Political Wrinkles

Political Wrinkles (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/)
-   News & Current Events (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/news-current-events/)
-   -   Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever (http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/news-current-events/56859-partial-us-government-shutdown-tied-longest-ever.html)

GetAClue 01-15-2019 11:47 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD (Post 959115)
Should the Congress back Trump's $70 billion "wall" with an initial down payment of $5.7 billion for 2019 or should Congress take the time to study the most cost effective means of providing border security and provide funding for that?

How much time does Congress need? We've had this problem for well over 30 years. The promised Reagan to support border security in exchange for amnesty for 3 million illegals over 30 years ago, but reneged on the promise then. How much more time do they need?

Face it, that is just another way to say "We're not really interested in securing our border, we'll just continue to give lip service to it."

Hairy Jello 01-15-2019 11:56 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Looks like libs are gonna be stubborn and keep the government shutdown goin' over their refusal to crack down on illegal immigration. All this over a tiny fraction of our national budget.

The fact libs are so adamantly against the wall tells ya how effective they know it would be. That's why they're against it; they know it'll work. Trump has been in the WH since all this went down waitin' for libs to come to the table and negotiate but instead they wanna fly around the world on vacations hangin' out with rich donors.

Democrats boycott White House border security meeting

saltwn 01-15-2019 05:28 PM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD (Post 958769)
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/10/gove...all-fight.html

So where are we at and what are the possible/probable outcomes.

President Trump is intransient in his demand for a border wall or fence built of concrete or steel along the US-Mexico border. If Congress won't fund it then he's threatened to declare an emergency and use funds either from the US military, FEMA allocated funds for disasters, or perhaps both.

Democrats are never in 100 years going to provide funds for Trump's wall and they don't have to. They have the support of the American people and no reason to capitulate to the demands of President Trump that they were, for the most part, elected to oppose on stupid crap like this. The Democrats are not being blamed for the shutdown.

Republicans are between a rock and a hard place. They know that the Democrats in the House will never approve funding for the wall. The also know that Democrats overwhelmingly support improving border security but Trump won't talk "border security" because he's hung up on the Wall that he'll never get funding for. Mitch McConnell, that's been missing in action, refuses to put the House bill that funds the government to a vote knowing it will pass without any problem in the Senate.

Republicans also know that they're being blamed for the shutdown along with President Trump. Unlike Trump they also know the damage to the country that the shutdown is causing and that if the damage is severe enough in 2020 a Republican won't even be electable in a bright red state.

I'm seeing two things.

Yes, Trump could declare an emergency (when one doesn't exist) and get away with it. It takes a veto-proof joint resolution to stop him from stealing money from the military and/or taking money for people suffering some of the worst natural disasters in our history but it's a bad move. It would allow the next president, a Democrat, to declare states of emergency over things like gun deaths and then confiscate firearms with impunity. Republicans are crazy of they support Trump declaring an emergency because the payback would shake their very core. Of course whatever Trump accomplished on the wall would be quickly and inexpensively gone with a few sticks of dynamite placed along it.

The Republican lawmakers really have no options. They can't stick with Trump and they know that the funding bill will never include money for the wall.

So why are they, or more specifically Mitch McConnell, holding out? Trump can veto legislation of the Senate passes the House funding but that just kicks it back to Congress where Republicans are going to have to join the Democrats and make the funding legislation veto proof with 2/3rds supporting it. Why not do it now and be heroes as opposed to villains in the coming days.

Trump doesn't give a spit about working people. He is politically motivated. Period.

GetAClue 01-16-2019 06:18 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn (Post 959172)
Trump doesn't give a spit about working people. He is politically motivated. Period.

You really should try posting your opinion more often and leave facts aside. Open up and tell us how you feel. After all, that why this forum exists, facts be damned. :sar3

Dog Man 01-16-2019 11:13 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn (Post 959172)
Trump doesn't give a spit about working people. He is politically motivated. Period.

So who is benefitting from all this work going on? Politicians?

Why is Trump politically motivated? I thought the left hated him because he wasn't a politician......

ShivaTD 01-16-2019 11:45 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by lurch907 (Post 959121)
What do you think of the overwhelming support of a border wall by those charged with protecting our border, the boots on the ground border agents?

The "Boots on the ground" Border Patrol agents don't endorse Trump's vision of a wall along the US-Mexican border based upon a poll of members of the Border Patrol Union in March of 2017.

Quote:

Border Patrol union: US-Mexico border wall needed only in 'strategic locations

The leader of the union representing U.S. Border Patrol agents says there doesn’t need to be a full wall along the United States-Mexico border. Instead, he argues, there needs to be a barrier in “strategic locations.”

“We don’t need a great wall of the United States. We do not need 2,000 miles of border wall. I will tell you, however, that a wall in strategic locations is absolutely necessary,” Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, said, ABC News reported.

The union president did, however, admit that the current wall — which is made largely of fencing — “can be defeated” in its present state, noting that he has spent time locating holes in the southwestern border.

Judd shared his analysis during a Senate hearing on staffing issues for Border Patrol, Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“If we do a wall and we do it properly on the border, we can, in fact, effectuate a better arrest rate and we can, in fact, secure the border,” Judd continued. “Before we do that, we have to address the current issues that we have.”

Ron Vitiello, who was sworn-in as Border Patrol chief last week, told ABC that the No. 1 priority should be upping the number of boots on the ground because “somebody has to arrest the people who are going to continue to attempt to enter, even if there is a border wall.”

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/0...egic-locations

So the No. 1 priority for the Border Patrol is more "Boots on the Ground" because without the boots on the ground the wall/fence is useless. Next is to identify those strategic locations along the US-Mexico border where additionally fencing (or a wall) would be advantageous for enforcement.

Democrats are not opposed to additional physical barriers such as the limited use of walls or fencing in strategic locations along the border like the 700 miles of vehicle and pedestrian fencing they authorized in 2006 if it's based upon the expert advice of those involved in border security. Along with funding the government the Democrats have been calling for exactly that. They want experts on border security to review and provide the recommendations that Republicans and Democrats need before authorizing improvements to our border security.


Democrats not going to support some hair-brained political idea by President Trump that he used in his campaign as an appeal to xenophobic Americans as a basis for funding anything. Not even the Border Patrol endorses Trump's vision of a wall along the entire US-Mexico border because that expenditure would take funds from providing more boots on the ground and wouldn't be effective because under no circumstances will there ever be enough boots on the ground on the US side of the border to back up Trump's 2,000 mile wall.

As an expert in crisis management explained the Democrats hold the upper hand. They've provided legislation to fund the government and end the shutdown as well as the proposal to improve border security based upon the advice of experts. They have the support of the American people and have no reason to change their position(s).

President Trump is responsible for the shutdown and could end it tomorrow by placing border security ahead of his demands for a wall.

Republicans in Congress can also end the shutdown tomorrow by simply supporting veto-proof legislation that funds the government but that doesn't include funding for Trump's wall. The Senate previously passed this type of legislation unanimously in December.

A crisis is coming, make no mistake about it, and either Trump or the Congressional Republicans are going to be held accountable for that crisis. They'll also be the one's that have to cave-in to the Democrats to end the crisis.

When you know a crisis is coming, and that you're the one that will have to end the crisis even if it's not what you want to do, then you're better off doing what needs to be done today instead of waiting for the crisis to actually occur.

There will be no funding for Trump's wall. Get used to it.

lurch907 01-17-2019 11:50 AM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD (Post 959271)
The "Boots on the ground" Border Patrol agents don't endorse Trump's vision of a wall along the US-Mexican border based upon a poll of members of the Border Patrol Union in March of 2017.


https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/0...egic-locations

So the No. 1 priority for the Border Patrol is more "Boots on the Ground" because without the boots on the ground the wall/fence is useless. Next is to identify those strategic locations along the US-Mexico border where additionally fencing (or a wall) would be advantageous for enforcement.

Democrats are not opposed to additional physical barriers such as the limited use of walls or fencing in strategic locations along the border like the 700 miles of vehicle and pedestrian fencing they authorized in 2006 if it's based upon the expert advice of those involved in border security. Along with funding the government the Democrats have been calling for exactly that. They want experts on border security to review and provide the recommendations that Republicans and Democrats need before authorizing improvements to our border security.


Democrats not going to support some hair-brained political idea by President Trump that he used in his campaign as an appeal to xenophobic Americans as a basis for funding anything. Not even the Border Patrol endorses Trump's vision of a wall along the entire US-Mexico border because that expenditure would take funds from providing more boots on the ground and wouldn't be effective because under no circumstances will there ever be enough boots on the ground on the US side of the border to back up Trump's 2,000 mile wall.

As an expert in crisis management explained the Democrats hold the upper hand. They've provided legislation to fund the government and end the shutdown as well as the proposal to improve border security based upon the advice of experts. They have the support of the American people and have no reason to change their position(s).

President Trump is responsible for the shutdown and could end it tomorrow by placing border security ahead of his demands for a wall.

Republicans in Congress can also end the shutdown tomorrow by simply supporting veto-proof legislation that funds the government but that doesn't include funding for Trump's wall. The Senate previously passed this type of legislation unanimously in December.

A crisis is coming, make no mistake about it, and either Trump or the Congressional Republicans are going to be held accountable for that crisis. They'll also be the one's that have to cave-in to the Democrats to end the crisis.

When you know a crisis is coming, and that you're the one that will have to end the crisis even if it's not what you want to do, then you're better off doing what needs to be done today instead of waiting for the crisis to actually occur.

There will be no funding for Trump's wall. Get used to it.

We hereby interrupt this ranting misinformation to bring you some facts:
- The current plan is not for 2000 mile of wall (not sure it ever was), but 722 miles of barrier (mixed wall and fencing) largely to update and make more effective barriers that are already in place. You know, what the experts want.
- Trump is not against more "boots-on-the-ground", in fact he has repeatedly called for just that. He also understands we need both, one doesn't work without the other.
-You are correct in that D's don't oppose physical barriers per-se, what they oppose is anything endorsed by President Trump. Merit of the idea is of little concern.

Dog Man 01-17-2019 12:15 PM

Re: Partial US government shutdown is tied for the longest ever
 
[QUOTE=lurch907;959342]We hereby interrupt this ranting misinformation to bring you some facts:
- The current plan is not for 2000 mile of wall (not sure it ever was), but 722 miles of barrier (mixed wall and fencing) largely to update and make more effective barriers that are already in place. You know, what the experts want.
- Trump is not against more "boots-on-the-ground", in fact he has repeatedly called for just that. He also understands we need both, one doesn't work without the other.
-You are correct in that D's don't oppose physical barriers per-se, what they oppose is anything endorsed by President Trump. Merit of the idea is of little concern.[/QUOTE]

:thumbsup And THAT, is the whole enchilada.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0