Exclusive - Trump takes hard line on immigration, rejects 'horrible' bipartisan plan

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, mikebike said:

No, the obvious thing to do would be to remove the greasy politicking and pass a clean DACA bill then a clean immigration bill.

If you think Trump would fall for that scam, I have a bridge for sale.

The Dems will never fund the wall unless he has something they want more to bargain with.

Good try, but no cigar.

[stevenl]

6 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

Two presidents say it was wrong for them to come to the U.S.  Either you believe them or you don't.  I am not here to answer what their intent was. All I know is they have changed their tune since Trump became president. If you don't see that. Then it is time to get your head out of the sand.

Since neither of them was talking about the Dreamers, maybe time for you to get your head out of the sand and take a hard, good and honest look at your president.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, buick said:

i think the key thing here is your comment 'as of the last news item on the subject i saw'.  this stuff can change by the hour so we can all be right depending on when we last checked the news !!!  my head is spinning so i'm just going to revise my original commentary to 'a spending bill requires 60 votes in the senate'.

Unless something happens by tomorrow, the government will shut down then.

[Slip]

47 minutes ago, USPatriot said:

Swedish PM does not rule out use of army to end gang violence

 

Violent crime rises in Germany and is attributed to refugees

 

as for America

DACA-aged illegals commit crimes at twice the rate of young Americans, says a comprehensive summary of crimes and convictions in Arizona during the past 32 years.

Are you too embarrassed to cite your sources? I don't blame you.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/16/dreamer-age-illegals-crime-rate-double-young-americans-says-report/ 

 

The report in question comes from here: 

"Any claims on this website need to be fact checked with credible sources."

Edited January 19, 2018 by Slip
typo

[Ron19]

Off topic posts removed

[PhonThong]

33 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Oh, I’m not sure about that. 

 

Seems about the norm for trump supporters. 

You need to check yourself. Senators such as Chuck Schumer are holding up the process. They are self admittedly holding it up unless Trump approves DACA.  

[PhonThong]

57 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Since neither of them was talking about the Dreamers, maybe time for you to get your head out of the sand and take a hard, good and honest look at your president.

They were talking about illegals. Not sure what planet you  have been living on, but even Dreamers are illegal.

The law doesn't state the those under a certain age are legal.

Edited January 19, 2018 by PhonThong

[Bluespunk]

39 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

You need to check yourself. Senators such as Chuck Schumer are holding up the process. They are self admittedly holding it up unless Trump approves DACA.  

Really?

 

Was it not trump who refused to accept the bipartisan deal?

 

Dear me, I completely misread the OP. 

 

Let me look again and get back to you. 

 

EDIT; Hey, guess what, I’ve had a reread and...I’m right. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by Bluespunk

[Jingthing]

All trump has is his base. He doesn't care about any other Americans. He has shown again and again, he will pander to his hard core white resentment base (on many issues) to the point of irrationality and vicious cruelty. Politically, it makes sense for him because his base is all he has and all he will EVER have. But for the USA as whole, this is TRAGIC. 

 

The focus now may be on the DACA people, but look what he's doing to Haitians and Salvadorians as well. 

 

A normal president makes efforts to EXPAND her base. Especially one elected by a minority with low approval ratings. Not trump. Never trump. He's is truly and greatly AWFUL. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by Jingthing

[PhonThong]

Decided not to forego.  What's the point?

Edited January 19, 2018 by PhonThong

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, Slip said:

Are you too embarrassed to cite your sources? I don't blame you.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/01/16/dreamer-age-illegals-crime-rate-double-young-americans-says-report/ 

 

The report in question comes from here: 

"Any claims on this website need to be fact checked with credible sources."

The report he was referring to comes from the Crime Prevention Research Center. It's the creation of John Lott, a man not noted for his honesty:

In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a sock puppet to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.^[70] Sanchez also pointed out that Lott, posing as Rosh, not only praised his own academic writing, but also called himself "the best professor I ever had".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

[Slip]

6 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

The report he was referring to comes from the Crime Prevention Research Center. It's the creation of John Lott, a man not noted for his honesty:

In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a sock puppet to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.^[70] Sanchez also pointed out that Lott, posing as Rosh, not only praised his own academic writing, but also called himself "the best professor I ever had".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Yeah- the attached image in my post shows just how trustworthy they are, but I didn't know that about John Lott- thanks. 

 

It's understandable that people don't want to admit to sources such as these when they post their propaganda.

[Bluespunk]

29 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

Decided not to forego.  What's the point?

Ha ha ha, what’s the point?

 

The president of the USA is supposed to lead, not throw a hissy fit when he doesn’t get his way. 

 

The great negotiator, my left buttock. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by Bluespunk

[PhonThong]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Ha ha ha

I'm rich already. It is I laughing at you.

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, PhonThong said:

I'm rich already. It is I laughing at you.

Hillarious. 

[USPatriot]

33 minutes ago, Slip said:

Yeah- the attached image in my post shows just how trustworthy they are, but I didn't know that about John Lott- thanks. 

 

It's understandable that people don't want to admit to sources such as these when they post their propaganda.

You didnt post a link.  So post it

[Slip]

11 minutes ago, USPatriot said:

You didnt post a link.  So post it

 

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/crime-prevention-research-center/

 

As to your comments about it being biased because a website says it is- no, it is biased because of the agenda of the people who run it.  The website merely reports that fact.  (It also reports when websites are so far left that they become non-credible.)

 

Your further comments about police scanners in Phoenix are not worthy of any response.

[USPatriot]

11 minutes ago, Slip said:

 

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/crime-prevention-research-center/

 

As to your comments about it being biased because a website says it is- no, it is biased because of the agenda of the people who run it.  The website merely reports that fact.  (It also reports when websites are so far left that they become non-credible.)

 

Your further comments about police scanners in Phoenix are not worthy of any response.

MBFC's most trusted fact checking websites^[7] include:

• PolitiFact
• FactCheck.org
• Open Secrets
• Snopes
• Sunlight Foundation

all liberal websites.

 

sorry so is you "source"

[Slip]

6 minutes ago, USPatriot said:

MBFC's most trusted fact checking websites^[7] include:

• PolitiFact
• FactCheck.org
• Open Secrets
• Snopes
• Sunlight Foundation

all liberal websites.

 

sorry so is you "source"

facts are non-partisan.  I fear we may be getting a bit off topic.

[USPatriot]

3 minutes ago, Slip said:

facts are non-partisan.  I fear we may be getting a bit off topic.

If you trust a website and say it is fact them nake sure they are not political either way.

[mrwebb8825]

Yes, you are straying off topic: President Trump said he would sign any bi-partisan deal put in front of him that includes ALL the immigration issues. Let's be clear here, a slap in the face offer of $1.7b is a far cry from the $18b he asked for to build the wall where appropriate and the use of other measures to beef up the southern border in exchange for helping the dem dreamers. Of course he rejected it. It would never have passed both houses so why waste the time?

[ilostmypassword]

13 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Yes, you are straying off topic: President Trump said he would sign any bi-partisan deal put in front of him that includes ALL the immigration issues. Let's be clear here, a slap in the face offer of $1.7b is a far cry from the $18b he asked for to build the wall where appropriate and the use of other measures to beef up the southern border in exchange for helping the dem dreamers. Of course he rejected it. It would never have passed both houses so why waste the time?

Actually, to pay for the wall, Trump is not looking for  "other measures to beef up the southern border". In fact his budget proposal called for slashing proven effective methods to hinder illegal immigration in order to pay for the wall. As one Republican congressman put it, Trump is calling for a 3rd century solution to a 21st century problem.

[Srikcir]

13 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

Let's be clear here, a slap in the face offer of $1.7b is a far cry from the $18b he asked for to build the wall

Let's be clear, Trump won't discuss anything other than complete concession from the Democrats.

 

"Schumer went on to bring up that he actually agreed for funding of the Mexican border wall as a compromise to get Trump to say yes and believed they may actually have a deal.... I put the wall on the table in exchange for strong DACA protections in the Graham/Durbin compromise.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-schumer-negotiating-with-president-trump-is-like-negotiating-with-jello/

Schumer's offer was rejected because Trump refused any compromise on Dreamers!

Talk about a slap in the face.

 

[Thakkar]

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Actually, to pay for the wall, Trump is not looking for  "other measures to beef up the southern border". In fact his budget proposal called for slashing proven effective methods to hinder illegal immigration in order to pay for the wall. As one Republican congressman put it, Trump is calling for a 3rd century solution to a 21st century problem.

 

Symbols matter. What’s the fun in being racist if you can’t be openly so? Hence swastikas and tiki torches, slogans and marches. Hence The Wall.

[PhonThong]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Let's be clear, Trump won't discuss anything other than complete concession from the Democrats.

 

"Schumer went on to bring up that he actually agreed for funding of the Mexican border wall as a compromise to get Trump to say yes and believed they may actually have a deal.... I put the wall on the table in exchange for strong DACA protections in the Graham/Durbin compromise.”

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/chuck-schumer-negotiating-with-president-trump-is-like-negotiating-with-jello/

Schumer's offer was rejected because Trump refused any compromise on Dreamers!

Talk about a slap in the face.

 

How much is the wall going to cost? 

[ilostmypassword]

24 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

How much is the wall going to cost? 

And how much more will it cost if Trump's budget proposal for the wall goes through. Keep in mind that he's slashing the budget for proven methods in order to to build a wall that people with actual knowledge of the situation say will be largely ineffective. As one Republican Congressman put it Trump is proposing a 3rd century solution to a 21st century problem.

 

And honorable people will cite the source of their contentions such as the graph you posted. I'm guessing you didn't because most likely it comes from fairus.org, whose studies have been repeatedly discredited.

Edited January 21, 2018 by ilostmypassword

[Srikcir]

15 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

How much is the wall going to cost? 

The WALL is an answer looking for a problem.

• 80% or more of undocumented immigrants entered the US legally.
• 80% of illegal drugs come into the US through legal ports of entry and illegally air and by/under(?) sea.
• Current funding for wall prototypes comes from the Border protection budget for border security.

Illegal entry across the US southern border has significantly decreased mostly due to immigration policies.

 

 

[isaanbanhou]

36 minutes ago, PhonThong said:

How much is the wall going to cost? 

nice graphics, you must be very talented as you cite no source I assume you made it yourself 

[PhonThong]

43 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And how much more will it cost if Trump's budget proposal for the wall goes through. Keep in mind that he's slashing the budget for proven methods in order to to build a wall that people with actual knowledge of the situation say will be largely ineffective. As one Republican Congressman put it Trump is proposing a 3rd century solution to a 21st century problem.

 

And honorable people will cite the source of their contentions such as the graph you posted. I'm guessing you didn't because most likely it comes from fairus.org, whose studies have been repeatedly discredited.

“Really? The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which just researches the facts concerning America’s immigration policies, puts out reports concerning the number of dollars spent on illegal immigrants, goes up and through that. But because some of their stuff points out the truth, which the other side doesn’t like, concerning how many illegals we have in this country, how much it costs this country, our failing policies, politicians who don’t stand up for our laws, who don’t stand up for border patrol, how they are suddenly labeled a hate group.”

[ilostmypassword]

8 hours ago, PhonThong said:

“Really? The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which just researches the facts concerning America’s immigration policies, puts out reports concerning the number of dollars spent on illegal immigrants, goes up and through that. But because some of their stuff points out the truth, which the other side doesn’t like, concerning how many illegals we have in this country, how much it costs this country, our failing policies, politicians who don’t stand up for our laws, who don’t stand up for border patrol, how they are suddenly labeled a hate group.”

Who are you replying to? I never called them a hate group. I just said they were dishonest.

And why didn't you share with us the source of this quote, Ken Champiou

 

"John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou, the immigrant-bashing Los Angeles radio personalities who were suspended earlier this year when they referred to Whitney Houston as a “crack ho” and marveled that the late pop singer “took this long” to die, are back on the air and up to their old tricks."

www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2012/08/10/how-do-we-know-fair-hate-group

 

Could you have chosen a nastier person to quote?

 

And, in fact, FAIR does have a history of ties to racist groups 

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2012/08/10/how-do-we-know-fair-hate-group

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2008/john-tanton’s-private-papers-expose-more-20-years-hate