anti trumpers say the wall won’t work. they seem to prefer cameras, drones, etc.

a question for those who agree. if a camera happens to catch a group of ms13 members crossing the border, and the nearest cops are 10 miles away, how do we stop them, exactly? cameras and drones might see who is crossing, but how do they stop who is crossing?

of course walls
work. that’s why people still build them. they aren’t perfect, they don’t last forever, it won’t reduce illegal immigration to zero ( but obviously will reduce it), and it won’t cure cancer or end poverty. it will help. if you disagree, you’re not rational. you’re just not. not every single person can get around the wall.

Jim breathe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The cameras and drones will show them where we need to put the walls
Simple
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim breathe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this from the guy who said trumps facts were wrong, and naturally didn’t provide the
actual facts. you also posted a link opposing the wall as ineffective, because storms can damage the wall. spence, storms can also damage the walls of your home, so did you choose not to use walls in your home? if your walls work
even though they are not impervious to weather, but the southern wall is ineffective unless it lasts forever, why isn’t your argument a stupid, steaming pile of hypocrisy?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The cameras and drones will show them where we need to put the walls
Simple
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that makes sense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hmm, Yuma Arizona lengthened their wall from 5 miles to 60 miles, and then border arrests went down by 95%, and crime went down by 91%.

But because arrests and crime didn't converge to zero, I'm supposed to believe that walls don't work?


https://www.theepochtimes.com/sheriff-border-fence-helped-cut-crime-in-yuma-by-91-percent_2749236.html

Ask Israel if their Wall has worked in keeping unwanted visitors away. They work,only a real ass hat would say otherwise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Ask Israel if their Wall has worked in keeping unwanted visitors away. They work,only a real ass hat would say otherwise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If the wall works so well, why this??


https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/israel-palestine-deaths/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe,go back and check the number of incidents before the Wall was built. Then tell me they don’t work. It doesn’t fix everything but certainly makes things more difficult for the bad hombres. Egypt also has had success in Gaza with fencing as has Spain on their border with Morocco. Check out the reduction in illegal crossings this fence has had for the Spaniards. It’s startling. Educate yourself and make informed decisions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

should put solar panels and wind turbines on top of the wall....call it a "smart wall" or a "green wall"..oooh...call it a "comprehensive" wall...it could power and even pay for itself over time and good for the environment, say it's federally funded "planned immigranthood"......promise to name it after some leftist southern icon....like Che Guevara...leftists embrace big smart sounding words and phrases that they feel smart repeating even if they can't spell them or use properly in a sentence...Trump could have a lot more fun with this...ya gotta know how to talk to these people in their language

If the wall works so well, why this??


https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/israel-palestine-deaths/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

nebe, youbare making the insane argument that because walls aren’t perfect, they don’t work. it’s a stupid, nonsensical argument. nothing is perfect. thats so intellectually bankrupt.

nebe, there are people
out there who know how to pick locks. yet you still shut your door and lock it. Why do you do that? using your logic, locks and doors don’t reduce crime to zero, so therefore they don’t work and are a waste of money.

walls aren’t perfect. but they help. of course they work. all the data, as well as common sense, tell us they work.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

trump needs to build a big beautiful wall so when he deports all of the democrats they can't get back in :happy:

Hmm, Yuma Arizona lengthened their wall from 5 miles to 60 miles, and then border arrests went down by 95%, and crime went down by 91%.

But because arrests and crime didn't converge to zero, I'm supposed to believe that walls don't work?


https://www.theepochtimes.com/sheriff-border-fence-helped-cut-crime-in-yuma-by-91-percent_2749236.html

Correct
and add to that point the fact that it costs the taxpayers 500 billion dollars for the undocumented(illegal) immigrants who cut in line each year, so leftists refuse to pony up 1 percent of that yearly cost that would stop 95% of the crossings to build a better barrier(wall) which is only a part of solving a problem(crisis) not the be all end all.
Liberalism is most definitely a mental disorder, how else do you explain the lack of understanding the obvious? All about power, these #^&#^&#^&#^&s just want to stay in power and get more power and idiots elect them. Not that there are not idiots on the other side as well but conservative ideology is a lot closer to what I agree with and common sense. BUT TRUMP!

you all whine about hissy fits, manufactured crisis, fear and on and on, I say get over yourselves and get on with life.

so i’ve had my question out here for a few hours ( how do cameras and sensors stop illegals
from entering), and i see
exactly zero responses to the question.

guys, when your beliefs can not withstand the scrutiny of such an obvious question, it’s tome to ask yourselves why you believe what you believe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

anti trumpers say the wall won’t work. they seem to prefer cameras, drones, etc.

a question for those who agree. if a camera happens to catch a group of ms13 members crossing the border, and the nearest cops are 10 miles away, how do we stop them, exactly? cameras and drones might see who is crossing, but how do they stop who is crossing?



1st there aren't that many ms13ers --- but since this is a hypothetical question.

You send out an agent(s) to get them. While the Trumpanists (i guess you are either an anti Trumper or the opposite) seem to believe the land that is being discussed is like Israel or Tijuana where you walk out of a house, walk 50 yards to the border and then another 50 yards to a house on the other side the truth is much different. Most of the land that Trump is talking about (I think since he changes his mind every day) is very rural (or even desert). That is why for many years people have died of thirst trying to get across the border.

If we were talking about putting a fence up in San Diego, I would have no problem with it. There has been a few miles of new fencing put up (and still being put up) in areas that have seen increased activity.



"Nearly every lawmaker who represents a district or state along the U.S.-Mexico border — including two Republicans — either opposes outright or more quietly declines to support President Donald Trump’s $5.7 billion request for a border wall, according to a survey conducted by POLITICO.

The dissenters include Texas Rep. Will Hurd, the only Republican House member who represents a border district, and Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who will accompany the president on Thursday. Cornyn dodged questions Wednesday about whether he backs Trump’s $5.7 billion demand.

“I support a solution to the problem,” Cornyn told reporters when asked specifically about the sum. “I think it’s going to be negotiated.”

Cornyn was more blunt Monday talking to Fox News. “Coming from Texas with a 1,200-mile common border with Mexico," he said, "the idea of a wall is somewhat off-putting to a lot of people.”

In a separate Fox News interview Tuesday, Cornyn said: "There is no one-size-fits-all prescription for the entire border. It's quite a diverse geography.”

POLITICO polled the offices of 17 Senate and House members who represent Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California about Trump’s $5.7 billion border barrier request. Only two — Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) — said they supported it.

In the House, eight of nine border lawmakers are Democrats. The Democratic members all told POLITICO they’re against the $5.7 billion request. Instead, they favor spending for increased border security technology, improved screening at ports of entry and more personnel to handle asylum processing.

Rep. Xochitl Torres Small, a newly elected Democrat who represents a New Mexico district with more than 175 miles of U.S.-Mexico border, opposes Trump’s request. She said a wall across her entire district would be “fiscally irresponsible,” since mountains provide natural barriers, but added that existing fencing in high-traffic areas makes sense.

1st there aren't that many ms13ers --- but since this is a hypothetical question.

You send out an agent(s) to get them. While the Trumpanists (i guess you are either an anti Trumper or the opposite) seem to believe the land that is being discussed is like Israel or Tijuana where you walk out of a house, walk 50 yards to the border and then another 50 yards to a house on the other side the truth is much different. Most of the land that Trump is talking about (I think since he changes his mind every day) is very rural (or even desert). That is why for many years people have died of thirst trying to get across the border.

If we were talking about putting a fence up in San Diego, I would have no problem with it. There has been a few miles of new fencing put up (and still being put up) in areas that have seen increased activity.



"Nearly every lawmaker who represents a district or state along the U.S.-Mexico border — including two Republicans — either opposes outright or more quietly declines to support President Donald Trump’s $5.7 billion request for a border wall, according to a survey conducted by POLITICO.

The dissenters include Texas Rep. Will Hurd, the only Republican House member who represents a border district, and Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who will accompany the president on Thursday. Cornyn dodged questions Wednesday about whether he backs Trump’s $5.7 billion demand.

“I support a solution to the problem,” Cornyn told reporters when asked specifically about the sum. “I think it’s going to be negotiated.”

Cornyn was more blunt Monday talking to Fox News. “Coming from Texas with a 1,200-mile common border with Mexico," he said, "the idea of a wall is somewhat off-putting to a lot of people.”

In a separate Fox News interview Tuesday, Cornyn said: "There is no one-size-fits-all prescription for the entire border. It's quite a diverse geography.”

POLITICO polled the offices of 17 Senate and House members who represent Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California about Trump’s $5.7 billion border barrier request. Only two — Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) — said they supported it.

In the House, eight of nine border lawmakers are Democrats. The Democratic members all told POLITICO they’re against the $5.7 billion request. Instead, they favor spending for increased border security technology, improved screening at ports of entry and more personnel to handle asylum processing.

Rep. Xochitl Torres Small, a newly elected Democrat who represents a New Mexico district with more than 175 miles of U.S.-Mexico border, opposes Trump’s request. She said a wall across her entire district would be “fiscally irresponsible,” since mountains provide natural barriers, but added that existing fencing in high-traffic areas makes sense.

"You send out an agent(s) to get them"

What if when the agent gets there, they aren't exactly where they were, when they were caught on camera? What if the nearest agent is 20 miles away when they are caught on camera? Are we going to have a drone follow each person, to lead an agent to each person? I guess that could work.

"While the Trumpanists (i guess you are either an anti Trumper or the opposite)"

Here's what I am. I am someone who thinks he's an awful human being, who is doing some really good things as POTUS, and some bad things as POTUS, but more good than bad in terms of policy (not behavior). Categorize that any way you want.

""Nearly every lawmaker who represents a district or state along the U.S.-Mexico border — including two Republicans — either opposes outright or more quietly declines to support President Donald Trump’s $5.7 billion request for a border wall, according to a survey conducted by POLITICO."

The lawmakers and border patrol agents that I have seen on TV (not a credible sample perhaps), overwhelmingly say it will help. I'll trust law enforcement, WAY before I trust a politician. Especially in the Trump era, where all that matters is making him look bad.

1st there aren't that many ms13ers --- but since this is a hypothetical question.



Looks like a lot to me

Mara Salvatrucha MS-13


Founding location: Los Angeles, California, U.S.

Years active: 1980s–present

Territory: El Salvador; Guatemala; Honduras; United States; Compton, California; Los Angeles, California; Boston, Massachusetts; Fresno, California; Santa Cruz, California; New York City

Ethnicity: Mostly Salvadorans, Hondurans, and Guatemalans

Membership: 8,000–10,000 (U.S.)
30,000–50,000 (worldwide)[1]

Criminal activities: Drug trafficking, illegal immigration, people smuggling, robbery, larceny, human trafficking, extortion, murder, money laundering, prostitution (including child prostitution), racketeering, battery, kidnapping, and arms trafficking

Need more than just a fence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HOcncx9oNM

"You send out an agent(s) to get them"

What if when the agent gets there, they aren't exactly where they were, when they were caught on camera? What if the nearest agent is 20 miles away when they are caught on camera? Are we going to have a drone follow each person, to lead an agent to each person? I guess that could work. The areas we are talking about don't have the massive amount of people say Larado Tx does. If they are in the desert you have the drone follow them or follow their tracks. What currently happens is the agents follow their tracks. Again, we are talking about trecks across the desert,

"While the Trumpanists (i guess you are either an anti Trumper or the opposite)"

Here's what I am. I am someone who thinks he's an awful human being, who is doing some really good things as POTUS, and some bad things as POTUS, but more good than bad in terms of policy (not behavior). Categorize that any way you want.

""Nearly every lawmaker who represents a district or state along the U.S.-Mexico border — including two Republicans — either opposes outright or more quietly declines to support President Donald Trump’s $5.7 billion request for a border wall, according to a survey conducted by POLITICO."

The lawmakers and border patrol agents that I have seen on TV (not a credible sample perhaps), overwhelmingly say it will help. I'll trust law enforcement, WAY before I trust a politician. Especially in the Trump era, where all that matters is making him look bad.

There would be no advantage to the Repubs. along the border to make Trump look bad. Hurd and Cornyn are both against the "wall".

Need more than just a fence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HOcncx9oNM

Agreed.

I've never heard a single person, not one, say that all we need is a fence. Trump sure isn't saying that.

so i’ve had my question out here for a few hours ( how do cameras and sensors stop illegals
from entering), and i see
exactly zero responses to the question.

guys, when your beliefs can not withstand the scrutiny of such an obvious question, it’s tome to ask yourselves why you believe what you believe.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim, nobody is saying you only rely on a single method. We need a comprehensive approach that includes multimodal security, much improved ports of entry, adequate personnel, realistic guest worker provisions, working with Central American nations to curb corruption and crime etc...it’s a complex issue...but just stomping your feet for a wall which at this point is more symbolic than substance and being justified by fear and misinformation isn’t the way to solve a problem.

Not to mention how Trump’s own policies have made the humanitarian issue much worse. This is by far the most pressing problem which both Democrats and Republicans agreed to additional funding which Trump won’t sign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim, nobody is saying you only rely on a single method. We need a comprehensive approach that includes multimodal security, much improved ports of entry, adequate personnel, realistic guest worker provisions, working with Central American nations to curb corruption and crime etc...it’s a complex issue...but just stomping your feet for a wall which at this point is more symbolic than substance and being justified by fear and misinformation isn’t the way to solve a problem.

Not to mention how Trump’s own policies have made the humanitarian issue much worse. This is by far the most pressing problem which both Democrats and Republicans agreed to additional funding which Trump won’t sign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how does
that squishy stuff you
list, eliminate the need for a wall?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'll stick with Howard, till I see a plan from Trump
Howard Stern said Wednesday that President Trump’s proposed border wall won’t solve the nation’s immigration problems and was simply cooked up as a campaign tool that “morons can get behind.”

Trump’s demand for funding for the project, which he made a key campaign promise, is at the center of the 19-day partial government shutdown, with congressional Democrats emerging from a White House meeting on Wednesday saying no progress on resolving the conflict has been made.

Stern ripped the controversial wall on his SiriusXM radio program a day after Trump delivered a prime-time address from the Oval Office touting what he called the need for a barrier separating the United States and Mexico.


“The wall’s a problem because it’s a waste of money, even Donald knows that,” said Stern — who goes back decades with Trump, hosting the then-real estate mogul on his show numerous times before his White House bid.

“You gotta know Donald a bit to understand what’s going on here. The wall’s a simplistic answer to our problems with immigration. It’s something that, you know, morons can get behind because they’re like, ‘Oh yeah, if you build a wall no one can get over it.’ But it’s not that simple,” Stern told listeners of his eponymous show.

Stern blasted Trump’s demand of $5.7 billion in funding for the border wall — which Democrats have repeatedly rejected — saying the price tag wouldn’t cover the costs of such an expansive undertaking.

“You’re talking about building a massive wall across this country on the southern border. It’s a tremendous amount of property and a tremendous amount of area to cover,” said Stern. “You’re not going to get a whole wall for $5 billion. If you really want a wall, it’s probably going to cost you some trillions of dollars.”

The commander in chief, Stern exclaimed, should “be straight up with people.”

“I would love to see Donald come on last night and go, ‘F--- this, I’m not going to bull#^&#^&#^&#^& you guys. I want $20 billion.”

On Tuesday, Trump called the southern border a "pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs," but Stern argued the president's plan won’t keep drugs or terrorists from entering the country.

“They’re coming into our ports. We need way more security,” Stern told a listener who called in asking why he considered the wall “a problem.”

“I’m all about keeping illegal aliens out because it’s not fair — it’s not fair to people who apply legally,” said Stern. “But at the same point, you can’t be hypocritical and be hiring illegal aliens over at Mar-a-Lago.”

Last month, The New York Times interviewed a woman who said she worked for years as a maid at Bedminster, Trump’s New Jersey golf club, as an undocumented immigrant.

Stern said the ongoing shutdown itself poses a significant risk to national security with so many federal worker furloughed or working without pay.

“Right now we don’t even have air traffic controllers being paid,” said Stern. “Talk about a lack of security. If I’m a terrorist, I’m coming in now. I bet you they’re flooding in while this government shutdown is going on.”

When his caller brought up reports of political figures building security barriers outside their homes, Stern replied, “There’s a wall over the White House … and how many people f---ing climb over it and get close to the White House? A ton. The wall ain’t stopping anybody.”

“Even Donald’s not into this wall. It’s just he’s embarrassed because he can’t get it, and Rush Limbaugh shamed him,” Stern added.

“The whole concept of the wall got him elected, a lot of people could wrap their brain around it. But the wall ain’t going to solve #^&#^&#^&#^&. And it’s going to cost a fortune. Come on, it’s nonsense.”

I'll stick with Howard, till I see a plan from Trump
Howard Stern said Wednesday that President Trump’s proposed border wall won’t solve the nation’s immigration problems and was simply cooked up as a campaign tool that “morons can get behind.”

Trump’s demand for funding for the project, which he made a key campaign promise, is at the center of the 19-day partial government shutdown, with congressional Democrats emerging from a White House meeting on Wednesday saying no progress on resolving the conflict has been made.

Stern ripped the controversial wall on his SiriusXM radio program a day after Trump delivered a prime-time address from the Oval Office touting what he called the need for a barrier separating the United States and Mexico.


“The wall’s a problem because it’s a waste of money, even Donald knows that,” said Stern — who goes back decades with Trump, hosting the then-real estate mogul on his show numerous times before his White House bid.

“You gotta know Donald a bit to understand what’s going on here. The wall’s a simplistic answer to our problems with immigration. It’s something that, you know, morons can get behind because they’re like, ‘Oh yeah, if you build a wall no one can get over it.’ But it’s not that simple,” Stern told listeners of his eponymous show.

Stern blasted Trump’s demand of $5.7 billion in funding for the border wall — which Democrats have repeatedly rejected — saying the price tag wouldn’t cover the costs of such an expansive undertaking.

“You’re talking about building a massive wall across this country on the southern border. It’s a tremendous amount of property and a tremendous amount of area to cover,” said Stern. “You’re not going to get a whole wall for $5 billion. If you really want a wall, it’s probably going to cost you some trillions of dollars.”

The commander in chief, Stern exclaimed, should “be straight up with people.”

“I would love to see Donald come on last night and go, ‘F--- this, I’m not going to bull#^&#^&#^&#^& you guys. I want $20 billion.”

On Tuesday, Trump called the southern border a "pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs," but Stern argued the president's plan won’t keep drugs or terrorists from entering the country.

“They’re coming into our ports. We need way more security,” Stern told a listener who called in asking why he considered the wall “a problem.”

“I’m all about keeping illegal aliens out because it’s not fair — it’s not fair to people who apply legally,” said Stern. “But at the same point, you can’t be hypocritical and be hiring illegal aliens over at Mar-a-Lago.”

Last month, The New York Times interviewed a woman who said she worked for years as a maid at Bedminster, Trump’s New Jersey golf club, as an undocumented immigrant.

Stern said the ongoing shutdown itself poses a significant risk to national security with so many federal worker furloughed or working without pay.

“Right now we don’t even have air traffic controllers being paid,” said Stern. “Talk about a lack of security. If I’m a terrorist, I’m coming in now. I bet you they’re flooding in while this government shutdown is going on.”

When his caller brought up reports of political figures building security barriers outside their homes, Stern replied, “There’s a wall over the White House … and how many people f---ing climb over it and get close to the White House? A ton. The wall ain’t stopping anybody.”

“Even Donald’s not into this wall. It’s just he’s embarrassed because he can’t get it, and Rush Limbaugh shamed him,” Stern added.

“The whole concept of the wall got him elected, a lot of people could wrap their brain around it. But the wall ain’t going to solve #^&#^&#^&#^&. And it’s going to cost a fortune. Come on, it’s nonsense.”

Do you stick with Howard in everything he says? Is he your go to guy for how and what to think? Or does his opinion occasionally and conveniently agree with what your opinion already is?

Do you stick with Howard in everything he says? Is he your go to guy for how and what to think? Or does his opinion occasionally and conveniently agree with what your opinion already is?

Sometimes he's really funny and sometimes he calls a spade a spade.

I should have just chopped the first three sentences and just sent Howard in as a media bomber.

I'll stick with Howard, till I see a plan from Trump
Howard Stern said Wednesday that President Trump’s proposed border wall won’t solve the nation’s immigration problems and was simply cooked up as a campaign tool that “morons can get behind.”

Trump’s demand for funding for the project, which he made a key campaign promise, is at the center of the 19-day partial government shutdown, with congressional Democrats emerging from a White House meeting on Wednesday saying no progress on resolving the conflict has been made.

Stern ripped the controversial wall on his SiriusXM radio program a day after Trump delivered a prime-time address from the Oval Office touting what he called the need for a barrier separating the United States and Mexico.


“The wall’s a problem because it’s a waste of money, even Donald knows that,” said Stern — who goes back decades with Trump, hosting the then-real estate mogul on his show numerous times before his White House bid.

“You gotta know Donald a bit to understand what’s going on here. The wall’s a simplistic answer to our problems with immigration. It’s something that, you know, morons can get behind because they’re like, ‘Oh yeah, if you build a wall no one can get over it.’ But it’s not that simple,” Stern told listeners of his eponymous show.

Stern blasted Trump’s demand of $5.7 billion in funding for the border wall — which Democrats have repeatedly rejected — saying the price tag wouldn’t cover the costs of such an expansive undertaking.

“You’re talking about building a massive wall across this country on the southern border. It’s a tremendous amount of property and a tremendous amount of area to cover,” said Stern. “You’re not going to get a whole wall for $5 billion. If you really want a wall, it’s probably going to cost you some trillions of dollars.”

The commander in chief, Stern exclaimed, should “be straight up with people.”

“I would love to see Donald come on last night and go, ‘F--- this, I’m not going to bull#^&#^&#^&#^& you guys. I want $20 billion.”

On Tuesday, Trump called the southern border a "pipeline for vast quantities of illegal drugs," but Stern argued the president's plan won’t keep drugs or terrorists from entering the country.

“They’re coming into our ports. We need way more security,” Stern told a listener who called in asking why he considered the wall “a problem.”

“I’m all about keeping illegal aliens out because it’s not fair — it’s not fair to people who apply legally,” said Stern. “But at the same point, you can’t be hypocritical and be hiring illegal aliens over at Mar-a-Lago.”

Last month, The New York Times interviewed a woman who said she worked for years as a maid at Bedminster, Trump’s New Jersey golf club, as an undocumented immigrant.

Stern said the ongoing shutdown itself poses a significant risk to national security with so many federal worker furloughed or working without pay.

“Right now we don’t even have air traffic controllers being paid,” said Stern. “Talk about a lack of security. If I’m a terrorist, I’m coming in now. I bet you they’re flooding in while this government shutdown is going on.”

When his caller brought up reports of political figures building security barriers outside their homes, Stern replied, “There’s a wall over the White House … and how many people f---ing climb over it and get close to the White House? A ton. The wall ain’t stopping anybody.”

“Even Donald’s not into this wall. It’s just he’s embarrassed because he can’t get it, and Rush Limbaugh shamed him,” Stern added.

“The whole concept of the wall got him elected, a lot of people could wrap their brain around it. But the wall ain’t going to solve #^&#^&#^&#^&. And it’s going to cost a fortune. Come on, it’s nonsense.”

Now that, is enlightening. Good work Peter!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how does
that squishy stuff you
list, eliminate the need for a wall?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I think we've discussed many times the potential waste or negatives of a giant wall focused solution. Let the experts assess where we need wall, fence, barrier electronics etc...

Remember as well the wall isn't a 5.7 billion solution, estimates are likely 25 billion or more and 10+ years to construct assuming you can overcome the legal and land owner challenges. Then you have to maintain it...

This isn't the solution to a "security crisis" born at a campaign rally.

I
This isn't the solution to a "security crisis" born at a campaign rally.

The dems voted for a wall in 2006 and 2013, so what campaign rally
are you referring to?

The dems voted for a wall in 2006 and 2013,

Where were those walls built under those acts?

It would be cheaper and a lot less headaches to give California to Mexico

The hatred of Trump is the whole problem with the issue and simple economics.

It would be cheaper and a lot less headaches to give California to Mexico

The hatred of Trump is the whole problem with the issue and simple economics.

How would we be ever able to support all those states who vote Republican as they don't pay their own way? Simple economics means you don't spend $ when experts are telling you there are cheaper and more effective ways to accomplish something.

It would be cheaper and a lot less headaches to give California to Mexico

The hatred of Trump is the whole problem with the issue and simple economics.

Mexico would gladly do that
California has 12% of our population, 16% of our GDP but you would add about 700 miles to the length of the USA Mexico border
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Said the nitwit from the nutmeg state. Please take your logic to Mexico also,you can find a way to offset a history of good decision making. California will bail you out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Said the nitwit from the nutmeg state. Please take your logic to Mexico also,you can find a way to offset a history of good decision making. California will bail you out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Says the #^&#^&#^&#^& from who cares where.

I am sure you know a #^&#^&#^&#^& when you see one Paul. Probably an expert on #^&#^&#^&#^&s.🤡
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am sure you know a #^&#^&#^&#^& when you see one Paul. Probably an expert on #^&#^&#^&#^&s.��
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good one! Really using those few brain cells now!

Where were those walls built under those acts?

they weren’t, i don’t think. regardless, as recently as 2013, the democrats were in favor of barriers. Now that Trump is potus, pelosi says they are immoral. and a 13th century solution to a 21st century problem.

in what century did 2006 and 2013 take place?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where were those walls built under those acts?
They weren't because it never happened. 2006 was a bi-partisan bill that expanded fencing where it was needed, 2013 was another bi-partisan bill that had some money to study and improve fencing based on analysis, dramatically expand the number of border agents and provide some immigration reform but was killed by the GOP.

they weren’t, i don’t think. regardless, as recently as 2013, the democrats were in favor of barriers. Now that Trump is potus, pelosi says they are immoral. and a 13th century solution to a 21st century problem.

in what century did 2006 and 2013 take place?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In 2006, at the time it was passed, George W. Bush's White House touted the fence as "an important step toward immigration reform."[1] The White House Office of the Press Secretary stated that the Act "Authorizes the construction of hundreds of miles of additional fencing along our Southern border; Authorizes more vehicle barriers, checkpoints, and lighting to help prevent people from entering our country illegally; Authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to increase the use of advanced technology like cameras, satellites, and unmanned aerial vehicles to reinforce our infrastructure at the border."[1]

The original 2006 act provided for "at least two layers of reinforced fencing" to be built. However, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) successfully argued to Congress "that different border terrains required different types of fencing, that a one-size-fits-all approach across the entire border didn't make sense."[6]

An amendment introduced by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, was passed, amending the law to read: "nothing in this paragraph shall require the Secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location."[6]

I don't think they are immoral and she got a lot a crap for saying that. The walls under that act were put in the populous areas in Calif. - not the desert like where this wall will go.

They weren't because it never happened. 2006 was a bi-partisan bill that expanded fencing where it was needed, 2013 was another bi-partisan bill that had some money to study and improve fencing based on analysis, dramatically expand the number of border agents and provide some immigration reform but was killed by the GOP.

I think there were 15 miles of fences built in the 90s in San Diego and this act expanded to like 625 miles.

They weren't because it never happened. 2006 was a bi-partisan bill that expanded fencing where it was needed, 2013 was another bi-partisan bill that had some money to study and improve fencing based on analysis, dramatically expand the number of border agents and provide some immigration reform but was killed by the GOP.

"2006 was a bi-partisan bill that expanded fencing where it was needed"

The 2006 act, according to factcheck.org, called for construction of 700 miles of fencing.

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/democrats-support-border-wall/

"2013 was another bi-partisan bill that had some money to study and improve fencing"

Washington Examiner says it was for 700 miles of fencing.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/2013-all-senate-dems-voted-to-build-border-fence-kill-visa-lottery-end-chain-migration

So what's the difference (besides who POTUS is) between what the democrats voted for previously, and what Trump is proposing now? He's proposing a wall in sections, with other technologies obviously, and personnel.

The walls under that act were put in the populous areas in Calif. - not the desert like where this wall will go.

Are the un-fenced areas, where people are currently crossing? If so, that's where the fence SHOULD go, right?

What percentage of illegal crossings at the southern border, do you suppose take place, where we currently have a barrier? Just take a guess...I have no clue what the number is, I'm just wondering your opinion.

Is Trump proposing to put wall sections where we know there aren't a large number of people crossing?

Are the un-fenced areas, where people are currently crossing? If so, that's where the fence SHOULD go, right?

What percentage of illegal crossings at the southern border, do you suppose take place, where we currently have a barrier? Just take a guess...I have no clue what the number is, I'm just wondering your opinion.

Is Trump proposing to put wall sections where we know there aren't a large number of people crossing?

I've said all along if there is significant crossings in certain areas then they should fill it in with a wall or other things. The reason I am against this is it seems like it is a blanket put up the wall along the whole border when in certain areas it may not make sense or be necessary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And I feel that there's a certain element of racism in the Chant build the wall and what it means to some people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It really is not racist to keep your citizens safe. Am I racist for having a gun or locks on the door?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And I feel that there's a certain element of racism in the Chant build the wall and what it means to some people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Of course you do.

And I feel that there's a certain element of racism in the Chant build the wall and what it means to some people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Please explain your prejudices that make you feel this way?

You put a wall around your property because you love the ones within it, not because you hate the ones outside it.

You and Wayne with your brown people insinuations can stick a sock in it.

What happened to empathy that the left whines about Trump not having any? Do you not care about the families of loved ones killed by criminals who are not supposed to even be in the country to begin with?

Pathetic all of it

You people can’t won’t and will not agree that a wall will help border agents do their job because you hate Trump. Well wallow in your own misery then
I’m the meantime I’ll donate to the go fund me maybe to get it done
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If Trump succeeds in getting wall funds by declaring a national emergency, will that mean he won't have to compromise on DACA?

It would be cheaper and a lot less headaches to give California to Mexico

The hatred of Trump is the whole problem with the issue and simple economics.

Thats every Trump supporters excuse it has noting to do with him or his policys (its The hatred of Trump is the whole problem)

Funny that excuse did not fly when used to defend the last POTUS..

and that administration was boring compared to this freak show

Please explain your prejudices that make you feel this way?

You put a wall around your property because you love the ones within it, not because you hate the ones outside it.

You and Wayne with your brown people insinuations can stick a sock in it.

What happened to empathy that the left whines about Trump not having any? Do you not care about the families of loved ones killed by criminals who are not supposed to even be in the country to begin with?


Pathetic all of it

You people can’t won’t and will not agree that a wall will help border agents do their job because you hate Trump. Well wallow in your own misery then
I’m the meantime I’ll donate to the go fund me maybe to get it done
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no this is whats Pathetic

they had both houses and couldn't get it done and guys like you were silent

Trumps has called Brown people a scourge on the country and guys like you remain silent (until Trumps called on it then you rush to defend him)

Prior to January the his party pass government spending bill 100 for
no against and says hell sign it until 2 un elected fring personality chime in and Trump changes his Mind ( and pence calls one to give him a hand job) guys like you remain silent

Whats really Pathetic is Trump waited until Dems took over the house and then went into classic blame game and all of a sudden guys like you are silent no more ....????

Again its funny to see how that works over and over and over

"2006 was a bi-partisan bill that expanded fencing where it was needed"

The 2006 act, according to factcheck.org, called for construction of 700 miles of fencing.

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/democrats-support-border-wall/

"2013 was another bi-partisan bill that had some money to study and improve fencing"

Washington Examiner says it was for 700 miles of fencing.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/2013-all-senate-dems-voted-to-build-border-fence-kill-visa-lottery-end-chain-migration

So what's the difference (besides who POTUS is) between what the democrats voted for previously, and what Trump is proposing now? He's proposing a wall in sections, with other technologies obviously, and personnel.


what part do you not understand...why couldn't he get it done when he had both houses ?????

He loses the House and like Magic its a crisis once the dems take over the house ????

you and others are contortionist.. every day a new argument to defend... facts aren't your friend the Timeline is not your friend 2 years prior to today is not your friend .... all those things together paint an entirely different picture of events ... and all of it painted with GOP paint

I am a Brown person.



I am also Spartacus.




I never said putting up a wall wouldn't help the agents do their job. So would putting up a row of roses with sharp thorns but there may be cheaper and more effective ways than just putting up a wall across the whole border. A wall won't help stop the drugs coming through the current border crossings.

The 2 years of it not getting done he also could not get McConnel to get the conceal carry reciprocity bill voted on by the senate. I was not silent about that either. He did however accomplish many things to better our country and I am grateful for that. The border security is now the flavor of the month and both sides get worked up about it.
Yep it is a blame game now apparently.
I never rushed to defend him from any twisted spin the left has claimed he said.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess Trump is considering taking money earmarked for disaster relief to build his wall, I’m sure we are all in agreement that money is better spend there?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess Trump is considering taking money earmarked for disaster relief to build his wall, I’m sure we are all in agreement that money is better spend there?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is disaster relief defined as impeaching the mother#^&#^&#^&#^&er?? 👍👍
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How would we be ever able to support all those states who vote Republican as they don't pay their own way? Simple economics means you don't spend $ when experts are telling you there are cheaper and more effective ways to accomplish something.

cheaper and more effective to stop the flow of those cutting in line to suck on the government tete. If you want to spend our tax money allowing illegal immigrants to get healthcare and medicare or medicaid while citizens who worked their whole lives and paid into the system one day have a stroke and need to go into a facility but get told sell all your assets, raise all the funds to pay for it and then you can get your entitled benefit, that is what you choose to support. I do not. That is just one part of what I am talking about.

cheaper and more effective to stop the flow of those cutting in line to suck on the government tete. If you want to spend our tax money allowing illegal immigrants to get healthcare and medicare or medicaid while citizens who worked their whole lives and paid into the system one day have a stroke and need to go into a facility but get told sell all your assets, raise all the funds to pay for it and then you can get your entitled benefit, that is what you choose to support. I do not. That is just one part of what I am talking about.
Posts like this are funny, none of this is true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ya I know, fake news and all
people lie all the time yada yada yada

just admit that progressivism has no end, it goes after more and more and never ends

Said the nitwit from the nutmeg state. Please take your logic to Mexico also,you can find a way to offset a history of good decision making. California will bail you out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Which one? CT currently has a pair of nitwits in the senate, and more in the house. You must specify...

Posts like this are funny, none of this is true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How was that wrong? Just this week, the governors of CA and NY were on TV, promising free healthcare to illegals...

cheaper and more effective to stop the flow of those cutting in line to suck on the government tete. If you want to spend our tax money allowing illegal immigrants to get healthcare and medicare or medicaid while citizens who worked their whole lives and paid into the system one day have a stroke and need to go into a facility but get told sell all your assets, raise all the funds to pay for it and then you can get your entitled benefit, that is what you choose to support. I do not. That is just one part of what I am talking about.

This logic is the same as saying “hand guns save lives”.

I mean...they kind of do. But...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ya I know, fake news and all
people lie all the time yada yada yada

just admit that progressivism has no end, it goes after more and more and never ends
Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive especially social security, they can’t apply for Medicare or Medicaid or welfare or food stamps.

This isn’t fake blah, it’s well documented and the law.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive especially social security, they can’t apply for Medicare or Medicaid or welfare or food stamps.

This isn’t fake blah, it’s well documented and the law.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There's absolutely no way that's true. Do you EVER tire of being so deceptive? While illegal aliens themselves are banned from many welfare programs, their children born here, are not. More than 60% receive some kind of welfare, and they have more kids than American citizens, and public education is astronomically expensive. They can, and do, go the emergency room for medical treatment.

No group of 10 million people, most of whom barely have a high school diploma and don't speak English, will avoid being a drain. Maybe in my parents' generation when you could go to the factory, work hard, and provide for your family. Not anymore.

You really are something.

https://newspunch.com/63-percent-immigrants-welfare-census/

Why the wall doesn't work
Trump Just Doesn’t Understand the Border: Here Are the Facts
By David Bier
This article appeared in the New York Daily News on January 8, 2019.
President Trump took to television on Tuesday to make his case that the lack of a border wall has caused a “crisis.” Drugs, terrorism, crime and the illegal immigration of children all featured prominently as supposed justifications for spending billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars on the project. Yet upon close examination, the President’s justifications fall flat. The border has problems, but the President doesn’t understand them, and some of them he has caused himself.

The President cited stopping drug smuggling as a primary goal of his border barrier. Far from a crisis, however, the value of drug seizures by the average Border Patrol agent actually declined 70% since 2013. That’s because marijuana is the primary drug smuggled between ports of entry, where a border wall would go, and marijuana has been legalized in so many states that demand is being filled domestically.

While Trump acted as if the absence of a border wall were the primary cause of the opioid crisis, the average inspector at ports of entry in 2018 seized eight times more cocaine, 17 times more fentanyl, 23 times more methamphetamine and 36 times more heroin than the average Border Patrol agent seized at the physical border in early 2018. The hard drugs that Trump claims to care about aren’t coming where Trump thinks they are.


As importantly, building hundreds of miles of border fence from 2005 to 2009 did nothing to deter smuggling between ports of entry anyway. The average Border Patrol agent was seizing the same quantity of marijuana after the current fences went up as before. When marijuana was legalized in several states starting in 2014, marijuana seizures suddenly dropped 78% — legalization, not the wall, stopped the narcotraffickers.

The President could not help but raise the specter of terrorists crossing illegally. The fact is that a foreign terrorist has not carried out a single terrorist attack in more than four decades after crossing the border illegally. Trump officials have cited a number of “special interest aliens” whom Border Patrol apprehended, but those aren’t terrorists - they are just people who come from “countries of interest.” They could be a family fleeing terrorists, like the Syrian Christians who showed up at the border in 2015.

It would not be a “security crisis” without numerous “criminals and gangs.” Yet Border Patrol figures show that the agency arrested less than 1,000 border crossers who had convictions for violent crimes. That’s just 0.2% of total apprehensions. A majority of the “criminals” in 2018 were people convicted of, not surprisingly, crossing illegally. Trump claimed thousands of suspected gang members were caught crossing illegally, but again, the real number in 2018 was just 728.

The fact is that the vast majority of immigrants crossing the borders of the United States legally or otherwise are simply peaceful people seeking the American dream. That’s why, based on figures from the Census Bureau, immigrants — legal and illegal - are half as likely as natural-born Americans to be behind bars in America.

Trump struck a compassionate tone when he spoke about children who make the dangerous journey to this country. But his policies — and the current border fence — have only hurt them. As Border Patrol and the border fences pushed more and more immigrants to cross in remote areas of the border — in deserts, mountains and rivers — the journeys grew more perilous and more people died.

In 1998, Border Patrol found one dead migrant for every 5,767 apprehensions, but after building the fences and doubling its force, it found one dead migrant for every 1,034 apprehensions in 2017. That’s a sign that the journey is now about 5 times more dangerous. In addition, the remoteness of the locations where they were apprehended contributed to the deaths of both children who died in Border Patrol custody in recent weeks, as it was more difficult for them to get help.

Trump is making matters worse. His administration has institutionalized a practice of capping the number of people who can apply for asylum at legal ports of entry. This forces them to either live homeless and starving in dangerous cities in Mexico for months, or enter illegally. This choice is what is driving women and children into the hands of smugglers and leading them to cross illegally.

The administration says it doesn’t have the resources to process families at ports, but somehow Border Patrol has the resources to process five times as many families that it apprehends between ports. At a minimum, the port inspectors could turn the families over to Border Patrol, maintaining a safe and orderly flow.

The problem is that the Trump administration doesn’t want any flow, even a legal one. As Trump has said, “I don’t want them in our country.” But that’s not a solution. Trump’s policies have created a real problem, but his border wall is not the fix the system needs. America needs to overhaul its outdated immigration system.

David Bier is an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institue.

There's absolutely no way that's true. Do you EVER tire of being so deceptive? While illegal aliens themselves are banned from many welfare programs, their children born here, are not. More than 60% receive some kind of welfare, and they have more kids than American citizens, and public education is astronomically expensive. They can, and do, go the emergency room for medical treatment.

No group of 10 million people, most of whom barely have a high school diploma and don't speak English, will avoid being a drain. Maybe in my parents' generation when you could go to the factory, work hard, and provide for your family. Not anymore.

You really are something.

https://newspunch.com/63-percent-immigrants-welfare-census/

Hey, just apply the "document" con, and the selectively applied law con, and the statistic con, and the talking point con, and the compassion con, and the "most people believe" con, and the racist sexist, multi-phobe con, the fact check con, the WAPOST, NYT, CNN, liberal media con, the Trump is biggest liar of all time con, the endless number of genders con, the living breathing Constitution con, the right wing is Nazi, Fascist con, and the con only applies to Trump con . . . and you have the foundation for a slick big con.

This article appeared on the Washington Examiner on May 15, 2018.
The Trump administration is in the process of writing new regulations to guarantee that certain immigrants won’t consume too many welfare or entitlement benefits. The welfare state is certainly a problem, but it’s a home-grown one, not an imported one. Welfare’s benefits are too large and too many people receive them. But the Trump administration should not blame this problem on immigrants.

In fact, immigrants use fewer welfare and entitlement benefits in than native-born Americans.

These were the results of a new study we produced for the Cato Institute. We examined data from 2016 on programs for the poor, such as Medicaid and food stamps, and also the entitlement programs of Social Security and Medicare. The latter two are the largest portion of the welfare state and twice as large as all welfare programs for the poor combined. We found that immigrants use 39 percent fewer welfare and entitlements benefits per person than native-born Americans. Immigrants are less likely to use the individual programs in most cases and, when they do, the benefits they receive tend to be smaller.


Social Security retirement benefits provide a good example. Based on the data, adult immigrants are 47 percent less likely to receive Social Security benefits than native-born American adults. Furthermore, the average amount they receive in benefits is about $1,427 below that of natives in 2016. The net effect is that immigrants individually consumed 48 percent fewer Social Security retirement benefits than natives.

Supplemental Security Income provides another example. Lower immigrant use rates and benefits mean that the average adult immigrant consumes about 22 percent less in SSI benefits than the average native-born American adult.

Welfare and entitlement programs are generally intended to aid the poor and support the elderly, but only some Americans and immigrants fall into those categories. In another section of my study, we compare poor and elderly immigrants who meet the poverty and age requirements for those programs with native-born Americans who are also eligible. In this section, immigrants consume 27 percent fewer benefits than native-born Americans.

One reason why immigrants use fewer benefits is because they are often not eligible for them. Legal immigrants cannot get welfare for their first five years of residency, with few exceptions, mostly at the state level. Illegal immigrants are not eligible for welfare except for rare circumstances like emergency Medicaid.

Immigrants are drawn to America’s labor markets, not to welfare benefits. The number of illegal immigrants apprehended on the Southwest border, a good proxy measurement for the number who want to come here, is down by 82 percent in 2017 compared to 2000. During that time, Congress has increased the number of welfare programs available for new immigrants.

If they were coming for welfare, there would be more illegal immigrants entering the country than ever. But there aren’t. Murder, the chaotic drug war in Central America, and a recovering economy here, combined with a faltering one there, is the main driver of asylum seekers and some illegal immigrants coming from that part of the world.

The fact that immigrants are in fact less likely to receive welfare benefits should dampen the fears of conservatives and libertarians who would support more legal immigration if it weren’t for welfare and entitlement programs.

Still, Congress needs to address the high cost of welfare and entitlement programs. The best option would be to severely cut the size and accessibility to the welfare and entitlement state for everybody here — immigrants and natives. The benefits are unaffordable and push millions of people out of the labor market.

Congress should pass a simple law that makes all people ineligible to receive welfare and entitlement programs until they become U.S. citizens. Building expensive walls around the country, cutting legal immigration, or putting more faith in government technology to stop illegal immigration are fool’s errands. Reducing immigrant access to welfare and cutting the size of benefits are, by contrast, achievable and popular policies.

The good news is that even without a higher wall around the welfare state, immigrants are a welfare bargain compared to native-born Americans.

Alex Nowrasteh is a senior immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute. Robert Orr is a research assistant working on welfare policy at the Cato Institute.

A paragraph from Jonah Goldberg's book Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy
“I believe that, conceptually, we have reached the end of history. We are at the summit, and at this altitude [political] left and right lose most of their meaning. Because when you are at the top of the mountain, any direction you turn — be it left toward socialism or right toward nationalism … the result is the same: You must go down, back whence you came.”

A paragraph from Jonah Goldberg's book Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy
“I believe that, conceptually, we have reached the end of history. We are at the summit, and at this altitude [political] left and right lose most of their meaning. Because when you are at the top of the mountain, any direction you turn — be it left toward socialism or right toward nationalism … the result is the same: You must go down, back whence you came.”

Jonah Goldberg the con.

There's absolutely no way that's true. Do you EVER tire of being so deceptive? While illegal aliens themselves are banned from many welfare programs, their children born here, are not. More than 60% receive some kind of welfare, and they have more kids than American citizens, and public education is astronomically expensive. They can, and do, go the emergency room for medical treatment.
Why wouldn't an American citizen be entitled to benefits?

The cost/benefit issue has been studied a million times...

Jonah Goldberg the con.

Odd, I would have thought you would be bowing at his feet after his other book:Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change and The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas

Odd, I would have thought you would be bowing at his feet after his other book:Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change and The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas
You don’t get it, everything is a con, nothing is real. Now while you’re confused I’m robbing your house.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jonah Goldberg the con.

I see why you don't like him, he's written what I have been saying
He's not one of The People of Wall-mart:

"When looking at what advances this administration’s agenda or is good for the Republican Party, however, “his base loves it” doesn’t score any points.

Worse, it’s self-fulfilling prophecy. As he sheds the mostly suburban voters who gave him his margin of victory in 2016, of course he clings more tightly to those who celebrate the behaviors that are bleeding the GOP of support. They’re the only ones left. Proclaiming that “his base loves it” may be an explanation, but it’s no excuse. And it misses the point if you care about the GOP’s long-term viability or even Trump’s re-election prospects. He’s going to need more voters than his amen chorus.

Last month’s midterms showed what a national election looks like when only Trump enablers feel highly motivated to vote Republican. The GOP lost Orange County, Calif., the ancestral home of the conservative movement. New England now has more GOP governors than Republican members of Congress. In Iowa, the GOP lost all of its House races save for uber-Trumpy Steve King’s. A party in which only bigoted goons like King can thrive by fueling white resentment is destined for the dustbin of history.

The irony here is that Trump’s base will forgive him for nearly anything. He easily could have used the wall as leverage to gain Democratic support for mandating that all employers use E-Verify to confirm a prospective employee has legal immigration status. This is what serious immigration hawks have implored him to do — and he’d get credit for being the great deal-maker he claims to be.

But the larger irony is that his base-service has led him to this very predicament: shutdown or back down.

Most presidents try to expand their coalition while holding onto their base. Trump has shrunk his coalition and laid the foundation for future shrinkage by forcing his party to endorse this behavior. Trump will be gone soon enough, but at this rate the party of Trump will be a rump party."

This article appeared on the Washington Examiner on May 15, 2018.
The Trump administration is in the process of writing new regulations to guarantee that certain immigrants won’t consume too many welfare or entitlement benefits. The welfare state is certainly a problem, but it’s a home-grown one, not an imported one. Welfare’s benefits are too large and too many people receive them. But the Trump administration should not blame this problem on immigrants.

I don't recall the Trump administration blaming immigrants for our welfare benefits being too large.

In fact, immigrants use fewer welfare and entitlement benefits in than native-born Americans.

Congress should pass a simple law that makes all people ineligible to receive welfare and entitlement programs until they become U.S. citizens.

But then they too will become the same welfare guzzlers that native born Americans are. And as Jim pointed out, their children, that they produce at much higher rates than native born Americans will be native born so the number of welfare guzzlers will eventually go up dramatically at higher rates thanks to the immigrants.

Building expensive walls around the country, cutting legal immigration, or putting more faith in government technology to stop illegal immigration are fool’s errands. Reducing immigrant access to welfare and cutting the size of benefits are, by contrast, achievable and popular policies.

So "comprehensive immigration reform" is a fool's errand. Good to know. Oh, and cutting the size of benefits, I don't think you can get past the Dems on that without a huge fight--probably not an achievable or popular policy.

The good news is that even without a higher wall around the welfare state, immigrants are a welfare bargain compared to native-born Americans.


Actually, the Dems have a decent plan about that "good news". Put everybody on free birth control, abortion, promote genders which won't produce children, and so decrease the number of native-born Americans and allow massive immigration, legal or not, to replace the disappearing Americans. Voila! . . . the cost of the welfare state will go down because immigrants use welfare less at a less costly rate. Oh, but . . . darn. They produce children at a higher rate so, in spite of getting rid of most of the "native born," the population will grow dramatically with new "native borns."

Sounds rather hopeless.

Odd, I would have thought you would be bowing at his feet after his other book:Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change and The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas

I've grown to like throwing the word "con" around after seeing how it is being done on this forum. It's kinda fun. And eliminates the need for lengthy rational deliberation. Jonah Goldberg can be a con artist at times. Just like you.

There's absolutely no way that's true. Do you EVER tire of being so deceptive? While illegal aliens themselves are banned from many welfare programs, their children born here, are not. More than 60% receive some kind of welfare, and they have more kids than American citizens, and public education is astronomically expensive. They can, and do, go the emergency room for medical treatment.

No group of 10 million people, most of whom barely have a high school diploma and don't speak English, will avoid being a drain. Maybe in my parents' generation when you could go to the factory, work hard, and provide for your family. Not anymore.

You really are something.

https://newspunch.com/63-percent-immigrants-welfare-census/
After looking at your link, nice source by the way, I’d note it cites the same data we debunked a few weeks ago as not reinforcing your point. Read, think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive especially social security, they can’t apply for Medicare or Medicaid or welfare or food stamps.

This isn’t fake blah, it’s well documented and the law.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Social security? You are talking out your ass

When employers deduct SS and sent it in and the number does not exist or match, the money is returned to the employer because it has no place to be assigned to. What do you think it just goes into the general fund? I thought you know how things work.

The services they cost us are higher than you think. If you want more of them here, have at it. I am just telling you the truth.

documented where by law?

Actually, the Dems have a decent plan about that "good news". Put everybody on free birth control, abortion, promote genders which won't produce children, and so decrease the number of native-born Americans and allow massive immigration, legal or not, to replace the disappearing Americans. Voila! . . . the cost of the welfare state will go down because immigrants use welfare less at a less costly rate. Oh, but . . . darn. They produce children at a higher rate so, in spite of getting rid of most of the "native born," the population will grow dramatically with new "native borns."

Sounds rather hopeless.

You actually think LGBTQ people don't have or raise children, that abortion is a significant population limiter, that birth control is the reason people choose not to have children.
You likely don't think that parental leave, child care, access to affordable healthcare, student loans are things that limit people's choices about having children. Just think in those evil socialized countries typical childbirth costs are half and less than the US.

Just what scares you about new "native borns", what generation American are you, that entitles you to close the door?

After looking at your link, nice source by the way, I’d note it cites the same data we debunked a few weeks ago as not reinforcing your point. Read, think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you don’t like the source.

Do the kids of illegals qualify for welfare, yes or no.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you don’t like the source.

Do the kids of illegals qualify for welfare, yes or no.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Why would that matter

Second-generation Americans—the 20 million adult U.S.-born children of immigrants—are substantially better off than immigrants themselves on key measures of socioeconomic attainment, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. They have higher incomes; more are college graduates and homeowners; and fewer live in poverty. In all of these measures, their characteristics resemble those of the full U.S. adult population.

Hispanics and Asian Americans make up about seven-in-ten of today’s adult immigrants and about half of today’s adult second generation. Pew Research surveys find that the second generations of both groups are much more likely than the immigrants to speak English; to have friends and spouses outside their ethnic or racial group, to say their group gets along well with others, and to think of themselves as a “typical American.”

The Pew Research surveys also find that second-generation Hispanics and Asian Americans place more importance than does the general public on hard work and career success. They are more inclined to call themselves liberal and less likely to identify as Republicans. And for the most part they are more likely to say their standard of living is higher than that of their parents at the same stage of life. In all of these measures, the second generation resembles the immigrant generation more closely than the general public.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And just as true as the anecdotal evidence presented about immigrant killers is this
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/12/without-immigrants-the-fortune-500-would-be-the-fortune-284/547421/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Social security? You are talking out your ass

When employers deduct SS and sent it in and the number does not exist or match, the money is returned to the employer because it has no place to be assigned to. What do you think it just goes into the general fund? I thought you know how things work.

The services they cost us are higher than you think. If you want more of them here, have at it. I am just telling you the truth.

documented where by law?
This isn’t true. If there’s a mismatch between an SSN and name the money is held by the government in an earnings suspense file account.

I believe the SS amount illegals pay is believed to be something like 5 or 6 billion a year.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you don’t like the source.

Do the kids of illegals qualify for welfare, yes or no.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Any website that proudly displays its bias is instantly suspect.

As for kids of illegals, if they were born here they are citizens then they may qualify for some as they rightly should. You’re conflating data points in your highly biased link between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants by the way.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You actually think LGBTQ people don't have or raise children,

I put some serious pooh-pooh on your article and all you can respond to is my sarcastic hyperbolic summation?

The LGBTQ community as a whole will actually be able to "have" (create through sexual union) children at a lesser rate than "cisgenders" because the largest component of LGBTQ is the LG who now don't have to get into pretend marriages with a cisgender. Same sex folks can't biologically produce babies by having sex with each other. The other letters will have a more difficult time finding the right opposite letter than their cis cousins. The Q portion is probably too confused to know what they're supposed to do.

And raising children that a union did not produce does not add to population numbers.


that abortion is a significant population limiter,

Yes, abortion and birth control are both "a significant population limiter." One of their main purposes is specifically to reduce the number of children that will have to be raised.


that birth control is the reason people choose not to have children.

It's not the reason, it's the method.

You likely don't think that parental leave, child care, access to affordable healthcare, student loans are things that limit people's choices about having children. Just think in those evil socialized countries typical childbirth costs are half and less than the US.

The "native born" of those socialized countries in Europe where childbirth costs are half and less than here have lower birth rates than our "native born." Their birth rate is well below replacement numbers. lowering costs does not motivate them to have more children than we do here with our higher costs.

But the massive number of immigrants they've invited in the past decade have a much higher birth rate which demographers have calculated will make the children of those immigrants the majority population in a couple of generations.


Just what scares you about new "native borns", what generation American are you, that entitles you to close the door?

Why do you frame it as "scares"? Projecting?

I point out the incoherence of your posted article and that is supposed to mean that I am scared and believe that I'm entitled to close the door? Why are you being so defensive and imputing strange non sequitur characterizations of me?

I'm trying to have a rational discussion. But I am increasingly finding that it doesn't net a similar response.

This isn’t true. If there’s a mismatch between an SSN and name the money is held by the government in an earnings suspense file account.

I believe the SS amount illegals pay is believed to be something like 5 or 6 billion a year.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

then the people I know who had it returned must have been lucky

sounds like a good place to use the money to build a wall ;)

Why do you frame it as "scares"? Projecting?

I point out the incoherence of your posted article and that is supposed to mean that I am scared and believe that I'm entitled to close the door? Why are you being so defensive and imputing strange non sequitur characterizations of me?

I'm trying to have a rational discussion. But I am increasingly finding that it doesn't net a similar response.

Any female of childbearing age can become pregnant, all she has to do is have operable female genitals.
So how do LGBTQ people affect birthrates, are you proposing that they be "converted" so that they can produce children correctly in your mind or that so many females have sex changes or whatever the politically correct terminology is?
Do you think people should be required to marry and have children, or just be required to have children, or just not be allowed to use birth control so they suffer the consequences of their behavior? Just how do you propose that birth rates increase?

Why do you see this as a problem:
But the massive number of immigrants they've invited in the past decade have a much higher birth rate which demographers have calculated will make the children of those immigrants the majority population in a couple of generations.

That is why I posed this question below, perhaps I misunderstood your motivation for that statement and my assumption that you were implying that it is what will also happen here. Though I would also say that the analysis I've seen of second generation immigrants is that their behavior closely mirrors that of the larger society they live in, so I wouldn't count on them keeping the same high birthrates as their parents.
Just what scares you about new "native borns", what generation American are you, that entitles you to close the door?

Illegal is illegal regardless of various stats that supposedly show how the illegality should not be so important compared to the reputed benefits. So, in the war of links, there's this rebuttal to all the links supposedly showing that illegal immigrants are a net plus economically:

http://www.fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers

Who knows what to believe. Except that illegal is illegal.

Illegal is illegal regardless of various stats that supposedly show how the illegality should not be so important compared to the reputed benefits. So, in the war of links, there's this rebuttal to all the links supposedly showing that illegal immigrants are a net plus economically:

http://www.fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers

Who knows what to believe. Except that illegal is illegal.
Glad you picked a neutral source. I’m kind of surprised you didn’t quote Steve King.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federation-for-american-immigration-reform-fair/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

FAIR uses every skewed number.
A few quotes from John Tanton, the founder of FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA
"Do we leave it to individuals to decide that they are the intelligent ones who should have more kids? And more troublesome, what about the less intelligent, who logically should have less? Who is going to break the bad news [to less intelligent individuals], and how will it be implemented?"

"I've come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that."

"whether the minorities who are going to inherit California (85% of the lower-grade school children are now 'minorities' -- demography is destiny) can run an advanced society?

But illegal immigration keeps dropping anyways so it must be an emergency
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2018/11/27/u-s-unauthorized-immigrant-total-dips-to-lowest-level-in-a-decade/

Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive especially social security
.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

why would illegal immigrants get social security?

Any website that proudly displays its bias is instantly suspect.

.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you are always suspect

Any female of childbearing age can become pregnant, all she has to do is have operable female genitals.
So how do LGBTQ people affect birthrates,

I thought I explained that. Maybe not well enough. But I thought it was clear. If you disagree, that's OK.

are you proposing that they be "converted" so that they can produce children correctly in your mind or that so many females have sex changes or whatever the politically correct terminology is?
Do you think people should be required to marry and have children, or just be required to have children, or just not be allowed to use birth control so they suffer the consequences of their behavior? Just how do you propose that birth rates increase?

I don't and didn't propose that they do. I was responding to your article which was basically about the cost of welfare for illegal and legal immigrants vs "native born." I extrapolated the authors contention (that illegals put less strain on our welfare state than do "native born") to noting that his thesis could support the idea, facetious or serious, that replacing the "native born" population with legal or illegal immigrants would therefor reduce welfare costs.


Why do you see this as a problem:
But the massive number of immigrants they've invited in the past decade have a much higher birth rate which demographers have calculated will make the children of those immigrants the majority population in a couple of generations.

I didn't say it was a problem. First, I showed that your suggestion that the cost of child bearing is the reason why "native born" Americans have fewer kids doesn't square with your strange notion that the lower cost in countries where the cost is much lower is somehow proof that our high costs are the reason for less children. It obviously isn't, by your own comparison, since in the lower cost countries, they have even less children per couple than we do.

Then I suggested a parallel situation there to what may be happening here. Population replacement of those who don't replace their own by those who more than do so. For those who are basically numbers and statistically oriented, that may be perfectly fine. For those who are culturally oriented, that may be suicide. I wasn't slanting in either direction. If I were forced to choose between numbers and culture, I would pick culture. But there is much more to the ultimate choice.

That is why I posed this question below, perhaps I misunderstood your motivation for that statement and my assumption that you were implying that it is what will also happen here. Though I would also say that the analysis I've seen of second generation immigrants is that their behavior closely mirrors that of the larger society they live in, so I wouldn't count on them keeping the same high birthrates as their parents.
Just what scares you about new "native borns", what generation American are you, that entitles you to close the door?

The much more that concerns me is not ethnicity or skin color. I am considered "white," but I don't prefer only "white." I almost have a fetish about things Asian ("yellow"). And have an admiration for a great deal of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean culture. My favorite novel is The Tale of Genji written by Murasaki who was a lady of the Japanese Court in the 11th century. It is reputed to be the first novel ever written. And if I were in grade school now, knowing what I do now, I would learn Korean and master the violin through the rest of my education through college with the intention of eventually going there and joining the Seoul Philharmonic Orchestra. I think it's one of the best, and the fairly large number of classical pianists and violinists and opera singers being produced in Korea are phenomenally talented, among the best. Pop music and singing there is really good as well. And the Korean women dominate the WPGA. And, to me, Eurasian beauties are the sexiest and most beautiful. Even without the Euro mixture, Asian beauties are as well. I could go on and on.

But, in spite of my Asian fascination, what I prefer to preserve is the classical liberalism of Western civilization. And along with that its referred to Judeo Christian notion of individualism and rule of law as embodied by our Constitution. If the immigrants who come here, legally or illegally, were sure to be fervent adherents to our Constitution in its classical liberal sense rather than the Progressive notion of a living, breathing thing that can be changed or disregarded merely by opinion than by amendment, I would love to invite them. And make their acquaintance. I'm sure I would like them more than many of our complacent, centralized government type, politically ignorant dummies who really think socialism is the answer.

e·mer·gen·cy
/əˈmərjənsē/Submit
noun
a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.

I guess the immediate action part depeznds on the political fallout he wants to avoid.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

e·mer·gen·cy
/əˈmərjənsē/Submit
noun
a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.

I guess the immediate action part depeznds on the political fallout he wants to avoid.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

depeznds

I love when people cut and paste definitions then do that :spin:

depeznds

I love when people cut and paste definitions then do that :spin:
Hey I’m old suffing with a nasty cold and working on my iPad without cheaters, but thank god your there to point out what’s important! Also I guess I should point out that unexpected is part of that definition 😬
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Glad you picked a neutral source. I’m kind of surprised you didn’t quote Steve King.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federation-for-american-immigration-reform-fair/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know anything about FAIR. I picked the first one on the google list. Your "fact check" source is questionable. Using the Southern Poverty Law Center as source is a negative for me. My experience with its analyses showed it to be racist, very biased, and superficial. Cato often shows its bias as well, though not as bad as the SPLC.

And then calling Breitbart, Gatestone Institute, and Judicial Watch "far right," who all have done some excellent work, while using such a leftist and biased organization as Southern Poverty Law Center as a source is idiotic.

A "fact check" by a questionable "checker" doesn't tell me anything. Actually, and solidly refuting the numbers in my link would be the better way.

And why would I quote Steve King?

Hey I’m old suffing

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

sounds like an emergency

sounds like an emergency

I know how much you like to point out spelling errors, I’m happy to help you be all that you can be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I know how much you like to point out spelling errors, I’m happy to help you be all that you can be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not so much the error as the irony...keep the material coming

Why wouldn't an American citizen be entitled to benefits?

The cost/benefit issue has been studied a million times...

and liars like you can make data say what they want it to say. 10-20 million people, with no education or skills, who don’t speak english. producing millions and
millions and millions of
kids who are american citizens, but on whom we will
spend billions and billions in education, ESL resources, subsidized food, medicine, healthcare, housing.

it’s obvious that it’s a massive financial drain.

soemce, my town will spend 39k a year to educate my 3 kids, for 13 years. that’s 507k, and
my kids get NOTHING extra - no special
help or services whatsoever. it will take
me decades of paying enormous taxes, just to cover the education cost. illegalsmpay less in taxes than i do, and utilize far more services. it’s not anywhere close to a break even proposition. we need kire police and fire departments, we build more schools...it’s absurd.

and i’m talking about welfare. social
m security is not welfare, from where i sit, it’s a ripoff for
many people who are forced to participate. sonstating tjat illegals don’t receive SS, doesn’t make them bargains. Retirees who collect SS paid into it their whole lives.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://youtu.be/L8zwoh1iotY
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://youtu.be/L8zwoh1iotY
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device



Love the part 201 they (both houses ) gave Trump 1.3 billion for Fencing and other fixed structures as of jan 10 2019 none of those projects are Under construction

Oklahoma, Columbine, Chardon school, Isla Vista, Charlestin church, Las Vegas, Sandy hook, Aurora theater, Austin, Parkland, Santa Fe school, Jacksonville gamer and so many other us born and raised murderers didn’t come from Mexico, yet collectively they represent more of a national emergency when it comes to violent crimes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oklahoma, Columbine, Chardon school, Isla Vista, Charlestin church, Las Vegas, Sandy hook, Aurora theater, Austin, Parkland, Santa Fe school, Jacksonville gamer and so many other us born and raised murderers didn’t come from Mexico, yet collectively they represent more of a national emergency.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Stop making sense

You guys are missing the context in order to promote your anti-American agenda again. One group of heinous folks actually has a right to be here legally. The other group of murderers is here ILLEGALLY. Don’t confuse nut jobs with criminals. We obviously have enough problems without the ILLEGALS, compounding our burden will not solve the mental health issues in America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You guys are missing the context in order to promote your anti-American agenda again. One group of heinous folks actually has a right to be here legally. The other group of murderers is here ILLEGALLY. Don’t confuse nut jobs with criminals. We obviously have enough problems without the ILLEGALS, compounding our burden will not solve the mental health issues in America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s like you are arguing for gun control. Your argument is the equivelant ot “If you make guns illegal, it will stop gun violence”.
Guess what... criminals will still obtain guns and criminals will still cross our borders regardless of gun control or a wall.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Better yet... what don’t we just offer thoughts and prayers to solve the border problem?? That’s what everyone who wants the wall says will work to end school shootings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Better yet... what don’t we just offer thoughts and prayers to solve the border problem?? That’s what everyone who wants the wall says will work to end school shootings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

does the
mass rape occurring at the border bother you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You guys are missing the context in order to promote your anti-American agenda again. One group of heinous folks actually has a right to be here legally. The other group of murderers is here ILLEGALLY. Don’t confuse nut jobs with criminals. We obviously have enough problems without the ILLEGALS, compounding our burden will not solve the mental health issues in America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


love it Anti American agenda... dont confuse nut jobs with criminals
( the right answer to any mass shooting He was a nut job and its a mental health issue not a gun issue )


the walls and the wheel are ancient technology and still work .....

The right never runs out of dumb analogies

The only Anti american agenda is hidden in the Trump MAGA agenda
Nationalism cloaked in Patriotism and the constant promotion of fear of the other ..

and all the other ism's that motivate the base Globalism, communism, socialism

You guys are missing the context in order to promote your anti-American agenda again. One group of heinous folks actually has a right to be here legally. The other group of murderers is here ILLEGALLY. Don’t confuse nut jobs with criminals. We obviously have enough problems without the ILLEGALS, compounding our burden will not solve the mental health issues in America.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I’m pretty sure nobody on this board is promoting anti American anything, we are promoting a stop the BS campaign. Gee wizz it sounds like Trump might have had an investigation opened to see if his actions on firing Comey and subsequent actions were anti American. It’s a trwitter storm this morning as the heat in the kitchen is reaching melt down perportions. Now you can of course suggest that our entire DOJ was out to get Trump...........yes that is part of our stop the BS campaign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Better yet... what don’t we just offer thoughts and prayers to solve the border problem?? That’s what everyone who wants the wall says will work to end school shootings.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Extra spoonful of stupid today? I want the Wall and have no idea how to pray. Is this really how snowflakes think? I just happen to think a wall would help prevent some illegals from obtaining unlawful entry into this country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

love it Anti American agenda... dont confuse nut jobs with criminals
( the right answer to any mass shooting He was a nut job and its a mental health issue not a gun issue )


the walls and the wheel are ancient technology and still work .....

The right never runs out of dumb analogies

The only Anti american agenda is hidden in the Trump MAGA agenda
Nationalism cloaked in Patriotism and the constant promotion of fear of the other ..

and all the other ism's that motivate the base Globalism, communism, socialism

Simple things have a way of confusing you Wayne. You want to throw a blanket on things that have zero relevance to your point and give yourself a pat on the back. We are not all created equal unfortunately,and there are some nut jobs that need medical help they are not getting. They are our neighbors and sometimes friends who used to be alright, but something changes....if you judge these folks as your peers that does not surprise me at all. Not even sure what all those isms are.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Extra spoonful of stupid today? I want the Wall and have no idea how to pray. Is this really how snowflakes think? I just happen to think a wall would help prevent some illegals from obtaining unlawful entry into this country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Gun control works too. It helps save lives. See how your logic is flawed?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Gun control works too. It helps save lives. See how your logic is flawed?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Nebe, you’re talking about a guy who constantly has #^&#^&#^&#^& on his mind and loves to say the word snowflake. I mean I’m fine with it but...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thoughts and prayers. Thoughts and prayers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thoughts and prayers. Thoughts and prayers.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I’ll light a candle.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

is this simple enough for you Dangles it even has pictures

Witch Hunt🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

DC won’t need snow plows, the Oval Office melt down will take care of it, the twitter storm might be more severe today.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

is this simple enough for you Dangles it even has pictures

They are nice pictures but I still think a wall would help prevent ILLEGAL entry.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oklahoma, Columbine, Chardon school, Isla Vista, Charlestin church, Las Vegas, Sandy hook, Aurora theater, Austin, Parkland, Santa Fe school, Jacksonville gamer and so many other us born and raised murderers didn’t come from Mexico, yet collectively they represent more of a national emergency when it comes to violent crimes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does anyone disagree with you? Is anyone suggesting that the southern border is the only pressing issue?

I b et we can extend the barriers as Trump is proposing, AND have cops walking a beat in Chicago.

It's not one or the other.

Are you people for real? These are without a doubt, the stupidest, lamest, easiest-to-destroy, most thoughtless arguments I have ever heard on any topic, since i started paying attention to politics.

Extending existing barriers isn't perfect, some people will get through. It won't stop school shootings in New England, it won't stop gang violence in Chicago, it won't cure cancer or end poverty. It won't do any of those things.

Want to know what it will do? Look at what happened in San Diego, and Yuma Arizona, after barriers went up there.

Jim Acosta for Gods sake, spent 10 minutes at the border, and because he didn't see anything, means it's not a crisis? Do you know how stupid that is? It's as stupid as me saying, "I went to Chicago twice for work, I didn't get shot, didn't see anyone get shot, so the stories of violence are made up".

See how stupid that is?

Does anyone disagree with you? Is anyone suggesting that the southern border is the only pressing issue?

I b et we can extend the barriers as Trump is proposing, AND have cops walking a beat in Chicago.

It's not one or the other.

Are you people for real? These are without a doubt, the stupidest, lamest, easiest-to-destroy, most thoughtless arguments I have ever heard on any topic, since i started paying attention to politics.

Extending existing barriers isn't perfect, some people will get through. It won't stop school shootings in New England, it won't stop gang violence in Chicago, it won't cure cancer or end poverty. It won't do any of those things.

Want to know what it will do? Look at what happened in San Diego, and Yuma Arizona, after barriers went up there.

Jim Acosta for Gods sake, spent 10 minutes at the border, and because he didn't see anything, means it's not a crisis? Do you know how stupid that is? It's as stupid as me saying, "I went to Chicago twice for work, I didn't get shot, didn't see anyone get shot, so the stories of violence are made up".

See how stupid that is?

Glad to see you characterize it as the “issue” it is and not the national emergency the White House would like us to believe. I’d also suggest the reduced national security at our ports of entry due to disgruntled government workers is ironically happening over a shutdown over national security.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Glad to see you characterize it as the “issue” it is and not the national emergency the White House would like us to believe. I’d also suggest the reduced national security at our ports of entry due to disgruntled government workers is ironically happening over a shutdown over national security.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So his words are what matter, whether it's a serious problem, a crisis, or an emergency? Do you agree that at best, it's a serious problem? The dems sure thought so until January 2017...and who here, criticized them for saying it was a crisis?

GS, I'm responding to you, but I don't mean to single you out, as you are usually thoughtful and fair. But your side has really jumped the shark on this one, you're tripping all over yourselves for the sake of saying Trump is wrong. That's ALL this is. If Hilary had won and wanted the wall, we'd have the wall.

And the arguments the Trump haters are clinging to, are just beyond absurd.

The wall can''t guarantee that illegal immigration won't converge to zero

We have other problems in addition to immigration

Walls are immoral, but fences are swell

Walls don't work (this is so stupid and demonstrably false, there aren't words to describe it)

Not every single illegal comes through the southern border

it's too expensive

illegals contribute positively to our economy

not everyone who gets murdered, is killed by an illegal

trump doesn't really care about the women getting raped

These arguments would get any high school student, a richly deserved 'F' in debate class.

If we didn't know for a certainty how well barriers worked in San Diego and Arizona, MAYBE there'd be two sides to this. But we do, so there aren't.

How many border patrol agents have you seen on TV, who aren't saying the wall will help? The guy who ran the border patrol under Obama, who was fired by Trump and therefore has reason to hate Trump, says it will help and is needed.

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer know better? And what changed since 2013?

I’m not on a side as an independent and frankly what concerns me more than a real immigration problem I’ve acknowledged we have at the southern border, is the mounting evidence Trump may have had more than just a budding browmance with Putin. We are talking about a national security crisis at our border, when the farther we get into the mueller investigation and mounting evidence that not only did Russia influence the 2016 election, that the Trump family may have had reasons to possibly assist in those efforts. The wall is a distraction because the walls may be closing in on the Don’s family business.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

On one hand we have a problem with ILLEGAL entry and on the other hand we have speculation of Trump being directly involved with Russian collusion. We will see how real this Trump collusion turns out but my guess is this will be another nothing burger,similar to the Kavanaugh democratic debacle. Regardless,a wall would be an effective means of keeping ILLEAGALS out. Unfortunately half the nation would rather chase a ghost,similar to the previous distraction where the democrats threw a hissy fit and made up stories about a Supreme Court nominee. This is where we are as a nation politically.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I’m not on a side as an independent and frankly what concerns me more than a real immigration problem I’ve acknowledged we have at the southern border, is the mounting evidence Trump may have had more than just a budding browmance with Putin. We are talking about a national security crisis at our border, when the farther we get into the mueller investigation and mounting evidence that not only did Russia influence the 2016 election, that the Trump family may have had reasons to possibly assist in those efforts. The wall is a distraction because the walls may be closing in on the Don’s family business.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The wall may be an attempt to get Mueller off the front page. That doesn't mean it won't help innocent people. We can secure our borders, and investigate Trump. No need to do those things consecutively.

On one hand we have a problem with ILLEGAL entry and on the other hand we have speculation of Trump being directly involved with Russian collusion. We will see how real this Trump collusion turns out but my guess is this will be another nothing burger,similar to the Kavanaugh democratic debacle. Regardless,a wall would be an effective means of keeping ILLEAGALS out. Unfortunately half the nation would rather chase a ghost,similar to the previous distraction where the democrats threw a hissy fit and made up stories about a Supreme Court nominee. This is where we are as a nation politically.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump must be salivating at even the thought of being able to replace Ginsberg. I hope she lives to be 100, but I hope she retires tomorrow, so he can nominate Amy Barrett a devout Catholic, and we can all see, once and for all, how tolerant these liberals are and how much they sincerely advocate for women.

Trump must be salivating at even the thought of being able to replace Ginsberg. I hope she lives to be 100, but I hope she retires tomorrow, so he can nominate Amy Barrett a devout Catholic, and we can all see, once and for all, how tolerant these liberals are and how much they sincerely advocate for women.

Separation of church and state mean anything to you?
I doubt it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Separation of church and state mean anything to you?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It does. But unlike you, I know what it means. It means that there will be no official state religion. It does NOT mean that religiously-informed consciences, cannot influence public policy. It does NOT men, that religious people are required to leave their religion outside of public service.

Religiously-motivated people ended slavery and segregation.

So his words are what matter, whether it's a serious problem, a crisis, or an emergency? Do you agree that at best, it's a serious problem? The dems sure thought so until January 2017...and who here, criticized them for saying it was a crisis?

GS, I'm responding to you, but I don't mean to single you out, as you are usually thoughtful and fair. But your side has really jumped the shark on this one, you're tripping all over yourselves for the sake of saying Trump is wrong. That's ALL this is. If Hilary had won and wanted the wall, we'd have the wall.

And the arguments the Trump haters are clinging to, are just beyond absurd.

The wall can''t guarantee that illegal immigration won't converge to zero

We have other problems in addition to immigration

Walls are immoral, but fences are swell

Walls don't work (this is so stupid and demonstrably false, there aren't words to describe it)

Not every single illegal comes through the southern border

it's too expensive

illegals contribute positively to our economy

not everyone who gets murdered, is killed by an illegal

trump doesn't really care about the women getting raped

These arguments would get any high school student, a richly deserved 'F' in debate class.

If we didn't know for a certainty how well barriers worked in San Diego and Arizona, MAYBE there'd be two sides to this. But we do, so there aren't.

How many border patrol agents have you seen on TV, who aren't saying the wall will help? The guy who ran the border patrol under Obama, who was fired by Trump and therefore has reason to hate Trump, says it will help and is needed.

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer know better? And what changed since 2013?

and you still have yet to address why in 2 years and control of both houses no wall but as soon as dems take the house There is suddenly a crisis ...

All your effort has been to Support Trump by any lie or excuse necessary ... just like the russian thing I remember the outrage over the Jeremiah Wright controversy

But Putin and russia is all fake news LOL

I spent years on school boards, not nearly as complicated as Congress but we received each year budgets from administration that we reviewed, if something went up we asked for and got an explanation. Trump DHS budget prior to his added demands had gone up 7.3% from the previous year and I think then very late in the game he added more.
I attached the 2019 proposed budget from the Trump administration, I see 1.6 billion for new wall,
"• $1.6 billion for 65 miles of new border wall construction in the Rio Grande Valley Sector to deny access to drug trafficking organizations and illegal migration flows in high traffic
zones where apprehensions are the highest along the Southwest Border. "
How did it change and why?
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/DHS%20BIB%202019.pdf
I find little information on what Trump wants to do, but if this is close to correct it is embarrassing, 6.5M per new hire?
Does anyone honestly think that there will not be a significant loss of personnel with the shutdown to the affected government agencies?

Those eager to help President Trump spend $5 billion girding the southern frontier against largely imaginary threats, and perhaps shut down part of the government to do it, should consider the administration’s stewardship of border security funds so far.

Take, for example, its attempt to dramatically expand the Border Patrol, which has produced a spasm of spending to no apparent avail.

A border surge was such a priority for the president that he made it part of an executive order within a week of his inauguration. The same order that called for the construction of Trump’s oft-promised “big, beautiful” border wall — never mind that, two years later, he has yet to get Congress (or Mexico) to pay for it — also called for adding 5,000 agents to the Border Patrol, a roughly 25 percent increase. And yet a new internal investigation finds that the agency hasn’t begun to effect a hiring spree.

Last year, in a panicked response to Trump’s executive order, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agreed to pay the consulting firm Accenture nearly $300 million over five years to add 7,500 to the payrolls of the Border Patrol and two other agencies. Members of Congress and others soon raised concerns that have now been substantiated by the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general.


Calling for officials’ “immediate attention,” the inspector general’s report says that 10 months into the contract, the government had paid Accenture more than $13 million to complete a grand total of two hires. Moreover, according to the report, the agency was doing much of the work that the company had agreed to do. While Customs and Border Protection maintains that Accenture did put in place a “hiring structure” and lay other important groundwork for recruitment, the time allotted for the startup phase of the contract was only three months, later extended to six months.

The results, or lack thereof, reflect on the administration’s dubious goals as well as its incompetence in implementing them. Even at its current complement, Customs and Border Protection is the largest federal law enforcement agency, having more than doubled in size since 2000 at a time when illegal immigration from Mexico has generally ebbed. The agency also suffers from long-standing hiring and retention difficulties that have left it perpetually lagging the staffing level previously mandated by Congress, let alone exceeding it by 5,000.

Even without wasting another dime on Trump’s multibillion-dollar monument, the federal government has spent lavishly on border security with diminishing returns.

It’s all about the distraction his MO and keeping his base engaged, why more republicans have not abanded the sinking Trump Tower of BS is frankly disturbing and amazing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Phillip Rivers should take one out of Trumps playbook and refuse to take the field until the offensive line promises him a wall to throw behind🤣.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think Phillip Rivers should take one out of Trumps playbook and refuse to take the field until the offensive line promises him a wall to throw behind🤣.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Good one
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where Does Illegal Immigration Mostly Occur?

and the Source for this information Homeland Security


So I guess if you walk to the USA your not welcome if you can afford to fly here we assume your not getting a Government hand out ... so your lower on the list and less likely to be involved in the drug trade or a rapist or a criminal .. so please be patient will deport you once we get rid of those who Walked here 1st...

I really feel for the government workers who are getting a royal screwing over this political BS, but clearly Trump doesn't care. For him to stand there and suggest all these workers are in his corner is just another lie; big shocker there.

I really feel for the government workers who are getting a royal screwing over this political BS, but clearly Trump doesn't care. For him to stand there and suggest all these workers are in his corner is just another lie; big shocker there.

He thinks they’re all democratic’s any way

Trumps hurting Americans to help Americans. It’s the same with the farmers

And his supporters have framed everything in literal terms aka wall
Or collusion The details are of no concern
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and you still have yet to address why in 2 years and control of both houses no wall but as soon as dems take the house There is suddenly a crisis ...

All your effort has been to Support Trump by any lie or excuse necessary ... just like the russian thing I remember the outrage over the Jeremiah Wright controversy

But Putin and russia is all fake news LOL

"and you still have yet to address why in 2 years and control of both houses no wall "

I have said multiple times, that Trump and the GOP ,deserve a LOT of criticism for not doing a damn thing for two years. I don't know what else to say. I would happily endorse replacing these Republicans with ones who would have gotten that done. Many, many right-leaning voters are furious that they did nothing for two years. What else do you want me to say? It's not enough to make me switch parties, but it's enough for me to say they blew it and deserve to be replaced. Because they waited, innocent federal workers are getting hurt, and that's disgusting to me. Is that fair enough?

I answered that. Now perhaps YOU can show me the same courtesy, and tell us why all the democratic leaders were all for expanded barriers in 2006 and 2013, but no wall of a sudden, walls are immoral and don't work?

I haven't seen a single issue expose just how ineffective and ugly our political process has become. This is what happens when you vote for people based on how pretty and popular they are.

"All your effort has been to Support Trump by any lie or excuse "

You have serious, serious issues either with memory or comprehension, if you believe that.

" remember the outrage over the Jeremiah Wright controversy"

I was outraged over Obama's relationship with the deranged Wright. I didn't say Obama deserved to be impeached for it.

The Coast Guard is attempting to control the flow of boats, especially in areas in which illegal immigration is rampant, such as the waters next to San Diego and in parts of Florida. However, if one is truly concerned with security, especially with the inflow of terrorists, and you put such a high priority on a wall at our southern boarder and continued high security at legal ports of entry, think about how poorly our coasts are protected.

Trumps 2018 HSE budget was 44 Billion
Trumps proposed 2019 HSE budget was 47.5 Billion
What is his current HSE budget?

"and you still have yet to address why in 2 years and control of both houses no wall "



I answered that. Now perhaps YOU can show me the same courtesy, and tell us why all the democratic leaders were all for expanded barriers in 2006 and 2013, but no wall of a sudden, walls are immoral and don't work?

I


It’s very simple in 2016 and 2013 they were negotiations and agreements and in the end signed by the potus

this wall funding demanded from Trimp is solely based on losing the midterm ... and being scolded by Ann and rush And using the shut down as cover That is what separates them
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s very simple in 2016 and 2013 they were negotiations and agreements and in the end signed by the potus

this wall funding demanded from Trimp is solely based on losing the midterm ... and being scolded by Ann and rush And using the shut down as cover That is what separates them
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you dodged, and i mean comoletely. why are the same folks who said recently we need a wall to address the crisis, now saying we don’t? what changed? why were the dems in favor of the wall then, but not
now? Answer - Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where Does Illegal Immigration Mostly Occur?

and the Source for this information Homeland Security


So I guess if you walk to the USA your not welcome if you can afford to fly here we assume your not getting a Government hand out ... so your lower on the list and less likely to be involved in the drug trade or a rapist or a criminal .. so please be patient will deport you once we get rid of those who Walked here 1st...

Are you trying to say that we should not be trying to do everything we can to stop 304, 000 illegals from trying to cross the southern border because there are supposedly more coming from another direction?

And that 304,000 is APPREHENDED. That doesn't count those many thousands who were not apprehended. It is said that for every one who is apprehended, there is one who isn't.

A USA Today article (Alan Gomez, USA TODAY Published 11:31 a.m. ET May 22, 2017 | Updated 6:21 p.m. ET May 22, 2017) "People who overstay their visas make up an estimated 40% of the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the U.S. They are largely overshadowed by undocumented immigrants who cross the southwest border with Mexico."

Trump made an executive order to install a biometric system like one that had been suggested by the 9/11 commission, which Congress approved in 2004 and appropriated funds for it several times, but it was not put in place until Trump did the executive order.

Both problems need to be addressed. It's not one or the other. Trump has instituted a system that Congress approved but didn't make operative. For the southern border, he is trying to make happen that which Congress had previously approved but didn't completely follow through on.

What's your point?

The Coast Guard is attempting to control the flow of boats, especially in areas in which illegal immigration is rampant, such as the waters next to San Diego and in parts of Florida. However, if one is truly concerned with security, especially with the inflow of terrorists, and you put such a high priority on a wall at our southern boarder and continued high security at legal ports of entry, think about how poorly our coasts are protected.

If we can also do a better job of protecting the coasts, we should.

I saw a suggestion that the government sell Wall Bonds to fund the wall.
If all the people (42% of 250,000,000 eligible voters) who support building a wall bought a $50 bond it would come pretty close to the regime's current demands.

I saw a suggestion that the government sell Wall Bonds to fund the wall.
If all the people (42% of 250,000,000 eligible voters) who support building a wall bought a $50 bond it would come pretty close to the regime's current demands.

Since the wall will pay for itself, many times over, he could also easily offer a very preferential interest rate.

you dodged, and i mean comoletely. why are the same folks who said recently we need a wall to address the crisis, now saying we don’t? what changed? why were the dems in favor of the wall then, but not
now? Answer - Trump.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You just keep looking for another angle to support Trump . So you think there was a national emergency in 2013 and 2016

Yet it went away in 2017 and 2018 no crisis but flared up again after the mid terms ... most here have been very consistent on why we are against the wall .. trump and company change daily
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are you trying to say that we should not be trying to do everything we can to stop 304, 000 illegals from trying to cross the southern border because there are supposedly more coming from another direction?

And that 304,000 is APPREHENDED. That doesn't count those many thousands who were not apprehended. It is said that for every one who is apprehended, there is one who isn't.

A USA Today article (Alan Gomez, USA TODAY Published 11:31 a.m. ET May 22, 2017 | Updated 6:21 p.m. ET May 22, 2017) "People who overstay their visas make up an estimated 40% of the 11 million undocumented immigrants who live in the U.S. They are largely overshadowed by undocumented immigrants who cross the southwest border with Mexico."

Trump made an executive order to install a biometric system like one that had been suggested by the 9/11 commission, which Congress approved in 2004 and appropriated funds for it several times, but it was not put in place until Trump did the executive order.

Both problems need to be addressed. It's not one or the other. Trump has instituted a system that Congress approved but didn't make operative. For the southern border, he is trying to make happen that which Congress had previously approved but didn't completely follow through on.

What's your point?

Trumps more worried about those who get here via walking that’s all
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You just keep looking for another angle to support Trump . So you think there was a national emergency in 2013 and 2016

Yet it went away in 2017 and 2018 no crisis but flared up again after the mid terms ... most here have been very consistent on why we are against the wall .. trump and company change daily
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not sure how skilled
you are at reading...the problem/crisis whatever has been there a long time. the gop has two years to get it done and failed, and they all deserve heavy, heavy criticism.

i also think the dems who did a 180 on this issue on the day trump took the oath, also should get
pink slips.

i was honestly critical of
my side, because they deserve it. can you do the same?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trumps more worried about those who get here via walking that’s all
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know who he's more "worried" about. And I don't know why I should care which one he's more worried about. He's addressing both issues with whatever technology is available.

not sure how skilled
you are at reading...the problem/crisis whatever has been there a long time.

i also think the dems who did a 180 on this issue on the day trump took the oath, also should get
pink slips.

i was honestly critical of
my side, because they deserve it. can you do the same?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


the gop has two years to get it done and failed, and they all deserve heavy, heavy criticism.


But but its the Dems fault ok

I don't know who he's more "worried" about. And I don't know why I should care which one he's more worried about. He's addressing both issues with whatever technology is available.


Ok sure he is :btu:

the gop has two years to get it done and failed, and they all deserve heavy, heavy criticism.


But but its the Dems fault ok

I guess they were busy fixing 8 years of screwups

Illegal immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive especially social security, they can’t apply for Medicare or Medicaid or welfare or food stamps.

This isn’t fake blah, it’s well documented and the law.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

This isn’t true. If there’s a mismatch between an SSN and name the money is held by the government in an earnings suspense file account.

I believe the SS amount illegals pay is believed to be something like 5 or 6 billion a year.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


https://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/02/irs-defends-giving-refunds-illegal-immigrants?fbclid=IwAR1jMdpd6lkpUmgQhsclyOvOa8DTEQ VTKiPR9XbgSGit8r6u_8nTAylHGmE



In a letter to Congress, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen defended the decision to allow illegal immigrants to get refunds from the agency.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) went “On The Record” tonight to explain that illegal immigrants who get a social security number can go back and apply for a refund through the earned income tax credit. He said this is due to President Barack Obama’s executive order on illegal immigration, calling it unconstitutional and unfair.

“It’s unfair to taxpayers that noncitizen illegals are gonna get this bonus that […] their tax money’s gonna be used for,” he said, adding that this “points to the patent unfairness” of Obama’s action.



Yes, they are getting tax credits even if they did not pay any taxes to begin with!


sounds like the fox is watching the henhouse again, especially since the Republicans did not fix this


https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/04/13/irs-admits-it-encourages-illegals-to-steal-social-security-numbers-for-taxes/#6cb229004c04

how do they explain that?

The recipe goes like this. First, get a Social Security number, then claim the Earned Income Tax Credit for the last three years. Then, wait for the IRS to send you three years of tax refunds. The gambit could apparently work even if you never paid taxes, never filed a return, and worked off the books. And the IRS says this is the way the Earned Income Tax Credit works.

Cautious IRS Commissioner Koskinen himself explained the seemingly bizarre result to Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in 2015. Illegal immigrants covered by the President’s amnesty deal can claim back tax credits for work they performed illegally, even if they never filed a tax return during those years. This written response clarified the IRS chief’s earlier statements, confirming that illegals can get back taxes.

Ok sure he is :btu:

When words or evidence fails . . . resort to an emoticon.

The recipe goes like this. First, get a Social Security number, then claim the Earned Income Tax Credit for the last three years. Then, wait for the IRS to send you three years of tax refunds. The gambit could apparently work even if you never paid taxes, never filed a return, and worked off the books. And the IRS says this is the way the Earned Income Tax Credit works.

Cautious IRS Commissioner Koskinen himself explained the seemingly bizarre result to Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in 2015. Illegal immigrants covered by the President’s amnesty deal can claim back tax credits for work they performed illegally, even if they never filed a tax return during those years. This written response clarified the IRS chief’s earlier statements, confirming that illegals can get back taxes.
He clarified that they could possibly, about as good a chance as Trump being a Russian agent.
What Koskinen’s clarification stated was that immigrants eligible under the amnesty program to claim EITC could do so by filing retroactive tax returns (i.e., submitting returns for years in which they had previously not filed at all) in addition to amending previous years’ returns. But either way, claimants must still first file tax returns in order to be eligible for EITC, and they must show a documented history of earned income in order to qualify (“filers would have to reconstruct earnings and other records for years when they were not able to work on the books”). Thus, although amnestied immigrants are eligible to retroactively amend and file tax documents in order to claim earned tax credits, they may do so only within the same framework that applies to all other taxpaying Americans (no further back than three years), and no exceptional flexibility in that regard has been extended to them due to amnesty provisions introduced in November 2014.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He clarified that they could possibly, about as good a chance as Trump being a Russian agent.
What Koskinen’s clarification stated was that immigrants eligible under the amnesty program to claim EITC could do so by filing retroactive tax returns (i.e., submitting returns for years in which they had previously not filed at all) in addition to amending previous years’ returns. But either way, claimants must still first file tax returns in order to be eligible for EITC, and they must show a documented history of earned income in order to qualify (“filers would have to reconstruct earnings and other records for years when they were not able to work on the books”). Thus, although amnestied immigrants are eligible to retroactively amend and file tax documents in order to claim earned tax credits, they may do so only within the same framework that applies to all other taxpaying Americans (no further back than three years), and no exceptional flexibility in that regard has been extended to them due to amnesty provisions introduced in November 2014.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

no #^&#^&#^&#^&
what's your point? to clarify what he stated was correct ? or to insinuate that there is in fact a path BUT redtape process you have to file those pesky tax returns? Another words spence is wrong and I was right. thanks

no #^&#^&#^&#^&
what's your point? to clarify what he stated was correct ? or to insinuate that there is in fact a path BUT redtape process you have to file those pesky tax returns? Another words spence is wrong and I was right. thanks
No, illegals can’t get a SSN. They are still required to pay taxes which there is a provision for without one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

some people are obtuse


whether they can or cannot get a SSN is not the point at all
fact is they can go back and file 3 years taxes, get tax credit etc.
they steal them, sometimes within days of someone dying or whatever, however they get a number legal or not they get a number.
don't give me this bull that they pay more in taxes than they receive. You do not have any idea what they receive, you are just going along with your party that wants to stay in power even if they have to import votes. Sounds anti American to me.

try reading the article this time, especially last paragraph



This isn’t exactly the kind of story the IRS wants buzzing around at tax time. The IRS and Justice Department normally want 'scared straight' stories just before Tax Day. Ideally, when an indictment or conviction for tax evasion hits the news, it makes you think twice. Somehow, you think just a bit more about all those deductions, or if you really reported all your income, before you sign your return under penalties of perjury.

Instead, we have the top dog at the IRS, the IRS Commissioner himself, admitting that, well, there’s a problem with illegal immigrants and taxes. In fact, the top IRS official this time wasn’t talking about how the IRS wipes some hard drives or can’t find emails. He wasn’t even asking for a bigger budget to give bonuses to IRS employees.


This time, he was talking about illegal immigrants, and about the IRS turning a blind eye. Or maybe worse. The IRS actually wants illegal immigrants to illegally use Social Security numbers, he suggested.
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen made the surprising statement in response to a question from Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., at a Senate Finance Committee meeting. The question was a touchy one. Gee, is the IRS collaborating with taxpayers who file tax returns using fraudulent information? It wasn't put exactly that way. According to Senator Coats:



What we learned is that ... the IRS continues to process tax returns with false W-2 information and issue refunds as if they were routine tax returns, and say that's not really our job. We also learned the IRS ignores notifications from the Social Security Administration that a name does not match a Social Security number, and you use your own system to determine whether a number is valid."

Commissioner Koskinen was asked to explain this. He suggested that as long as the information is being used only to fraudulently obtain jobs, the IRS was OK with it. In fact, he said that the IRS actually had an interest in helping the illegal immigrants to crook these rules. In fairness, perhaps it's just the 'that's not my department' response that abounds in big government. Perhaps this just isn't the IRS's problem, but it sure seems odd to have any agency chief encouraging illegal immigrant theft of SSNs.



You'll love this next part. The IRS chief tried to distinguish between the various bad uses and misuses of someone else's personal data. It is at least vaguely reminiscent of the flap a year ago that differentiated President Obama and Donald Trump over immigration and taxes. Mr. Trump said illegal immigrants get $4.2 billion in tax credits. A 2011 audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration confirmed that individuals who are not authorized to work in the United States were paid $4.2 billion in refundable credits.

Of course, undocumented immigrants cannot legitimately get Social Security numbers, but it seems the IRS doesn't care. Besides, they can file taxes with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number. ITIN. They are not supposed to get the Earned Income Tax Credit, but they can receive the additional child tax credit. If the President succeeds in legitimizing the status of illegal immigrants, they could even get the Earned Income Tax Credit that is responsible for billions in fraudulent refunds.


there is more to the article but I already pasted a couple paragraphs

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2016/04/13/irs-admits-it-encourages-illegals-to-steal-social-security-numbers-for-taxes/#53a4b8454c04


it's all on the internet spence

Article published Apr 13, 2016, 03:10am
Is it still true today?

Article published Apr 13, 2016, 03:10am
Is it still true today?

yes, in 2011 an audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration confirmed that individuals who are not authorized to work in the United States were paid $4.2 billion in refundable credits. It is still true today
Yes