2 billion for a wall. Winning!!!
 
Old 03-23-2018, 10:13 AM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,218,061 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
But of that $1.6 billion, only $641 million of that money is designated for 33 miles of “new fencing or levees.” The rest of the money is for repairing or replacing existing fencing or border security technology.

So yeah, his wall actually got nothing at all.

Good.
And no DACA, even better.
 
Old 03-23-2018, 10:15 AM
 
11,404 posts, read 4,083,837 times
Reputation: 7852
Coworker just said that Trump already talked about vetoing the bipartisan bill because his wall didn't get the funding he wanted. Is that true?
 
Old 03-23-2018, 10:16 AM
 
20,757 posts, read 8,573,399 times
Reputation: 14393
Rush is talking about this now. Said the Senate isn't going to do a budget next year so this will go beyond six months as stated, which means no money for the wall and fewer agents hired!

Space to detain illegals will be reduced to less than we have now which means there will be no point in arresting them. Catch and release will remain.

Sanctuary cities will continue getting money.

Start emailing the White House and calling Make a lot of noise!

Pass it on!
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:02 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top