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)
View Poll Results: Are you happy with Trump’s deal to reopen the Federal government for 3 weeks?
I’m happy with the deal 41 36.61%
It’s ok 50 44.64%
I’m unhappy with this deal 21 18.75%
Voters: 112. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2019, 05:58 PM
 
1,991 posts, read 902,482 times
Reputation: 2627

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40 View Post
Really, do we have to clarify this point yet again? Well.....I guess we do.

"Mexico will pay for the wall" never meant that they were going to write a check. It meant that we would get it from them in other, indirect ways.

* Tariffs
* Fines on their illegals
* Excise Taxes on phone calls
* Confiscation of wages of their illegals
* Currency manipulation

You're welcome.
Lol, sure, two years down the road you can obfuscate Trump’s promise all you want to, but that doesn’t change the fact that Trump said Mexico would pay for the wall. He didn’t mean metaphorically, he actually meant they would pay. As in, hand over the money, pay. That’s what all those goofs at his campaign rallies thought and that’s were he failed. Now the rest of the country has to pay for his BS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-24-2019, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,351,970 times
Reputation: 15291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibby View Post
The House has all sorts of Rules, Protocols and Traditions.
This joint Resolution is one of them. You will notice that the 60 vote Rule in the Senate is also not in the Constitution ..... but it is the main thing the Senate works under to pass anything at all.
House “rules, protocols, and traditions” are not Constitutional law. They extend no further than the south end of the Capitol.

The 60-vote Senate argument is irrelevant to rhis topic.

There is no stipulation anywhere that controverts the fact that the President is neither required to address the Congress in the House chamber, or indeed to give a speech at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:01 PM
 
25,461 posts, read 9,833,669 times
Reputation: 15359
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOS2IAD View Post
And from the link in your post:

CBP officials want a “border wall system” that includes more technology, more manpower, and new infrastructure, but they never mentioned a coast-to-coast wall, which Trump once proposed. A barrier is not effective without technology or access roads, they said, and technology is less effective without barriers

---------------------------

I haven't seen anyone in any wall thread call for a continuous wall from San Diego to Brownsville.


Many on here have talked about the wall, the wall, the wall, and my point is even the CBP doesn't think a "wall" is the answer.

Why won't Trump accept the $5.7 billion for border security that the Dems are offering? It's because he wants his monument. Now he wants to declare a national emergency. What a moron.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:05 PM
 
Location: FL
20,702 posts, read 12,553,151 times
Reputation: 5452
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
It's something that Oldglory has been pushing here nonstop for months now. Every time I see him post it again all I can think of is, "Squawk, squawk! Polly wanna cracker?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:11 PM
 
63,004 posts, read 29,210,493 times
Reputation: 18622
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomC23 View Post
Lol, sure, two years down the road you can obfuscate Trump’s promise all you want to, but that doesn’t change the fact that Trump said Mexico would pay for the wall. He didn’t mean metaphorically, he actually meant they would pay. As in, hand over the money, pay. That’s what all those goofs at his campaign rallies thought and that’s were he failed. Now the rest of the country has to pay for his BS.

Yet, you didn't give a damn back in 2006 that it was to be the rest of the country to pay for the wall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:14 PM
 
1,991 posts, read 902,482 times
Reputation: 2627
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
It is a fact that those from known terrorist countries have slipped thru our southern border right along with these illegal aliens and disappeared into our country even the former FBI Director has said so. We certainly don't need more of them getting in here. If that's not a threat to our citizens then I don't know what is.


Illegal aliens cost us over $100 billion a year. Those taxes should go to helping our own citizens. Where did I say anything about being trampled by a caravan? If Trump's promise of a wall has failed it's because of the stubbornness of the Democrats and in particular Schumer and Pelosi so that's on them not Trump. They are holding our border security hostage and don't give a damn about these furloughed workers. The safety and security of over 320 million Americans is more important than that because they will get their back pay. If another terrorist attacks occurs because of ineffective security at our border it will impact all of us!


I posted a link denoting how Trump can make Mexico pay down the line so why do you and yours keep repeating yourselves like parrots in here day in and day out? I also asked where was your concern back in 2006 when the actual wall bill passed and it was to be soley funded by the taxpayer. Crickets..... Why the refusal to answer that question?
Your paragraph one. Has been asked and answered ad infinatum. It has been refuted. You just keep posting the same stupid crap. Trust me, it’s not going to be any more accurate than the first time you posted.

Your paragraph two. You have been shown numerous times that your figures were derived from a discredited organization. Yet you post the same drivel. It’s not going to be anymore accurate than the first time you posted.

Your paragraph three. I’ve lost track of how many people have responded to you about your 2006 “gotcha” post and pointed out that the circumstances of the 2006 funding have nothing to do with Trumps wall. Trust me, your 2006 argument is not going to be anymore convincing now then the first time you posted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:17 PM
 
34,081 posts, read 17,134,198 times
Reputation: 17234
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-ne...019/index.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
7,826 posts, read 2,735,940 times
Reputation: 3387
I love The Onion

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1086748898612465665
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:22 PM
 
47,000 posts, read 26,047,970 times
Reputation: 29475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeyore1954 View Post
If he had said he was going ahead he would of been the evil emperor to you.
If he goes along with her according to you he "bows" down.
This is what happens when you make a dumb move. You end up without good options.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2019, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Over Yonder
3,923 posts, read 3,650,451 times
Reputation: 3969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
House “rules, protocols, and traditions” are not Constitutional law. They extend no further than the south end of the Capitol.

The 60-vote Senate argument is irrelevant to rhis topic.

There is no stipulation anywhere that controverts the fact that the President is neither required to address the Congress in the House chamber, or indeed to give a speech at all.
Beautiful!!! Finally, a post that makes absolute sense and tells the truth in no uncertain terms. If anyone questions the validity of this statement, please see your pocket Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:04 PM.

© 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