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.
Which is exactly what he did in that same news clip. Right beside the section of slat fencing he stood in front of was a long section of chain link fencing (less than head high) that he even described as "the same as around a lot of residential back yards" and he said there were no hoards crossing over it.
Why don't they mention that part of the news clip???
These boobs don't have the brains god gave them. Sold them to buy MAGA caps.
If you are waiting for honesty from the OP you will be waiting a long, long time.
"CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta wants America to know there’s no national emergency on the border, no need for a wall. So he’s flown down to the border to report live from the scene, and he says there’s no issue.
Just one thing: He’s standing next to the steel slats President Donald Trump wants Congress to fund elsewhere on the border."
Just proved walls work. Thank you Acosta. LOL
Sort of like standing in front of a group of firemen and fire trucks dousing a house with water, and announcing there's no danger from fire here.
"CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta wants America to know there’s no national emergency on the border, no need for a wall. So he’s flown down to the border to report live from the scene, and he says there’s no issue.
Just one thing: He’s standing next to the steel slats President Donald Trump wants Congress to fund elsewhere on the border."
Just proved walls work. Thank you Acosta. LOL
Exactly! We already built and have a wall were it is needed and were it is feasible. What is the problem?
Quote:
By May 2011, DHS reported completing 649 miles of fencing (99.5% of the 652 miles planned). The barrier was made up of 299 miles of vehicle barriers and 350 miles of pedestrian fence. The fencing includes a steel fence (varying in height between 18 and 26 feet) that divides the border towns of Nogales, Arizona in the U.S. and Nogales, Sonora in Mexico. A 2016 report by the Government Accountability Office confirmed that the government had completed the fence by 2015. A 2017 GAO report noted: "In addition to the 654 miles of primary fencing, CBP has also deployed additional layers of pedestrian fencing behind the primary border fencing, including 37 miles of secondary fencing and 14 miles of tertiary fencing."
OK, here are a couple of legitimate questions. I would really like to see some informed responses to the questions, to gauge if there really is any middleground left in the political spectrum for actual progress on these issues.
According to PEW Research, illegal immigration from Mexico has dropped every year since 2006, but shows that Central American nations people have increased. Trendlines seem to show that the problem emerged shortly after Lyndon Johnson/Richard Nixon presidencies, and continued unabated until 2006, in the middle of George W's term, when the numbers started to drop. They continued to drop until this present day. There are multiple sources for this, and all can be confirmed. Here are a couple:
1. Anybody know why Trump and the GOP are standing up for "A National Emergency" NOW, when no congress or any other president, either party, declared it earlier, when the situation was a lot worse and numbers were rising unabated?
2. Despite liberal or progressive opinions that say otherwise, there are also a significant number of studies showing that immigrants do in fact consume a much higher percentage of social programs (Welfare/SNAP, etc.) than US citizens. That fact is slightly misleading as there are fewer migrants than native Americans so the actual financial hit is smaller, but nonetheless, statistically, it is still correct.
Now the question: Since that seems to be the case, why is there (apparently) no visibility in Washington to tighten the requirements here instead of wasting money on a wall that has no statistical evidence to prove efficacy? Even during Obama's administration there were significant efforts to deport illegals, (he was criticized for it, and deportations were higher under his adminstration than Trumps) so it would seem there would be some middleground here where progress from both parties could be made without throwing the entire government workforce under the bus. Why aren't we pushing this??
Anybody want to tackle this with thoughtful introspection?
OK, here are a couple of legitimate questions. I would really like to see some informed responses to the questions, to gauge if there really is any middleground left in the political spectrum for actual progress on these issues.
According to PEW Research, illegal immigration from Mexico has dropped every year since 2006, but shows that Central American nations people have increased. Trendlines seem to show that the problem emerged shortly after Lyndon Johnson/Richard Nixon presidencies, and continued unabated until 2006, in the middle of George W's term, when the numbers started to drop. They continued to drop until this present day. There are multiple sources for this, and all can be confirmed. Here are a couple:
1. Anybody know why Trump and the GOP are standing up for "A National Emergency" NOW, when no congress or any other president, either party, declared it earlier, when the situation was a lot worse and numbers were rising unabated?
2. Despite liberal or progressive opinions that say otherwise, there are also a significant number of studies showing that immigrants do in fact consume a much higher percentage of social programs (Welfare/SNAP, etc.) than US citizens. That fact is slightly misleading as there are fewer migrants than native Americans so the actual financial hit is smaller, but nonetheless, statistically, it is still correct.
Now the question: Since that seems to be the case, why is there (apparently) no visibility in Washington to tighten the requirements here instead of wasting money on a wall that has no statistical evidence to prove efficacy? Even during Obama's administration there were significant efforts to deport illegals, (he was criticized for it, and deportations were higher under his adminstration than Trumps) so it would seem there would be some middleground here where progress from both parties could be made without throwing the entire government workforce under the bus. Why aren't we pushing this??
Anybody want to tackle this with thoughtful introspection?
Why do people think that a wall/fence is not efficacious? In San Diego, by all accounts, it is very effective.
China's great wall was top tech for the time and didn't work for long, now it's just a tourist attraction.
Israel's copy-cat wall is sorta working, but largely because they have some of their own terrorists living on the wrong side of it. It will become a relic and a tourist attraction too.
And now the Trumper. Obviously walls are band aids. With all the experts and research at his disposal those people need to be looking for a coordination of controls, not just a single expensive antique in the making.
So, we should not listen to, yo know, those people who are actually guarding the border?
Or are you going to be one of those people who say: Well, trump owns that website, he can post whatever he wants....
Quote:
The Bottom Line: Walls Work. When it comes to stopping drugs and illegal aliens from crossing our borders, border walls have proven to be extremely effective. Border security relies on a combination of border infrastructure, technology, personnel and partnerships with law enforcement at the state, local, tribal, and federal level. For example, when we installed a border wall in the Yuma Sector, we have seen border apprehensions decrease by 90 percent. In San Diego, we saw on Sunday that dilapidated, decades-old barriers are not sufficient for today’s threat and need to be removed so new – up to 30 foot wall sections can be completed.
OK, here are a couple of legitimate questions. I would really like to see some informed responses to the questions, to gauge if there really is any middleground left in the political spectrum for actual progress on these issues.
According to PEW Research, illegal immigration from Mexico has dropped every year since 2006, but shows that Central American nations people have increased. Trendlines seem to show that the problem emerged shortly after Lyndon Johnson/Richard Nixon presidencies, and continued unabated until 2006, in the middle of George W's term, when the numbers started to drop. They continued to drop until this present day. There are multiple sources for this, and all can be confirmed. Here are a couple:
1. Anybody know why Trump and the GOP are standing up for "A National Emergency" NOW, when no congress or any other president, either party, declared it earlier, when the situation was a lot worse and numbers were rising unabated?
2. Despite liberal or progressive opinions that say otherwise, there are also a significant number of studies showing that immigrants do in fact consume a much higher percentage of social programs (Welfare/SNAP, etc.) than US citizens. That fact is slightly misleading as there are fewer migrants than native Americans so the actual financial hit is smaller, but nonetheless, statistically, it is still correct.
Now the question: Since that seems to be the case, why is there (apparently) no visibility in Washington to tighten the requirements here instead of wasting money on a wall that has no statistical evidence to prove efficacy? Even during Obama's administration there were significant efforts to deport illegals, (he was criticized for it, and deportations were higher under his adminstration than Trumps) so it would seem there would be some middleground here where progress from both parties could be made without throwing the entire government workforce under the bus. Why aren't we pushing this??
Anybody want to tackle this with thoughtful introspection?
Because it's easier to convince the "less informed" a physical wall will "fix" the problem of illegal aliens.
This leaves the benefits in place to use temp visa cheaper labour with a very high proportion of them over-staying and becoming Illegal aliens but still available for Trump et-al to use as a cheap labour force with Trump claiming the problem has been solved as promised and the less informed believing him while he and others continue bringing them in and using them for however long they need them.....anybody here think they simply saddle up and go home after, for example; getting laid off at Mar-A-Lago?.
Why do people think that a wall/fence is not efficacious? In San Diego, by all accounts, it is very effective.
True; that's an unmentioned aspect of my question. We DO already have a wall, and it does have some good impact. Is a $25 Billion wall going to have a larger impact than restricting benefits to those coming over here illegally in the first place??
For example, if I saw a 10' wall (current), vs a 25' wall, and knew that I would still be sitting pretty financially if I found a way across either, I am not sure that the height difference would be much of an incentive to not try to find a way in....
Walls work, especially topped with razor wire, motion sensing machine guns, and the razor wire electrified.
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.
