The Trump Presidency – 2016

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The H-1B visas have been horribly abused by companies. I'm sure there are some fields that need more demand but it's also being used by companies to drive down high paying jobs.

For instance, Zuckerberg only fights for immigration because he wants cheap programmers.

Agree, I have experience with H1-B.

I am talking about something broader fro well educated (not just the rich) immigrants wannabees. Assuming there is a vetting process, why don't we want the best and brightest from other countries. I think there should be a special category to fast track them.

One thing I would like to see is eliminating dual citizenship which the US allows with some countries. That doesn't see right.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So, who else often asks for immunity when testifying about your boss?

Only when I know there will be "fake news" involved.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-fl...ity-1490912959

Flynn offers to testify.. but in exchange, he wants immunity.

Weeeeelllll now.

Him wanting it is one thing.

The FBI granting it--that's a whole new ballgame

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Is it not true that a huge chunk--maybe even a majority--of illegals aren't border-jumpers, but people who overstayed visas? I know that some American companies (chicken farming comes to mind) hire Mexican workers legally but then when the visa is up, they just stay.

I think this article (from Pew, but seems to be based on DHS report, not on survey or anything) addresses that question.


Homeland Security produces first estimate of foreign visitors to U.S. who overstay deadline to leave | Pew Research Center

The answer is still pretty sketchy due to inadequacies in both information gathering and subsequent data collection.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-fl...ity-1490912959

Flynn offers to testify.. but in exchange, he wants immunity.

Weeeeelllll now.

The military requires sacrifice and risk, but this guy doesn't want to tell the truth unless he gets a cookie first.

There's a reason jailhouse snitch testimony is notoriously unreliable.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think this article (from Pew, but seems to be based on DHS report, not on survey or anything) addresses that question.


Homeland Security produces first estimate of foreign visitors to U.S. who overstay deadline to leave | Pew Research Center

The answer is still pretty sketchy due to inadequacies in both information gathering and subsequent data collection.

Yeah, overall not a great hard data, but if those estimates of 400K+ a year are anywhere close to correct, I'd think those make up a significant chunk of our illegals. Makes me wonder even more about the cost-effectiveness of a wall.

On another note, I would never have guessed that Brazil would be #3 on that list. I would have assumed a European country.

[bronconick]

I forgot to buy stocks in Polonium.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Yeah, overall not a great hard data, but if those estimates of 400K+ a year are anywhere close to correct, I'd think those make up a significant chunk of our illegals. Makes me wonder even more about the cost-effectiveness of a wall.

On another note, I would never have guessed that Brazil would be #3 on that list. I would have assumed a European country.

I wouldn't have guessed Brazil immediately, but I've seen enough to know that they've got a serious upper middle class and upper class. ABInBev is run by a Brazilian. One of the first bank branches to be fully automated was opened in Sao Paolo in 2012. There's a ton of brutally poor people in Brazil, but there's also a well educated populace looking for somewhere else to live now that the economy there has collapsed.

[tarcone]

The Clintons would have never let something like this Flynn thing get anywhere near this point. They would have offed the person a long time ago.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Makes me wonder even more about the cost-effectiveness of a wall.

20+ bln to build then a few bln per year in increased overhead. Within a few years the cost to maintain blows the cost to build out of the water. That's more than a third of the proposed cost to increase military spending. Look what was cut to afford that. Hard to even argue about the cost effectiveness of it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Yeah, overall not a great hard data, but if those estimates of 400K+ a year are anywhere close to correct, I'd think those make up a significant chunk of our illegals. Makes me wonder even more about the cost-effectiveness of a wall.

Well, the report does show a significant attrition rate. (dropping nearly 70k from just Sept til Jan). The indications being that those who overstay tend to not stay permanently at anything close to a 100% level.

Then again, I don't give two shits WHY they're here illegally, simply that they are is the offense.

[tarcone]

Here is a way to save money AND protest our borders.
Shut down bases in foreign countries and bring all those soldiers home and place them on the mexican border. Cut off aid to other countries and spend it at home.

Problem solved.

[JPhillips]

Except for the unconstitutional aspect of deploying troops on American soil.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The Clintons would have never let something like this Flynn thing get anywhere near this point. They would have offed the person a long time ago.

What's more is that the only people they've left alive to even talk about it only suspect all the shit they've done. They've cleaned themselves better than the "Wolf" himself.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Here is a way to save money AND protest our borders.
Shut down bases in foreign countries and bring all those soldiers home and place them on the mexican border. Cut off aid to other countries and spend it at home.

Problem solved.

Great idea, I wonder why no one else has thought of that. It's almost enough to make you think there's non-humanitarian reasons as to why the US has bases and soldiers in foreign countries.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Except for the unconstitutional aspect of deploying troops on American soil.

Build a bunch of forts then. Use domestic workers. So now I have created jobs AND secured the border.

And, really, what President has let the constitution stand in his way in the last 40 years?

[NobodyHere]

Remember to cancel all temporary work permits too.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by molson

The military requires sacrifice and risk, but this guy doesn't want to tell the truth unless he gets a cookie first.

There's a reason jailhouse snitch testimony is notoriously unreliable.

To be fair, even if I knew I was innocent, I would still ask for this considering the situation. No harm in trying.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

To be fair, even if I knew I was innocent, I would still ask for this considering the situation. No harm in trying.

Same here, but this is still fun.

You won’t believe what Mike Flynn said on @MeetThePress in September 2016. pic.twitter.com/MwQC7MAbhK

— Randall. (@JRC_) March 31, 2017

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

20+ bln to build then a few bln per year in increased overhead. Within a few years the cost to maintain blows the cost to build out of the water. That's more than a third of the proposed cost to increase military spending. Look what was cut to afford that. Hard to even argue about the cost effectiveness of it.

Don't think I've seen a cost-benefit analysis of this. On the other hand, there would may/theoretically be reduced social services, less crime, more lower wage jobs available etc.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Same here, but this is still fun.

Nice irony, hypocrisy and karma.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Edward64

To be fair, even if I knew I was innocent, I would still ask for this considering the situation. No harm in trying.

It's a rational thing to do, it would just be nice if someone of consequence in government (or someone recently in government) once, ever, put their country first at great personal risk and sacrifice. That's why governments have many of the problems they do, everybody's obsessed with self-preservation and their own personal interests.

There's no harm in trying for him, but there is potential harm for the country. Anything he testifies about has much less value if he's getting something in exchange for it, and that testimony has almost zero value unless there's independent corroboration.

I hope the government can get to the bottom of things without him, and that he can just go down with everybody else. But those investigators, like him, will likely all be working in their own self-interest first, so there's a lot of potential roadblocks to that outcome.

[JPhillips]

I read speculation that this is an Oliver North type play. He isn't expecting the FBI to offer immunity, but if one of the congressional committees does it will make a future prosecution much more difficult. I expect the target is Nunes.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The Clintons would have never let something like this Flynn thing get anywhere near this point. They would have offed the person a long time ago.

This is such bullshit. You've been reading too much Russian-based fake news, my friend.

[mckerney]

@justinsink 12m
12 minutes ago

after @MajorCBS asks about Flynn, Trump leaves signing ceremony without signing executive orders. Pence went and picked it up from desk



The best temperament.

[Atocep]

The reactions of everyone else is what makes it amazing. It started with "what's going on?" and moved to "is this really happening?" with a touch of "try to act normal" rather quickly.

[Chief Rum]

Gawd, he's such an utter ass.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The reactions of everyone else is what makes it amazing. It started with "what's going on?" and moved to "is this really happening?" with a touch of "try to act normal" rather quickly.

Pence looks like he's kind of used to it.

[Chief Rum]

Friend of mine overheard this in a bar (non-PC).

"Say what you want about the wall, but the Chinese built a wall 3,000 years ago, and there still ain't no Mexicans in China."

I laughed in spite of myself.

[JPhillips]

With sound it's even more bizarre.

Trump walked out of an executive order signing ceremony without having signed the executive orders pic.twitter.com/v0SjanotTe

— POLITICO (@politico) March 31, 2017

Nobody said anything until he started to walk away.

[Easy Mac]

Remember guys, they don't make mistakes.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Nobody said anything until he started to walk away.

Yup, that changes the context completely. He wasn't pissed about a question about Flynn, he was... ??? I have no idea. Headed towards a nervous breakdown? Just going through the motions?

[Chief Rum]

Yea, I watched it live now as well, and I agree, whatever he was doing, it wasn't about the question on Flynn.

That said, I remain resolute that he is indeed an utter ass, for past actions taken.

[digamma]

Is the podium inside the Oval Office new? Not a criticism or anything, just thought it seemed a little odd, and don't remember seeing that before.

[molson]

Maybe he just had to poop

[thesloppy]

It looks like one of those too-drunk/high moments where he thought he was cool until he had to get up to the podium & speak, and then he said "fuck this, I need to lie down."

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by molson

Maybe he just had to poop

Pence: Mr. President, you forgot to sign the executive orders.

Trump: Just bring them along, I'll sign them on the can.

Pence: Yes, Mr. President.

[Sun Tzu]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

It looks like one of those too-drunk/high moments where he thought he was cool until he had to get up to the podium & speak, and then he said "fuck this, I need to lie down."

This.

[Edward64]

You know, looks weird but somewhat harmless. Considering his age, he gets a pass unless this starts to happen alot.

[Ben E Lou]

Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd ftw

When will Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd and @NBCNews start talking about the Obama SURVEILLANCE SCANDAL and stop with the Fake Trump/Russia story?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 1, 2017

[Edward64]

I don't agree with much he says, but do kinda appreciate him using Twitter to connect with the common person. Obviously using it to move his agenda and sow confusion/misdirection but he is the first Twitter President.

[Edward64]

Don't think its that big of a deal but interesting that Hannity publicly disagrees. Hope Trump twitter responds.

Hannity breaks with Trump on health care debacle - Mar. 31, 2017

In a notable moment of divergence between the White House and perhaps its most reliable media booster, Fox News host Sean Hannity said Thursday that President Donald Trump was wrong to blame the failure of the Republican health care bill on the faction of GOP lawmakers known as the Freedom Caucus.

"Now in my opinion, it's not the Freedom Caucus that's responsible for the GOP failure in this case to repeal and replace Obamacare," Hannity said on his eponymous program. "Now this legislation was flawed from the beginning. It was created behind closed doors. Not one single member saw the bill until it was rolled out. And that made it a disaster."

Hannity's commentary came hours after Trump lashed out at the Freedom Caucus, a group of hardline conservatives and libertarians in the House of Representatives, for the demise of the American Health Care Act.

In a tweet on Thursday morning, Trump said the caucus "will hurt the entire Republican agenda," and suggested that members should face primary challenges next year.

Hannity said that Trump was off the mark with the tweets.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd ftw

Correction Mr. President, the "fake news" obama surveillance scandal you created so we would stop talking about your criminal activities?

[Atocep]

Mark Cuban did a great job on twitter of explaining what's mostly likely going on with Trump and the Russia ties.

[tarcone]

HRC took lots of money from countries and gave favors in return. Would this have gotten this long of a run had she won?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

HRC took lots of money from countries and gave favors in return. Would this have gotten this long of a run had she won?

Of course not. She would have killed everyone.

You gotta keep up with your own posts!

[stevew]

Maybe a dumbass question but can't they just modify rules of engagement/deployment of the "Coast Guard" and use that branch of the service as cheap-ish border enforcement?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

HRC took lots of money from countries and gave favors in return. Would this have gotten this long of a run had she won?

You mean, like emails?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by stevew

Maybe a dumbass question but can't they just modify rules of engagement/deployment of the "Coast Guard" and use that branch of the service as cheap-ish border enforcement?

Changing the mission statement of a branch of service is highly unlikely and extremely difficult. You'd arguably be breaking the contract of every current Coast Guard member.

[Edward64]

I'm not sure I understand the big deal about Gorsuch other than its sour grapes by the Dems. He seems to be well qualified, well thought of, and doesn't seem to be as extreme as Scalia.