The President Trump Immigration Thread

[Trigger Time]

Dimik thanks for sharing your story. It truly is sickening knowing this and I've heard similar stories.
KLB, The wall WILL help. Its not a final solution and thats why The President has asked for additional manpower, electronic surveilance ect. All of these work together.
Ill tell you what absolutely wont work and that is doing nothing just because Donald Trump is the one asking for it. And THAT is exactly the reason the democrat pieces of **** are fighting the wall.
Well plus they do believe they will get a vote bounce off of illegals that eventualy get voting rights. Another travesty.
This issue is worth literally having a war over in my opinion. Not saying we should, I'm just saying Im willing to dig in because I know im on the right side which is my country!

 

[Route 45]

Dimik thanks for sharing your story. It truly is sickening knowing this and I've heard similar stories.
KLB, The wall WILL help. Its not a final solution and thats why The President has asked for additional manpower, electronic surveilance ect. All of these work together.
Ill tell you what absolutely wont work and that is doing nothing just because Donald Trump is the one asking for it. And THAT is exactly the reason the democrat pieces of **** are fighting the wall.
Well plus they do believe they will get a vote bounce off of illegals that eventualy get voting rights. Another travesty.
This issue is worth literally having a war over in my opinion. Not saying we should, I'm just saying Im willing to dig in because I know im on the right side which is my country!

 

[Trigger Time]

I better put a disclaimer or someone will accuse me of being for that. I was laughing becaue its a joke. I don't believe in "a final solution" and would fight against that racist ****.

 

[KLB]

Neither of the situations he mentioned would be affected. We are not building one on the Canadian border, and I will bet that the truck is rolling right through a border crossing. Possibly bribing the guys at the border to look the other way.

 

[Route 45]

I better put a disclaimer or someone will accuse me of being for that. I was laughing becaue its a joke. I don't believe in "a final solution" and would fight against that racist ****.

Just messing with ya.

 

[Hawkeye]

Neither of the situations he mentioned would be affected. We are not building one on the Canadian border, and I will bet that the truck is rolling right through a border crossing. Possibly bribing the guys at the border to look the other way.

So, if its not 100% effective, don't do it?

 

[KLB]

So, if its not 100% effective, don't do it?

Sure, that's what I said. I would still like to see an independent cost benefit analysis. It isn't like anyone knows how effective it would be. What is your number where it makes sense? 75%,50%,25%,10%?

I think it would be so much more effective to take away the benefits of them coming here than to build a wall that will cost God only knows how much, and then turn our Southern border into a militarized zone.

 

[BugI02]

Sure, that's what I said. I would still like to see an independent cost benefit analysis. It isn't like anyone knows how effective it would be. What is your number where it makes sense? 75%,50%,25%,10%?

I think it would be so much more effective to take away the benefits of them coming here than to build a wall that will cost God only knows how much, and then turn our Southern border into a militarized zone.

You should do a practicality analysis on that. What do you estimate to be the time frame within which you could accomplish the wholesale changes to many pieces of legislation to implement that goal? Would most of us still be alive?

With the wall it's one and done, so if it is only 10% effective it would still be vastly more effective than what you advocate

I believe politics, like diplomacy, must be the art of what's possible - and it is no longer acceptable to do nothing

 

[Hawkeye]

Sure, that's what I said. I would still like to see an independent cost benefit analysis. It isn't like anyone knows how effective it would be. What is your number where it makes sense? 75%,50%,25%,10%?

I think it would be so much more effective to take away the benefits of them coming here than to build a wall that will cost God only knows how much, and then turn our Southern border into a militarized zone.

I'd be happy with a fairly low number on just the wall. It would certainly channel crossers into areas where it would be easier to pick them up. Maybe every 20 miles leave a gap, and then patrol that gap very heavily?

Why do you think the wall would be exclusive of taking away benefits or any other measures. I'd do the wall/enhanced fences, whatever, and many other actions to discourage border jumpers.

 

[KLB]

I'd be happy with a fairly low number on just the wall. It would certainly channel crossers into areas where it would be easier to pick them up. Maybe every 20 miles leave a gap, and then patrol that gap very heavily?

Why do you think the wall would be exclusive of taking away benefits or any other measures. I'd do the wall/enhanced fences, whatever, and many other actions to discourage border jumpers.

Not exclusive, more effective.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

U.S. House fails to override President Trump's veto of Border Emergency Resolution, 248-181.

The veto of the president is sustained

 

[KLB]

I am so surprised

 

[T.Lex]

The veto override was always a simple math problem.

The real issue now is that POTUS found a trump card up his sleeve that beats all sorts of checks and balances.

Will be ... interesting ... to see how (often) he uses it.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

The veto override was always a simple math problem.

The real issue now is that POTUS found a trump card up his sleeve that beats all sorts of checks and balances.

Will be ... interesting ... to see how (often) he uses it.

Found up his sleeve?

Congress wrote it into law.

 

[T.Lex]

Found up his sleeve?

Congress wrote it into law.

No, they didn't.

I mean, sure, they wrote a law. But there are constitutional executive emergency powers that existed before the the law, and continue to exist after the law.

And, yes, "found" is the appropriate word IMHO. Does anyone seriously believe that Trump knew the parameters of the POTUS ability to exercise emergency powers (either constitutional or statutory) before he was elected? No way.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

No, they didn't.

I mean, sure, they wrote a law. But there are constitutional executive emergency powers that existed before the the law, and continue to exist after the law.

And, yes, "found" is the appropriate word IMHO. Does anyone seriously believe that Trump knew the parameters of the POTUS ability to exercise emergency powers (either constitutional or statutory) before he was elected? No way.

sorry

(from Trump Twitter Archive)

 

[T.Lex]

sorry

(from Trump Twitter Archive)

Sorry not sorry.

Everyone knows about veto.

Only a small percentage of geeks knew about the POTUS ability to cut through appropriations by calling something an emergency.

Curious, though, what are the hits for "emergency" and "wall" in the same tweet? Dollars to donuts they all come after the election.

ETA

Thanks for the link - did the search myself, on "emergency" alone. Up until 2018, he used it for "normal" emergencies like natural disasters.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Sorry not sorry.

Everyone knows about veto.

Only a small percentage of geeks knew about the POTUS ability to cut through appropriations by calling something an emergency.

Curious, though, what are the hits for "emergency" and "wall" in the same tweet? Dollars to donuts they all come after the election.

First "emergency" hit was about Omorosa.

First "wall" was a tweet here:

"My persona will never be that of a wallflower - I’d rather build walls than cling to them" --Donald J. Trump

the infamous self-quote.

 

[T.Lex]

First "emergency" hit was about Omorosa.

First "wall" was a tweet here:



the infamous self-quote.

The "emergency" search - follow the trajectory. He had no clue about using the emergency power for a wall until October 2018 when he talked about bringing in the national guard for the "emergency."

 

[SheepDog4Life]

No, they didn't.

I mean, sure, they wrote a law. But there are constitutional executive emergency powers that existed before the the law, and continue to exist after the law.

And, yes, "found" is the appropriate word IMHO. Does anyone seriously believe that Trump knew the parameters of the POTUS ability to exercise emergency powers (either constitutional or statutory) before he was elected? No way.

With all due respect, bull****.

It doesn't really matter whether congress meant to restrict or expand the President's emergency powers. The wrote the law such that when the President declared an emergency, he could direct spending on certain appropriated money.

The discretion for declaring an emergency is purely the President's, with a veto-proof majority of Congress required to rebuke it.

This is NOT a constitutional issue... it is a policy and politics issue. He is operating within the four corners of the law.