The Trump Presidency – 2016

[Edward64]

Admittedly not pleasing to the eye.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/w...gtype=Homepage

[JPhillips]

Part of the new wall in CA blew over due to high winds.

lol

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Part of the new wall in CA blew over due to high winds.

lol

I'm sure it's still unclimbable though.

[GrantDawg]

Per the arguments yesterday, the White House plans to fight in court any subpoenas for people or documents if given by the Senate. They said even with Chief Roberts there, they would force any decision up through the full court system, or by "negotiation." I see no reason to believe the White House is going to agree to any witnesses unless they are allowed to go full circus side show.

[Flasch186]

They also argued that receiving foreign interference in an election was all good.

If this isn’t the booking of the frog’s bones I don’t know what else is.

It’s also the death of the gop.

When they lose power they will have no soap box left to stand on and proclaim the standard on anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

Who says they'll lose power? That's really the foundation of all of this. The GOP is working to establish an apartheid state where they rule over a majority of people that vote differently. That's what Ukraine is about. That's what Russia is about. That's what voter suppression is about. That's the goal.

And if Trump wins in 2020 it might work for a generation or so.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

It's also the death of the gop.

Nixon resigned in 1974. I imagine that people at the time were saying that the scandal was so horrible that the GOP would be out of power for a generation or two.

This was slightly over ten years later:



Do not overestimate the attention span of the American voter.

[Flasch186]

I believe the GOP as I've known it is dead in so much as reflecting what they've always espoused.

I also believe that through demographics and shirking the independent voters that they'll lose power over time while catering to a smaller and smaller base.

[panerd]

So is the GOP completely dead or are we soon living in an Apartheid State controlled by this now undead/unstoppable GOP or is this thread now just a bunch of hyperbole?

[Kodos]

I think they just mean that the supposed values-based GOP of the past is dead, but that the zombie-GOP we currently have is still dangerous until more of its proponents die off.

[lungs]

Are the kids of the people who were kids during the Reagan years give a bump to the GOP? Anecdotal, I know, but it seems like I run into more 20-something MAGA types whose parents grew up in all the glory of the Reagan years.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by panerd

So is the GOP completely dead or are we soon living in an Apartheid State controlled by this now undead/unstoppable GOP or is this thread now just a bunch of hyperbole?

How many times does the GOP have to win with fewer voters? How many states do they need to gerrymander to have 2/3 of the seats with a minority of the votes? How many Court seats do they have to refuse to seat? How much primary evidence of planning to dilute opposition voting power has to be discovered? How many states need to reduce voting and registration opportunities for Dem leaning groups? And on and on...

There's a pattern here that even the super savvy can see if they just open their eyes.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by panerd

So is the GOP completely dead or are we soon living in an Apartheid State controlled by this now undead/unstoppable GOP or is this thread now just a bunch of hyperbole?

Why can’t it be both ?

[Lathum]

The most chilling aspect of the Dershowitz argument yesterday for me was around the possibility of voter suppression. What’s to stop a guy like Stephen Miller from mapping out all the blue districts is swing states then shutting down the voting stations in those areas forcing low income people to travel long distances to vote?

[JPhillips]

Here Evan McMullin uses different language, but says the same thing:

Republican leaders in Congress believe—and privately say—that they fear the country is quickly changing in ways that may soon deprive them of power, and that they must use the power they have now to delay it as long as possible, even by harming the Republic if necessary.

— Evan McMullin (@EvanMcMullin) January 30, 2020

[Lathum]

I mean, it’s pretty obvious that’s what McConnell is doing. Isn't it

[Thomkal]

Rand Paul, after the Chief Justice refused to ask his question because it revealed the name of Schiff's staff member and the supposed name of the whistleblower left the Senate chamber and read his question to the press.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I think they just mean that the supposed values-based GOP of the past is dead, but that the zombie-GOP we currently have is still dangerous until more of its proponents die off.

this

[thesloppy]

Who was possibly asking for rollbacks on freaking land mine regulations?

[RainMaker]

Still haven't fired this guy yet. Wonder why.


White Nationalist State Department Official Still Active in Hate Movement | Southern Poverty Law Center

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

It’s also the death of the gop.

Not a chance. Despite all the fake rallying cries around democracy, this country has always had a large contingent that doesn't really believe in it. And the country has flirted with fascism for a century.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Part of the new wall in CA blew over due to high winds.

lol

The contractor who got this half billion deal got it because he'd go on Fox News and praise Trump and talk about how he could do it for much cheaper. You get what you pay for.

[JPhillips]

In other news, the US Attorney overseeing the Flynn case was changed and now the DoJ is okay with a sentence of probation.

I'm calling it now that Stone and Manafort get pardoned after the impeachment trial is over.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The contractor who got this half billion deal got it because he'd go on Fox News and praise Trump and talk about how he could do it for much cheaper. You get what you pay for.

A more reasonable explanation.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/29/polit...nds/index.html

Newly installed panels from the US border wall fell over in high winds Wednesday, landing on trees on the Mexican side of the border.

The area is part of an ongoing construction project to improve existing sections of the wall.

Agent Carlos Pitones of the Customs and Border Protection sector in El Centro, California, told CNN that the sections that gave way had recently been set in a new concrete foundation in Calexico, California. The concrete had not yet cured, according to Pitones, and the wall panels were unable to withstand the windy conditions.

The National Weather Service reports that winds in the area gusted as high as 37 mph Wednesday. Video from CNN affiliate KYMA shows the metal panels leaning against trees adjacent to a Mexicali, Mexico, street as the wind whips up dirt from the construction site on the other side of the border.

[RainMaker]

Maybe a competent contractor would look up a weather report first. Expect more from your tax dollars.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Maybe a competent contractor would look up a weather report first. Expect more from your tax dollars.

Much ado about nothing.

Or in other words, pettifogging.

[RainMaker]

Braces are put in place till concrete is poured (which it clearly wasn't). Those braces weren't up to standards competent contractors have. Perhaps why we shouldn't be giving cable news kiss asses $400 million of taxpayer money.

I know it's not a big deal because it makes Daddy look bad. But you should expect more from government. Especially one that is led by someone who told you he was an expert on walls and that Mexico would pay for it.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Braces are put in place till concrete is poured (which it clearly wasn't). Those braces weren't up to standards competent contractors have. Perhaps why we shouldn't be giving cable news kiss asses $400 million of taxpayer money.

I know it's not a big deal because it makes Daddy look bad. But you should expect more from government. Especially one that is led by someone who told you he was an expert on walls and that Mexico would pay for it.

Too bad Obama and Dems didn't think the illegals were big enough of a priority in his first 2 years.

I would like to expect more from government but I deal in reality and mistakes are made. No need to make a big deal out of this one incident unless it is systemic problem with this contractor.

[RainMaker]

Illegal immigration dropped dramatically under Obama's administration from the historic high under President Bush. Especially among Mexican citizens.

Didn't need an expensive poorly constructed wall either.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Illegal immigration dropped dramatically under Obama's administration from the historic high under President Bush. Especially among Mexican citizens.

Didn't need an expensive poorly constructed wall either.

Why did illegal immigration drop?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Too bad Obama and Dems didn't think the illegals were big enough of a priority in his first 2 years.

I would like to expect more from government but I deal in reality and mistakes are made. No need to make a big deal out of this one incident unless it is systemic problem with this contractor.

You have walls that can be cut through with home depot saws and get blown over by the wind but they're supposed to stop people from crossing the border. Again, there's minimal proof these walls will work if made correctly and the government's own internal study showed its ineffective.

This is just further proof the entire wall thing is a joke.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Atocep

You have walls that can be cut through with home depot saws and get blown over by the wind but they're supposed to stop people from crossing the border. Again, there's minimal proof these walls will work if made correctly and the government's own internal study showed its ineffective.

This is just further proof the entire wall thing is a joke.

Please provide a link to the own internal study.

It's only been 3 months since the last illegal discussion so maybe its a good time to recap all these points again.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by Edward64

No need to make a big deal out of this one incident unless it is systemic problem with this contractor.

What about a systematic problem with the person who hires the contractors?

Bad Actors Among Border Wall Contractors

^ Admittedly, those were just the companies that built prototypes, and there's nothing saying who built the particular part of the wall, but on the other hand:

Lawsuits allege developers performed shoddy construction work on Trump Towers in Sunny Isles Beach

Trump Vancouver tower completion delayed by shoddy construction management, developer claims

Trump NY Project Went On Despite Warning About Concrete

Russian Firm That Partnered On Trump’s Moscow Project Had A Shoddy Record

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Atocep

You have walls that can be cut through with home depot saws and get blown over by the wind but they're supposed to stop people from crossing the border. Again, there's minimal proof these walls will work if made correctly and the government's own internal study showed its ineffective.

This is just further proof the entire wall thing is a joke.

The wall has always been a joke. A symbol for small-dicked racists to nod with approval at. The easiest way to stop it is by targeting employers who continue to hire undocumented immigrants with impunity. Especially when the growth is coming from people overstaying their visas.

But we can't do that because they are business leaders who need it to make money. And they bribe politicians. Laws don't apply to them after all. Plus it's a new avenue to funnel taxpayer money toward donors. Those contracts ain't cheap.

So instead, a wall that can't withstand some moderate winds is the answer.

Also should add that causing turmoil in Central and South America by supporting coups and other undemocratic policies would help limit the number of refugees trying to come here. But the same dotards who contrive our disastrous Middle East policy can't connect destroying a country near us with people wanting to flee that country.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

What about a systematic problem with the person who hires the contractors?

Bad Actors Among Border Wall Contractors

Are you saying that Trump himself hired these wall contractors or was the decision on who to award the contract done by someone below him?

If its the former, there may be a legit issue. Unlikely though, more likely some flunky a couple levels below.

^ Admittedly, those were just the companies that built prototypes, and there's nothing saying who built the particular part of the wall, but on the other hand:

Lawsuits allege developers performed shoddy construction work on Trump Towers in Sunny Isles Beach

Trump Vancouver tower completion delayed by shoddy construction management, developer claims

Trump NY Project Went On Despite Warning About Concrete

Russian Firm That Partnered On Trump’s Moscow Project Had A Shoddy Record

I'm not going to do the research but I'm pretty sure any multi-billion dollar real estate conglomerate will have suits.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Too bad Obama and Dems didn't think the illegals were big enough of a priority in his first 2 years.

No one really thought the border was a priority until Trump starting campaigning as an open racist.

The Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Pub.L. 109-367), a law that passed with bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, required the construction of about 850 miles of double layer fencing along five segments of the border.

Two years later, Congress recognized that 850 miles of additional border fencing was not feasible or necessary. In 2008, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 amended the 2006 law to reduce the required mileage of reinforced fencing to “not less than 700 miles of the southwest border where fencing would be most practical and effective...” In addition, DHS is not required to install fencing “in a particular location along the 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.”

Originally Posted by Edward64

Please provide a link to the own internal study.

It's only been 3 months since the last illegal discussion so maybe its a good time to recap all these points again.

Ineffective was the wrong word. Unnecessary is what I should have said.

Though recent comments by the DHS leadership and GOP members of Congress show support for a wall, this is a change in tone from their past insistence that a wall was not necessary. Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Gil Kerlikowske said in January 2017, “I think that anyone who’s been familiar with the southwest border and the terrain ... kind of recognizes that building a wall along the entire southwest border is probably not going to work,” adding that he does not “think it is feasible” or the “smartest way to use taxpayer money on infrastructure.”

The head of the National Border Patrol Council, a union representing 16,000 Border Patrol agents which endorsed President Trump during his campaign, said, “We do not need a wall along the entire 2,000 miles of border.” He went on to say, “If I were to quantify an actual number, I would say that we need about 30 percent. Thirty percent of our border has to have an actual fence [or] wall.” The existing 650 miles make up more than 30 percent of the 2,000 mile border.

According to an internal U.S. government study obtained by Reuters in April 2016, CBP indicated that more technology is needed along the border to create a “virtual wall.” The agency requested better radios and more aerial drones, but only 23 more miles of fences.

It's all in here, which is the same link I used last time. For every study or academic that says a physical border wall will work there's at least 10 that say otherwise.

The High Cost and Diminishing Returns of a Border Wall | American Immigration Council

The fact that anyone supports stealing billions from projects the country desperately needs so that people feel like the government is doing something about immigration, regardless of how ineffective it is, frustrates the hell out of me.

Playing the GOP's own game, I'll state definitively that if you support the border wall you don't support our troops and their families.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Are you saying that Trump himself hired these wall contractors or was the decision on who to award the contract done by someone below him?

Seems like he has taken a personal interest in who is hired.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immig...d1e_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immig...ec0_story.html

[thesloppy]

Trump said he'll pick a border wall design himself. Turns out, he can.

"We are looking at four different samples built by four great companies, four different concepts. They're just about completed," Trump said. "I'm going to go out and look at them personally and pick the right one."

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The wall has always been a joke. A symbol for small-dicked racists to nod with approval at. The easiest way to stop it is by targeting employers who continue to hire undocumented immigrants with impunity. Especially when the growth is coming from people overstaying their visas.

I agree it needs to be a holistic immigration reform along with the Wall. (+ electronics + more border patrol). Unfortunately, Trump has not been able to work with the Dems on this. It is too bad that Obama and the Dems did not think this was high enough of a priority in his first 2 years when they had the chance.

Did you find the link on why illegal immigration dropped during Obama's presidency? I would like to know what policies he enacted that cause it the drop.

But we can't do that because they are business leaders who need it to make money. And they bribe politicians. Laws don't apply to them after all. Plus it's a new avenue to funnel taxpayer money toward donors. Those contracts ain't cheap.

Don't deny this is part of the problem, its supply and also the demand for sure. But lets be clear, business leaders from both sides.

Also should add that causing turmoil in Central and South America by supporting coups and other undemocratic policies would help limit the number of refugees trying to come here. But the same dotards who contrive our disastrous Middle East policy can't connect destroying a country near us with people wanting to flee that country.

Supporting coups and other undemocratic policies? Maybe in the past but I think our biggest problem to them now are our demand for their drugs.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Seems like he has taken a personal interest in who is hired.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immig...d1e_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immig...ec0_story.html

Sorry, don't have access to WP. Can you quote the specific piece that says Trump actually picked the contractor?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Sorry, don't have access to WP. Can you quote the specific piece that says Trump actually picked the contractor?

Well the whole article is about it. But here's the jist.

A company that President Trump urged military officials to hire for border wall construction has been awarded a $400 million contract to build a span of new barrier across an Arizona wildlife refuge, according to a Defense Department announcement Monday.

North Dakota-based Fisher Sand and Gravel won the contract to build in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge in Yuma County, Ariz., the Defense Department said, with a target completion date of Dec. 30, 2020.

Trump has repeatedly pushed for Fisher to get a wall-building contract, urging officials with the Army Corps of Engineers to pick the firm — only to be told that Fisher’s bids did not meet standards. Trump’s entreaties on behalf of the company have concerned some officials who are unaccustomed to a president getting personally involved in the intricacies of government contracting.

Trump has been enamored with Tommy Fisher, the company’s chief executive, who has made multiple appearances on Fox News to promote his firm and insists that it would do a better job than those the government had already chosen. The company’s attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment late Monday.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Atocep

No one really thought the border was a priority until Trump starting campaigning as an open racist.

Huh? The Secure Fence Act that you quoted contradicts this. Why pass the act if it was not a priority? Obviously not "the top" priority but it was a priority.

Ineffective was the wrong word. Unnecessary is what I should have said.

The quote was re: 2008 amendment of 2006. There is nothing that said fencing was unnecessary. It said fencing was not needed for the entire border.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I agree it needs to be a holistic immigration reform along with the Wall. (+ electronics + more border patrol). Unfortunately, Trump has not been able to work with the Dems on this. It is too bad that Obama and the Dems did not think this was high enough of a priority in his first 2 years when they had the chance.

Did you find the link on why illegal immigration dropped during Obama's presidency? I would like to know what policies he enacted that cause it the drop.

In a poll, most people said they left for family reasons. Also deportations rose under Obama.

Supporting coups and other undemocratic policies? Maybe in the past but I think our biggest problem to them now are our demand for their drugs.

Bolivia just happened a few months ago. We will be flabbergasted when our border is inundated with Bolivian refugees though. Who could see it coming?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Well the whole article is about it. But here's the jist.

Okay, I see it.

Let's see if there is a systemic problem with these guys in building the wall.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Okay, I see it.

Let's see if there is a systemic problem with these guys in building the wall.

I am ready to give the benefit of the doubt to a company that was run by a guy who went to jail for defrauding the United States and another who went to jail for child pornography. The company's bid also wasn't up to the Army Corps of Engineers standards.

This is who we should be trusting with half a billion dollars.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Atocep

It's all in here, which is the same link I used last time. For every study or academic that says a physical border wall will work there's at least 10 that say otherwise.

The High Cost and Diminishing Returns of a Border Wall | American Immigration Council

The fact that anyone supports stealing billions from projects the country desperately needs so that people feel like the government is doing something about immigration, regardless of how ineffective it is, frustrates the hell out of me.

From our last discussion, my post #20486 concluded there really was no "academic study" other than Yuma. The others were just opinions.

I don't disagree with you that Trump should not be reallocating (not stealing since it is supposedly legal) funds. And I do wish Trump had taken the Dem deal early on in exchange for DACA.

Playing the GOP's own game, I'll state definitively that if you support the border wall you don't support our troops and their families.

Think what you want but I disagree that one cannot support both.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

In a poll, most people said they left for family reasons. Also deportations rose under Obama.

I think its reasonable to ask you to provide a link to the poll?

Bolivia just happened a few months ago. We will be flabbergasted when our border is inundated with Bolivian refugees though. Who could see it coming?

Mexico is 55% of all illegals now. Let me know when Bolivia hits 5%.

[RainMaker]

Well you support funding being taken away from them and their continued dangerous presence in endless unwinnable wars. If that's support, I'd hate to see how little you think of people you don't support.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Well you support funding being taken away from them and their continued dangerous presence in endless unwinnable wars. If that's support, I'd hate to see how little you think of people you don't support.

I do support Trump in finding a way to fund the wall. I am sorry it has to come out of their dole. I wish the Democrats would give Trump another chance at trying to make a DACA deal for Wall funding. I wish Obama and the Dems had the courage to do the holistic immigration reform when they had the opportunity to in his first 2 years.

So enough about me. Easy enough to snipe but how about you laying out what you support and letting me react to it?

1) Other than no wall, what do you want to do about illegal immigrants coming over, those already here, and special situation with DACA?

2) What do you want to see done with our troops currently in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other low intensity conflicts (e.g. Philippines)?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I think its reasonable to ask you to provide a link to the poll?

Unauthorized immigrants smaller share of U.S. foreign-born population | Pew Research Center

Mexico is 55% of all illegals now. Let me know when Bolivia hits 5%.

No it isn't. Mexico has been a net negative over the past 5 years too.

Mexicans decline to less than half of US undocumented immigrant population | Pew Research Center

The areas where we are seeing net positives are in Central America (where we fuck around with their politics) and Asia (who aren't dark enough to be seen as a threat by racists).

If illegal immigration was the real issue, efforts would be put toward curbing the areas where it is growing, not declining. That would be in regards to overstayed visas. But illegal immigration isn't really the issue when it comes to a wall.