Trump tweeted he will "Address the Nation

[wdmso]

Trump tweeted he will "Address the Nation on the Humanitarian and National Security crisis on our Southern Border" on Tuesday night. It will be his first Oval Office address as president.


I can't wait

[Jim in CT]

If he would just stick to facts and common sense, he'd win the debate. This is not a debate that a fair minded, articulate person can lose.

1,000 - 3,000 people a day cross the border illegally. These people are uninvited and un-vetted, it's in our interests to reduce this number any way we reasonably can. A wall will not ever reduce that number to zero, but it will reduce the number, anybody who says otherwise is mistaken or a liar.

64% of illegals receive some kind of welfare; there's a huge economic benefit to preventing them from coming here

the small percentage of illegals who will continue to commit certain crimes here are, for some Godforsaken reason, protected from deportation by sanctuary cities and states, meaning illegals who intend to commit crime will seek out these places, meaning citizens who live there are more at risk. If you don't believe that, he can show the gravestone of the CA cop, a legal immigrant, murdered by an illegal with two DUI convictions, who local cops were prohibited of notifying ICE about, because of sanctuary laws. That's the downside of sanctuary laws, we need to see that before we decide that sanctuary policy is good.

Choosing not to crack down on illegals is a slap in the face to people all over the world who are waiting in miserable places to come here legally.

Not that long ago, many of the most vocal opponents to Trump's wall, voted for a bill that included funding for a wall. So it would seem that their current opposition isn't principled, but rather political.

We all close our doors at night, in the hopes of keeping people out who we don't want in. Prisons have walls as part of their security. Barriers work. They aren't perfect, they won't guarantee that we'll all live forever. But they work.

Finally, he should commit on national television, that he is willing to give the democrats what they want on DACA, if they fund his wall. That he'll promise to sign such a compromise, and all they need to do, is agree to something they previously agreed to. That's putting your adversaries in a no-win situation.

That's how he'd win this. Chances are, what he'll actually do, is something very different, and a lot uglier.

[Pete F.]

Hopefully Trump will explain what his plan is.
List the problems he believes exist with the southern border, immigration, refugees or other and quantify them with numbers drawn from multiple sources.
Show the causes of the problems and identify the root cause(s).
Explain his proposed multifaceted solution and why he thinks it will solve the problems.
But I doubt it.

[Sea Dangles]

Well, now that Pete has drawn up his list of demands I am sure the Donald will be sure to comply.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Well just claiming we need a (insert descriptive phrase of the moment) wall hasn't worked so far.
Last February, the Senate voted on four immigration packages, including one that reflected Trump’s wish list, complete with $25 billion for his wall.

Guess which one got the fewest votes, with numerous Republicans voting against it?

[Nebe]

After the GOP has taken the country hostage they now air a list of demands on national TV
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Cool Beans]

I have a feeling once he goes over the data on drug trafficking, human trafficking, gang activity and how dangerous it is for refugees to attempt border crossings in desolate and dangerous areas and with a wall most of the refugees would go through proper channels that could provide medical and other assistance to enter legally. At the end of his speech I have a sneaky feeling that he will end it with

"And because of these immediate threats and inability to act through congress in a timely manner, I am declaring a National Emergency to build the wall."

[spence]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

I have a feeling once he goes over the data on drug trafficking, human trafficking, gang activity and how dangerous it is for refugees to attempt border crossings in desolate and dangerous areas and with a wall most of the refugees would go through proper channels that could provide medical and other assistance to enter legally.

They’ve been trying to socialize data for weeks and getting hammered for it because they’re blatantly lying about the risks.

Declaring a national emergency when there is no crisis (other than the humanitarian one Trump has largely created) is pretty abhorrent when you think about it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Why is the president giving this address now? Immigration was Trump’s signature issue during the campaign, so why did he not try to make this case in his first year or two as president?
This address seems to be a tell that Republicans are getting squeamish about the political consequences of the current impasse.
If Trump is really prepared to announce an emergency order to build the wall, I assume he will sign bills to reopen the government. If the White House has any hope of selling the border situation as a true crisis requiring an immediate emergency response, it’s hard to argue that it’s a true emergency but also not serious enough to need a federal government (including the Department of Homeland Security!) that’s operating at full strength.
What he hasn’t done, other than insist on the wall as a deterrent, is sell Americans on a plan to address the root causes or even identified them, behind why many migrants undertake a dangerous and uncertain journey in the first place.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

I have a feeling once he goes over the data on drug trafficking, human trafficking, gang activity and how dangerous it is for refugees to attempt border crossings in desolate and dangerous areas and with a wall most of the refugees would go through proper channels that could provide medical and other assistance to enter legally. At the end of his speech I have a sneaky feeling that he will end it with

"And because of these immediate threats and inability to act through congress in a timely manner, I am declaring a National Emergency to build the wall."

I think you are spot on.

Wouldn’t one think that our crumbling infrastructure is more important to fund than an archaic wall??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I think you are spot on.

Wouldn’t one think that our crumbling infrastructure is more important to fund than an archaic wall??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When has Congress effectively done anything about either? And why couldn't they do both?

Probably because like most issues, they can be used to beat up on the other side.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Nebe

I think you are spot on.

Wouldn’t one think that our crumbling infrastructure is more important to fund than an archaic wall??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That would fall under "Promises Made, Promises Forgotten"
His neo-liberal approach of getting private funding to it never flew.
and it never caught on as a rally chant, no rhyme to it, "Infrastructure" will never be as good as "build a wall" or "lock them up", just too many syllables.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by detbuch

When has Congress effectively done anything about either? And why couldn't they do both?

Probably because like most issues, they can be used to beat up on the other side.

Thanks Obama

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sour...47051914722608
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

When has Congress effectively done anything about either? And why couldn't they do both?

Probably because like most issues, they can be used to beat up on the other side.

Because that would mean tax increases, lean government and maybe those elected politicians might have to give up all the pay raises, pensions and great health insurance. Gee I don’t know, maybe all those immigrants looking for a better life might love a job rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, but I guess they would have to give up the murders, gang meetings, rapes and illegal activities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Because that would mean tax increases, lean government and maybe those elected politicians might have to give up all the pay raises, pensions and great health insurance. Gee I don’t know, maybe all those immigrants looking for a better life might love a job rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, but I guess they would have to give up the murders, gang meetings, rapes and illegal activities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don’t you love the catch 22 argument about illegals? They are too lazy to work and will be a drain on our welfare system and yet magically they are going to steal our jobs.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Thanks Obama

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sour...47051914722608
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So Obama fixed it. $305 billion. Of course, $5 billion for a wall cannot also be done. So it has been fixed. Why cannot the wall be paid for since infrastructure is fixed. So what happened to the fix? How come we have to keep fixing it? Trump has proposed more money than Obama to fix what Obama already fixed. Why has this been a problem for years before Obama and still is? Hundreds of billions and we still need to fix it. Does the money really go into fixing it. Obama's $787 billion stimulus money, much of which was supposed to be spent on infrastructure, didn't stimulate and didn't meaningfully get spent on infrastructure. So he later had to propose more hundreds of billions on infrastructure, but the infrastructure still hasn't been fixed and we must spend hundreds of billions more. Will that finally, if the money is actually spent on infrastructure, fix it? And is it possible, between all of those hundreds of billions going into trillions, as well as the constant billions of pork spent on things we don't even know about, is it possible that $5 billion can be scrounged up for the wall?

I guess it's too much money and we just can't afford it.

[Pete F.]

Here's the last speech a President gave on the immigration issue, tonight we'll see what the new approach is.


My fellow Americans, tonight, I’d like to talk with you about immigration.

For more than 200 years, our tradition of welcoming immigrants from around the world has given us a tremendous advantage over other nations. It’s kept us youthful, dynamic, and entrepreneurial. It has shaped our character as a people with limitless possibilities – people not trapped by our past, but able to remake ourselves as we choose.

But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it.

Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them far less. All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America. And undocumented immigrants who desperately want to embrace those responsibilities see little option but to remain in the shadows, or risk their families being torn apart.

It’s been this way for decades. And for decades, we haven’t done much about it.

When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders. Today, we have more agents and technology deployed to secure our southern border than at any time in our history. And over the past six years, illegal border crossings have been cut by more than half. Although this summer, there was a brief spike in unaccompanied children being apprehended at our border, the number of such children is now actually lower than it’s been in nearly two years. Overall, the number of people trying to cross our border illegally is at its lowest level since the 1970s. Those are the facts.

Meanwhile, I worked with Congress on a comprehensive fix, and last year, 68 Democrats, Republicans, and Independents came together to pass a bipartisan bill in the Senate. It wasn’t perfect. It was a compromise, but it reflected common sense. It would have doubled the number of border patrol agents, while giving undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship if they paid a fine, started paying their taxes, and went to the back of the line. And independent experts said that it would help grow our economy and shrink our deficits.

Had the House of Representatives allowed that kind of a bill a simple yes-or-no vote, it would have passed with support from both parties, and today it would be the law. But for a year and a half now, Republican leaders in the House have refused to allow that simple vote.

Now, I continue to believe that the best way to solve this problem is by working together to pass that kind of common sense law. But until that happens, there are actions I have the legal authority to take as President – the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican Presidents before me – that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.

Tonight, I am announcing those actions.

First, we’ll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.

Second, I will make it easier and faster for high-skilled immigrants, graduates, and entrepreneurs to stay and contribute to our economy, as so many business leaders have proposed.

Third, we’ll take steps to deal responsibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants who already live in our country.

I want to say more about this third issue, because it generates the most passion and controversy. Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable – especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mother who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day.

But even as we focus on deporting criminals, the fact is, millions of immigrants – in every state, of every race and nationality – will still live here illegally. And let’s be honest – tracking down, rounding up, and deporting millions of people isn’t realistic. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn’t being straight with you. It’s also not who we are as Americans. After all, most of these immigrants have been here a long time. They work hard, often in tough, low-paying jobs. They support their families. They worship at our churches. Many of their kids are American-born or spent most of their lives here, and their hopes, dreams, and patriotism are just like ours.

As my predecessor, President Bush, once put it: “They are a part of American life.”

Now here’s the thing: we expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes – you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law.

That’s what this deal is. Now let’s be clear about what it isn’t. This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently. It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive – only Congress can do that. All we’re saying is we’re not going to deport you.

I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it’s not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today – millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules, while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time.

That’s the real amnesty – leaving this broken system the way it is. Mass amnesty would be unfair. Mass deportation would be both impossible and contrary to our character. What I’m describing is accountability – a commonsense, middle ground approach: If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up.

The actions I’m taking are not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican President and every single Democratic President for the past half century. And to those Members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill. I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution. And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary. Meanwhile, don’t let a disagreement over a single issue be a dealbreaker on every issue. That’s not how our democracy works, and Congress certainly shouldn’t shut down our government again just because we disagree on this. Americans are tired of gridlock. What our country needs from us right now is a common purpose – a higher purpose.

Most Americans support the types of reforms I’ve talked about tonight. But I understand the disagreements held by many of you at home. Millions of us, myself included, go back generations in this country, with ancestors who put in the painstaking work to become citizens. So we don’t like the notion that anyone might get a free pass to American citizenship. I know that some worry immigration will change the very fabric of who we are, or take our jobs, or stick it to middle-class families at a time when they already feel like they’ve gotten the raw end of the deal for over a decade. I hear these concerns. But that’s not what these steps would do. Our history and the facts show that immigrants are a net plus for our economy and our society. And I believe it’s important that all of us have this debate without impugning each other’s character.

Because for all the back-and-forth of Washington, we have to remember that this debate is about something bigger. It’s about who we are as a country, and who we want to be for future generations.

Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law? Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?

Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms? Or are we a nation that values families, and works to keep them together?

Are we a nation that educates the world’s best and brightest in our universities, only to send them home to create businesses in countries that compete against us? Or are we a nation that encourages them to stay and create jobs, businesses, and industries right here in America?

That’s what this debate is all about. We need more than politics as usual when it comes to immigration; we need reasoned, thoughtful, compassionate debate that focuses on our hopes, not our fears.

I know the politics of this issue are tough. But let me tell you why I have come to feel so strongly about it. Over the past few years, I have seen the determination of immigrant fathers who worked two or three jobs, without taking a dime from the government, and at risk at any moment of losing it all, just to build a better life for their kids. I’ve seen the heartbreak and anxiety of children whose mothers might be taken away from them just because they didn’t have the right papers. I’ve seen the courage of students who, except for the circumstances of their birth, are as American as Malia or Sasha; students who bravely come out as undocumented in hopes they could make a difference in a country they love. These people – our neighbors, our classmates, our friends – they did not come here in search of a free ride or an easy life. They came to work, and study, and serve in our military, and above all, contribute to America’s success.

Tomorrow, I’ll travel to Las Vegas and meet with some of these students, including a young woman named Astrid Silva. Astrid was brought to America when she was four years old. Her only possessions were a cross, her doll, and the frilly dress she had on. When she started school, she didn’t speak any English. She caught up to the other kids by reading newspapers and watching PBS, and became a good student. Her father worked in landscaping. Her mother cleaned other people’s homes. They wouldn’t let Astrid apply to a technology magnet school for fear the paperwork would out her as an undocumented immigrant – so she applied behind their back and got in. Still, she mostly lived in the shadows – until her grandmother, who visited every year from Mexico, passed away, and she couldn’t travel to the funeral without risk of being found out and deported. It was around that time she decided to begin advocating for herself and others like her, and today, Astrid Silva is a college student working on her third degree.

Are we a nation that kicks out a striving, hopeful immigrant like Astrid – or are we a nation that finds a way to welcome her in?

Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger – we were strangers once, too.

My fellow Americans, we are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too. And whether our forebears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here only because this country welcomed them in, and taught them that to be an American is about something more than what we look like, or what our last names are, or how we worship. What makes us Americans is our shared commitment to an ideal – that all of us are created equal, and all of us have the chance to make of our lives what we will.

That’s the country our parents and grandparents and generations before them built for us. That’s the tradition we must uphold. That’s the legacy we must leave for those who are yet to come.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless this country we love

[Cool Beans]

The National Emergency does not have to concern illegals at all. The amount of drugs that crosses our borders illegally and the number of deaths it causes, is more than enough for him to declare it an emergency.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

The National Emergency does not have to concern illegals at all. The amount of drugs that crosses our borders illegally and the number of deaths it causes, is more than enough for him to declare it an emergency.

That's the big propaganda message, when in fact most drugs are coming in through ports of entry, not in backpacks by illegals crossing our southern border. I have no doubt that is the big message coming tonight, that somehow if we build a wall our drug problem is somehow dramatically less, what a crock. His understanding of the drug problem is as sharp as his knowledge of history.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Because that would mean tax increases, lean government and maybe those elected politicians might have to give up all the pay raises, pensions and great health insurance. Gee I don’t know, maybe all those immigrants looking for a better life might love a job rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, but I guess they would have to give up the murders, gang meetings, rapes and illegal activities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well if those "immigrants" come here legally, and if we processed all those from other places, not just those from south of the border, more speedily rather than making them wait several years, or never, to immigrate here, we could rationally solve any supposed need for qualified workers.

What sounds to me like an empty phrase which has supposedly been passed a few times before but has never materialized into an actually functioning policy, we keep hearing about "comprehensive immigration reform." We must somehow scrap the past immigration policy of accepting immigrants on a need basis, and orderly entering them at ports of entry, with proper health screening and vetting, and in numbers that can easily be assimilated. And we must, for some reason (political?) create some vague "comprehensive" system that depends on technological devices but not actually use physical barriers that help to physically force or steer entry to legal ports of entry.

What is there so special about those millions south of the border that they require some new "comprehensive reform" to be given entry to the country and a special "path to citizenship"? How is it that they are privileged above the qualified emigres from the rest of the world who are just as deserving and usually more qualified and a better fit than random droves of multi-thousand member caravans or than coyote herded and paid for illegals?

It does not seem rational to me that we just let in millions without vetting from one area who come in uninvited and illegal crossings, many of whom will not work to rebuild infrastructure or in other way, but who will suck more from the economy that contribute to it.

[Cool Beans]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

That's the big propaganda message, when in fact most drugs are coming in through ports of entry, not in backpacks by illegals crossing our southern border. I have no doubt that is the big message coming tonight, that somehow if we build a wall our drug problem is somehow dramatically less, what a crock. His understanding of the drug problem is as sharp as his knowledge of history.

Well, I have completed 3 (6 month) counter narcotics deployments along both sides of South America and there is an enormous amount of cocaine that crosses our southern border. We can pursue and hopefully intercept the drug boats, before they reach Mexican national waters, where we are called off to "allow" Mexico's navy to apprehend them. We could see the boat reach Mexico's shore, while the Mexican navy ship watches them and then about an hour or so later, the navy ship actually dispatches their small boat to "arrest" the smugglers, who are long gone before they reach them.

In one deployment we captured over 12.5 tons of cocaine in a single bust on a "fishing vessel". During the typical 6 month tour a US navy ship (with a small Coast Guard Detachment onboard) will bring in anywhere from 400 to 800 bales of paste cocaine (20 kilo bales). We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it.

Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules.

When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders.

First, we’ll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.

And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mother who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day.

Now here’s the thing: we expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded.

....pass a criminal background check,

If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up.

you should forward these pearls of wisdom over to the Sanctuary cities, this sounds like pretty sound advice.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

you should forward these pearls of wisdom over to the Sanctuary cities, this sounds like pretty sound advice.

Spoken by Obama in 2014
We will see how Trump’s compares
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Spoken by Obama in 2014
We will see how Trump’s compares
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I doubt he will be so eloquent.

and I got that part about BO

[detbuch]

So Obama said:
"But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it.

Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules.

When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders.

First, we’ll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.

And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mother who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day.

Now here’s the thing: we expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded.

....pass a criminal background check,

If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

Trump seems to have the same view as Obama, except that he wants to make it more difficult for millions to do what Obama claims is the wrong way--the wrong way being entering illegally whether your a criminal or just good folks looking for a better life. And Obama's less restrictive method actually makes it easier for millions, most of who are just those looking for a better life, to do what is wrong. Thus making it more difficult, and infinitely more tedious, to prevent or redress the improper entries.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

Well, I have completed 3 (6 month) counter narcotics deployments along both sides of South America and there is an enormous amount of cocaine that crosses our southern border. We can pursue and hopefully intercept the drug boats, before they reach Mexican national waters, where we are called off to "allow" Mexico's navy to apprehend them. We could see the boat reach Mexico's shore, while the Mexican navy ship watches them and then about an hour or so later, the navy ship actually dispatches their small boat to "arrest" the smugglers, who are long gone before they reach them.

In one deployment we captured over 12.5 tons of cocaine in a single bust on a "fishing vessel". During the typical 6 month tour a US navy ship (with a small Coast Guard Detachment onboard) will bring in anywhere from 400 to 800 bales of paste cocaine (20 kilo bales). We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering.

That doesn't invalidate his point though, that smuggling drugs across unsecured areas of the Mexican border isn't the primary entry point. A wall isn't going to do much to prevent drug deaths in the US.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

That doesn't invalidate his point though, that smuggling drugs across unsecured areas of the Mexican border isn't the primary entry point. A wall isn't going to do much to prevent drug deaths in the US.

If Cool Beans actually is officially involved in counter narcotics and he says " We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering" I think there is more credibility to his assertion than yours.

And how do you get from drugs crossing unsecured areas of the border not being the primary entry point to assuming that not much drugs cross those unsecured points? If there are mega tons of drugs entering the US from south of the border, why does that fact that not all come at a supposed "primary" entry point mean that a great deal do not come across at non-primary points?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If Cool Beans actually is officially involved in counter narcotics and he says " We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering" I think there is more credibility to his assertion than yours.

And how do you get from drugs crossing unsecured areas of the border not being the primary entry point to assuming that not much drugs cross those unsecured points? If there are mega tons of drugs entering the US from south of the border, why does that fact that not all come at a supposed "primary" entry point mean that a great deal do not come across at non-primary points?

Perhaps because the DEA has said so
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/08/wi...rug-smuggling/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Perhaps because the DEA has said so
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/08/wi...rug-smuggling/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"beginning with the simple fact that much of the drug trade comes through legal ports of entry." doesn't mean that much doesn't. The Fact Check (has it looked into other viewpoints or just those that minimize drug entry across non official border entry points?) article is loaded with undefinitive assertions qualified by words such as "unlikely, much, cannot predict, we believe, mostly or most, common way, skeptical . . ."

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

"beginning with the simple fact that much of the drug trade comes through legal ports of entry." doesn't mean that much doesn't. The Fact Check (has it looked into other viewpoints or just those that minimize drug entry across non official border entry points?) article is loaded with undefinitive assertions qualified by words such as "unlikely, much, cannot predict, we believe, mostly or most, common way, skeptical . . ."

National Drug Threat Assessment Summary, October 2015: Mexican TCOs transport the bulk of their drugs over the Southwest Border through ports of entry (POEs) using passenger vehicles or tractor trailers.