Trump addresses government shutdown and border security


"Some have suggested a barrier is immoral. Then why do wealthy politicians build walls, fences, and gates around their homes? They don't build walls because they hate the people on the outside, but because they love the people on the inside."

build wall :wall:

I think I need to actually post an article as well so here's some shit from WSJ
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-addresses-nation-on-border-wall-as-shutdown-drags-on-11546999648
WASHINGTON—President Trump in a prime-time address Tuesday said a wall along the southern border is key to national security, as he called for lawmakers to fund it and end a partial government shutdown that is days away from becoming the longest in U.S. history.

In the televised address from the Oval Office, Mr. Trump’s first in his nearly two years as president, he said a barrier is necessary to prevent the movement of illegal drugs across the U.S.-Mexico border, and he shared stories of human trafficking.

“This is a humanitarian crisis—a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul,” said Mr. Trump, sitting at the Resolute Desk. “This is the cycle of human suffering that I am determined to end.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic congressional leaders, issued an immediate televised response to the president, rejecting the idea of a wall as unnecessary.

“President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must reopen the government,” Mrs. Pelosi said.

Mr. Schumer said Democrats are united with the president on the need for stronger border security, but said: “We sharply disagree with the president about the most effective way to do it.”

Earlier Tuesday, Senate Democrats blocked the chamber from considering bipartisan foreign-policy legislation in a bid to pressure Republicans to end the government shutdown, which was in its 18th day. That move, combined with Mr. Trump’s address, suggested that neither side was prepared to cede ground over wall funding.

Mr. Trump and congressional leadership from both parties are scheduled to meet and discuss the issue Wednesday at the White House, after the president attends a lunch with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill.

Mr. Trump’s address was part of a ramped-up effort by the White House this week to sway public opinion in favor of a border wall, a core issue for Mr. Trump’s political base but one that is broadly unpopular. On Thursday, the Republican president is set to travel to the border to highlight the issue in person.

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in September, ahead of midterm elections, showed 29% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for a congressional candidate calling for a wall, while 55% said they would be less likely to do so.

In his address, Mr. Trump didn’t declare a national emergency over border security—a move he publicly contemplated in recent days—in which he would seek to divert funds from elsewhere in the government to fund the wall. Such a declaration would bring swift legal challenges, and it is unclear in that scenario where the funds would come from.

Instead, the speech was aimed at explaining the president’s rationale for why he viewed the U.S.-Mexico border as in a state of crisis.

Mr. Trump has said he wouldn’t sign any bill ending the shutdown that doesn’t allocate money for hundreds of miles of a border wall.

Earlier Tuesday evening, Senate Democrats prevented the chamber from moving to consider a package of bills aimed at boosting security assistance for Israel and other Middle Eastern policy provisions. Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate, where most bills need 60 votes to clear procedural hurdles.

Some Democrats have said they would block all legislation until the government is reopened, though Mr. Schumer hasn’t gone that far.

“The first business of the Senate should be to reopen the government,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.), noting that he had co-sponsored one of the bills related to Israel. “As passionate as I have been for the security of the nation of Israel, I’m every bit as passionate about the security of the United States.”

The president’s apparent backing off on declaring an emergency comes after lawmakers in both parties indicated they wouldn’t support such a move. Rep. Mac Thornberry of Texas, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said Tuesday that he opposes using an emergency declaration to build a wall using military funds.

President Trump and prominent Democrats met Friday to discuss ending the government shutdown, which the president had claimed responsibility to further the cause border security. The talks were described by the president as productive, but the Democrats disagreed. Photo: AP
“In short, I’m opposed to using defense dollars for nondefense purposes,” he said.

Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said in a Fox News interview Monday that the White House Counsel’s Office was exploring the legal implications of declaring a national emergency, but said doing so would “let Congress off the hook.”

In preparation for Tuesday’s speech, White House officials were underscoring the importance of internally fact-checking any numbers and statistics, after the president and his aides have repeatedly mischaracterized immigration-related figures in recent weeks. “It’s really important we get this right,” one senior White House official said.

The president has made points about problems with drugs and human trafficking at the border publicly in the past week. Last week, he told cabinet members that 300 people in the U.S. die each day from overdoses of heroin, “the vast majority of which comes across through our southern border.” The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the epidemic of daily opioid deaths is 130.

Mr. Trump also has said 20,000 children were smuggled into the U.S. last month. There were 25,000 families apprehended at the border in November, according to the most recent data available from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

During closed-door negotiations on reopening the government, Mrs. Pelosi has disputed some White House aides’ statistics about the border. On Sunday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was challenged on Fox News for saying 4,000 known or suspected terrorists have been apprehended coming into the country.

“Do you know where those 4,000 people come, where they are captured?” Chris Wallace, the host of “Fox News Sunday,” told Ms. Sanders. “Airports … the State Department says there hasn’t been any terrorists found coming across the southern border.” Mr. Wallace was referring to data from the Department of Homeland Security.

Ms. Conway, in the Fox News interview, said that statistic “got unfortunately conflated by a colleague” and acknowledged that the nearly 4,000 terrorists or terror suspects apprehended in fiscal year 2017 hadn’t sought to enter the U.S. through the southern border.

The administration has sought in recent days to blunt the impact of the shutdown, buying time as negotiations with Congress continue. On Monday, the Trump administration said the Internal Revenue Service would pay tax refunds even though the agency is closed, reversing a longstanding policy.

About 420,000 employees deemed essential are working without pay, while another 380,000 federal employees have been placed on unpaid leave. The shutdown became the second-longest on record Monday. By Saturday, if the government hasn’t reopened, the shutdown will become the longest in U.S. history.
 
Última edición:
The wall is just only one piece of real immigration reform that is needed. Mandatory E-Verify, tracking people who overstay their visas, fining businesses who hire illegals, ending birthright citizenship, etc. are all actions that need to be done. The RAISE Act is to address these and more. To simply make it an all or nothing issue is pretty retarded.

The Democrats only want to shoot it down because they want to deny Trump his campaign promise and a wall means limiting future Democrat votes as they’ve put all their eggs in the demographic change basket.
 
ITT: I'd provide a summary but I can't see anything past all the people jerking each other off
Lol @ you if you thought this thread wasn’t going to be one big circle of people huffing each other’s farts.

*edit* I mean just look at all these salty af dumb ratings. Point proven.
 
Última edición:
Another big issue seems to be INS. Decades ago, you'd have them going door to door at various businesses doing a check to see whether or not places are utilizing illegals(all of them, not just mexicans). Now an illegal can simply waltz into an INS building with food they ordered and not have to worry about getting deported.

As mentioned by a few people, while a wall would serve as a way of halting the flow, it's a matter of overhauling the entire infrastructure that deals with illegals.
 
Another big issue seems to be INS. Decades ago, you'd have them going door to door at various businesses doing a check to see whether or not places are utilizing illegals(all of them, not just mexicans). Now an illegal can simply waltz into an INS building with food they ordered and not have to worry about getting deported.

As mentioned by a few people, while a wall would serve as a way of halting the flow, it's a matter of overhauling the entire infrastructure that deals with illegals.

I agree. After the wall is built and the caravan flow stopped resources need to be poured into ICE so they can start yanking these invaders off our streets.
 
Fine businesses that hire illegals at $1,000 per illegal. Then have it directly fund more immigration controls. When the number starts dropping, that works because then you no longer need to hire and retain as many ICE agents.
 
Seriously though, why is the idea of a wall so horrible to people? This government wastes so much more cash on things we don't even know about nor want. Now that a project comes along that costs the government relatively little to pay for and that a lot of people have been clamoring for, that's where people draw the line? Is it because it's perpetuating the current shutdown? I doubt that because people have been against the wall even before that.

The reasons I've seen:

1. Waste of money.

As said before, this is one of those rare times the US Government wants to spend tax dollars on something a lot of Americans actually want. That in itself sounds like a small miracle. We waste so much money on absolute bullshit, yet we don't see anybody willing to shut the budget down on any of that shit.

2. It won't stop illegal immigration completely.

I agree with this, but I never saw the wall as an all or nothing solution. If you did, you're retarded. It should go in tandem with enforcing existing law and going after companies that insist on hiring illegals. There are examples of walls working, please prove it that a border wall will not cut down on crossings at all.

Please offer me some more points from the anti wall side. I'm sure I've missed a couple, but these are the ones I see repeated ENDLESSLY, and they honestly seem disingenuous.
 
If the wall was so shitty an idea the dems would put it up so they can laugh at how ineffective it is and run on it in 2020.
This. It's a win-win situation for the democrats in a way.
- The wall succeeds: American are safer and have to spend less tax. Sure the republicans will gloat for a while but it'll die down eventually.
- The wall fails: Now there's an eternal monument of Trump's failure to laugh at.
 
I think the hypocrisy comes into play with Trump dehumanizing a country and its voter base agreeing and supplementing it with bigotry and etho centrism, it practically becomes as disturbing as black people demonizing white people. I can't speak for Schumer, but show me footage of Obama's stance on immigration and compare it with Trump. Is the problem that immigration wasn't solved or handled properly for decades or "feelings weren't hurt"?

How the fuck do you "dehumaniz[e] a country"? That is just meaningless, emotive language.
 
Seriously though, why is the idea of a wall so horrible to people? This government wastes so much more cash on things we don't even know about nor want. Now that a project comes along that costs the government relatively little to pay for and that a lot of people have been clamoring for, that's where people draw the line? Is it because it's perpetuating the current shutdown? I doubt that because people have been against the wall even before that.

The reasons I've seen:

1. Waste of money.

As said before, this is one of those rare times the US Government wants to spend tax dollars on something a lot of Americans actually want. That in itself sounds like a small miracle. We waste so much money on absolute bullshit, yet we don't see anybody willing to shut the budget down on any of that shit.

2. It won't stop illegal immigration completely.

I agree with this, but I never saw the wall as an all or nothing solution. If you did, you're exceptional. It should go in tandem with enforcing existing law and going after companies that insist on hiring illegals. There are examples of walls working, please prove it that a border wall will not cut down on crossings at all.

Please offer me some more points from the anti wall side. I'm sure I've missed a couple, but these are the ones I see repeated ENDLESSLY, and they honestly seem disingenuous.
Those are just the “logical” reasons they trot out and tbqh they’re just bullshit reasons they don’t care about.

The real reason is they feel bad for all those poor migrants and think the US has enough resources to take them in. Also, that the US is the cause of their misery and has an obligation to bring them here. This is the primary reason but it doesn’t work on anyone with common sense so they resort to the other two that you listed.

Again, Trump was 100% right when he said “we love the people on the inside more”. It’s about protecting those here and no country will survive with open borders and a loose immigration law.

Also, liberals often argue that the government is large enough to handle multiple issues at once and while we all agree the wall isn’t the only issue they’re not offering to fix anything else. Pelosi’s “tech improvements” were fucking stupid and pandering to her San Francisco elite/tech company masters.
 
How the fuck do you "dehumaniz[e] a country"? That is just meaningless, emotive language.
Let me rephrase that, making crude, derogatory comments while holding a position of power. And I'm certain you wouldn't like it if somebody makes derogatory comments about Jews, whites or whoever based on stereotyping. I don't exactly like it when it's the other way around, especially when these are adults in power making demeaning statements (you're welcome to link Democrats and Republicans making crude statements, acting like children.) It's ridiculous.
 
Seriously though, why is the idea of a wall so horrible to people? This government wastes so much more cash on things we don't even know about nor want. Now that a project comes along that costs the government relatively little to pay for and that a lot of people have been clamoring for, that's where people draw the line? Is it because it's perpetuating the current shutdown? I doubt that because people have been against the wall even before that.

The reasons I've seen:

1. Waste of money.

As said before, this is one of those rare times the US Government wants to spend tax dollars on something a lot of Americans actually want. That in itself sounds like a small miracle. We waste so much money on absolute bullshit, yet we don't see anybody willing to shut the budget down on any of that shit.

2. It won't stop illegal immigration completely.

I agree with this, but I never saw the wall as an all or nothing solution. If you did, you're exceptional. It should go in tandem with enforcing existing law and going after companies that insist on hiring illegals. There are examples of walls working, please prove it that a border wall will not cut down on crossings at all.

Please offer me some more points from the anti wall side. I'm sure I've missed a couple, but these are the ones I see repeated ENDLESSLY, and they honestly seem disingenuous.
it's a way for government employees to, as usual, get out of doing work. if they build the wall, there goes any enforcement of any other immigration policy. who needs to make sure no one's overstaying their visa or committing green card fraud when you have a W A L L?
 
why would trump lie about mexico buying the wall?
Because he is a populist who said whatever random shit he thought the people in front of him would like to hear.

I'm happy to be surprised that he apparently did have some ideas and plans, but you wouldn't know that looking at his campaign. However, if that did influence a person's decision to vote for him, I guess they should be annoyed about it.
 
Let me rephrase that, making crude, derogatory comments while holding a position of power. And I'm certain you wouldn't like it if somebody makes derogatory comments about Jews, whites or whoever based on stereotyping. I don't exactly like it when it's the other way around, especially when these are adults in power making demeaning statements (you're welcome to link Democrats and Republicans making crude statements, acting like children.) It's ridiculous.

Nice little add in about being in a position of power. It provides cover to you should you do the same thing. Regardless. I haven't seen a single line that Trump has said where he "dehumanizes" Mexicans. Interpreting what he says in the most uncharitable and intellectually dishonest light is disingenouous. You have a solution in search of a problem, I think. He never said, for instance, that all Mexicans are rapists. However, that is a common enough theme from feminists and their leftist ilk regarding men.

FWIW. I'm Canadian, and Americans make derogatory comments about us constantly. Hell, we do it ourselves. We find it hilarious. Is that because we are in a position of power, unlike those poow widdle Mexicans? Silly bigot.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo