Exclusive: In budget, Trump to ask Congress for $8.6 billion for border wall

[SLC]

Tunnels already exist under the border. And most of the tunnels they have found have been found years later, usually after they have already been closed down. It wouldn't be that hard to hide information from illegal immigrants being brought in by smugglers. Additionally, this assumes that border patrols and those at ports of entries cannot be bribed or get complacent.

And the key is, most are caught, by those border patrol already there.

LOL, yet we still have lots of illegal drugs pouring into our ports, especially smaller ports. It isn't that hard to hide people that way too, especially in small groups. Coast Guard can't be everywhere. They use fake documents in the US, so why do you think they couldn't simply start getting them to use before they enter?

Are you just making this stuff up as you go or do you have any proof of what you are saying? :lol:

The Border Patrol in McAllen Texas just today stopped a group of 300 aliens crossing in to the country. I'm not too worried about the occasional small group being smuggled in by boat.

 

[jghiretire]

Makes me laugh that you guys are reading into this. If she was thinking about impeaching Trump, do you think she would say so ahead of time?

I loved what she said "Trump isn't worth it". She's playing an interesting game.

 

[jghiretire]

That's because I'm speaking common sense.
But please...encourage the crazies to fight this wall thing, tooth and nail. Soon there will be so many beautiful refugees at the border, that it'll be a veritable sea of beauty.

Does it ever occur to you that there's more to the wall than just a wall?? People don't want to give up their property. Eco systems could be ruined (Not that you give a damn about that). More flooding could happen.
But I don't suppose you care about any of that, right? You just want your wall.

 

[OscarLevant]

He's doing a terrific job exposing what anti American pricks Democrats are...

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

Touch a nerve, did we?

 

[SLC]

Does it ever occur to you that there's more to the wall than just a wall?? People don't want to give up their property. Eco systems could be ruined (Not that you give a damn about that). More flooding could happen.
But I don't suppose you care about any of that, right? You just want your wall.

Sure the sky is falling the sky is falling. Its not like the US could ever build the Panama canal or some other complex project like sending a man to the moon or anything. Every building project has its sthat are to be overcome. I trust we can handle the problems presented by building a physical barrier in the most highly trafficked areas of the border.

 

[holbritter]

Source: (Reuters) Exclusive: In budget, Trump to ask Congress for $8.6 billion for border wall

Alright boys and girls, buckle-up for round two! I find it hard to believe Trump would shut it down again, in an effort to beat Spkr Pelosi for wall funding, but far be it for me to predict rational behaviour from this current President.

And in addition to trump's border wall, other sources are claiming there's an increase in military spending of around 5 percent, with a concurrent decrease in social spending of around 5 percent.

If the above is accurate, I'm calling Trump's budget dead-in-the-water.

A question I have been thinking about. If the reason for Democrats not wanting the wall is that it's a waste of money because it won't work, why did they, and possibly will again, not agree to this funding since it costs more to shutdown?

Trump wanted 5 billion, the shutdown cost more than double that.

That alone tells me that their reason for not wanting the wall has nothing to do with wasting taxpayer's money.

 

[SLC]

A question I have been thinking about. If the reason for Democrats not wanting the wall is that it's a waste of money because it won't work, why did they, and possibly will again, not agree to this funding since it costs more to shutdown?

Trump wanted 5 billion, the shutdown cost more than double that.

That alone tells me that their reason for not wanting the wall has nothing to do with wasting taxpayer's money.

Bingo! It was never about the money that is just a lame excuse the liberals use.

 

[Mongidig]

I'm sorry but one cannot be rational and a Trump supporter at the same time. The guy is the most transparent narcissistic conman in history.

At least he is transparent. Obama was a very secretive conman.

 

[Buzz62]

Does it ever occur to you that there's more to the wall than just a wall?? People don't want to give up their property. Eco systems could be ruined (Not that you give a damn about that). More flooding could happen.
But I don't suppose you care about any of that, right? You just want your wall.

Now you're concerned with someone's property and the ecosystem?
:lamo
Just how far do you figure those goal posts should be moved?

 

[Mongidig]

View attachment 67252486

2013, 2014, and 2016 were higher than 2018 (my comment was referring to 2017 numbers which were the latest in the graph I presented).

2018 is still FAR lower than what we saw in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s.

CARE!

A leak is a leak. It needs to be fixed before more damage can occur.

 

[roguenuke]

Before you automatically say most Americans don't want secure fencing on the border you should read this article.

Americans support a border wall more than the media wants to believe | TheHill

An opinion piece. And not all those polls taken specified a wall across the entire border, as the writer of your article implies.

Other articles show differently. In fact, many polls have been written specifying support/opposition for expanding the border wall that exists now or for the President's proposed border wall, which still come out quite consistently that most Americans do not want a border wall despite wanting border security.

How Americans see illegal immigration, the border wall and political compromise | Pew Research Center

Finding a single poll that was written a certain way does not mean they all or most were. Many polls are changing how they phrase that question.

https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1203a1GovernmentShutdown.pdf

 

[tres borrachos]

I didn't lie about Beto using his nickname as a child but he did go by Rob or Robert in prep school and College both. I don't know about you but my high school , college, graduate school, medical couldn't care less if you used your nick name or not. You spin is duly noted though. :lol:

You admitted his nickname was bestowed upon him as a child. That's all we all need to know. Don't believe the crap Ted Cruz pushed at you. Beto never pretended to be an Hispanic.

 

[roguenuke]

What that they work and the people that directly deal with the problem everyday say we need them? I'll believe them and not you . :lol: What we are doing now CLEARY isn't working we are on pace for nearly a million illegal crossing this year. That is more people than live in San Francisco. That is more people than live in each of the states of Rhode Island, Delaware, South Dakota, North Dakota, Alaska, Vermont , or Wyoming.

Just because someone works in that job does not mean that they really know what will work or not or what is most cost effective. Especially not if they are refusing to see why an increase in such things is taking place and what is going on when people are coming across the border at those points.

What percentage of those crossing the border right now, that increase in numbers, is simply surrendering to border patrol officers? How many are putting in papers for asylum? A border wall will not stop those people from coming here at all because they can do the same thing they are doing with or without a wall there.

 

[roguenuke]

The HS security secretary and the border patrol says a physical barrier works. NO ONE says the barrier won't be patrolled by armed Border Patrol agent 24/7 to suggest otherwise is disingenuous and stupid. BTW European countries are building barriers too.

How is a border wall going to stop asylum seekers? They are already walking up to the ports of entry and surrendering there. They wouldn't care if someone was waiting on the other side of the wall to catch them since their plan is to put in for asylum anyway. So please tell us how it would stop the majority of those currently crossing the border?

 

[roguenuke]

Do you have ANY evidence that physical barriers don't work as effectively as other security measures. I don't know why I even ask ...of course you don't. :roll:


What part of thousands of illegals crossing between the ports of entry do you not get. Historically only about 10% will actually qualify for asylum. I have no problem with people applying for asylum at ports of entry and waiting in Mexico for the US to determine if they are qualified. Most of these people are economic immigrants and that does not qualify for asylum. Sneaking across between ports of entry is evidence that they are trying to game the system. Get caught by BP with a kid in tow and they have to let you go after 20 days. Then you can disappear into the US while you pretend to be waiting for a hearing on your asylum eligibility.

I'm going to guess you have never even been to the Texas Mexico border. :lol:

It doesn't matter how many qualify. It only matters how many are seeking it right now, and that is far more who will qualify, but all, in accordance with US law, have to have their day in court when it comes to their applications for asylum, things that are done in the US.

You seem to believe that the people seeking asylum care about how you explain what you think is reason for a wall. They don't. They are still going to cross over, it may take them a little longer and they may get to see the border patrol as soon as they get across, but they aren't simply going to go away or stop coming due to a border wall if their entire reason for being there is to seek asylum. And since they can do that simply by going to a port of entry (the main reason we have so many crossing in between is limitations at those ports of entries that were set up), what you claim will happen when they are released while they wait for their asylum review can still happen there the same way.

 

[roguenuke]

so just because we had WAY to many illegal crossings in the past it’s OK that we are projected to have about a million times his year. That is some crazy rationalization there. :lol:

No one is saying that it is okay. What is being said is that this is very different from the situation in the past. Asylum seekers are not sneaking in trying to avoid border patrol. They are surrendering themselves to them in order to more quickly hand in paperwork for asylum, whether they are eligible or not. So a border wall is not going to change that part at all.

A better way to spend that money would be to expedite the process for asylum seekers so that there is little time between their application and their hearing for them to "disappear" and they can be more quickly sent out of the country. Hiring more personnel, especially for the courts that work such cases, and even for border patrol, would help far more and be a better allocation of resources when it comes to border security and preventing illegal immigration into the US (even if that means simply not giving asylum seekers time to become illegal immigrants.

 

[marke]

How is a border wall going to stop asylum seekers? They are already walking up to the ports of entry and surrendering there. They wouldn't care if someone was waiting on the other side of the wall to catch them since their plan is to put in for asylum anyway. So please tell us how it would stop the majority of those currently crossing the border?

Are democrats opposed to closing the asylum loophole? It does not look like it. In fact, the publicity surrounding the debate has had the effect of encouraging exploding numbers of foreigners to come to our borders with children and claim asylum which they have learned will guarantee them passage into the US. Who is going to feed, clothe, house, educate and medicate these homeless, jobless hordes, especially since they are prohibited by law from working here?

 

[roguenuke]

Are democrats opposed to closing the asylum loophole? It does not look like it. In fact, the publicity surrounding the debate has had the effect of encouraging exploding numbers of foreigners to come to our borders with children and claim asylum which they have learned will guarantee them passage into the US. Who is going to feed, clothe, house, educate and medicate these homeless, jobless hordes, especially since they are prohibited by law from working here?

Political asylum should not be closed simply because some may try to abuse it. You find ways to help improve their situation, in their own countries so they don't need to seek asylum with us. Not that hard of a concept.

 

[Chomsky]

A question I have been thinking about. If the reason for Democrats not wanting the wall is that it's a waste of money because it won't work, why did they, and possibly will again, not agree to this funding since it costs more to shutdown?

Trump wanted 5 billion, the shutdown cost more than double that.

That alone tells me that their reason for not wanting the wall has nothing to do with wasting taxpayer's money.

To the bolded:

Because it would not be right to allow Trump to hold the U.S. government "hostage" to his demands.

Congress, holding the "power of the purse", allowed Trump the customary amount they historically have been providing.

 

[Geoist]

Yes that's cool.
So in other words...you got nothin but hatred.

Hate is a strong word. I strongly dislike narcissists because they only look out for what is best for them. They are the scammers/fraudsters of our world. Trump is a textbook case.

 

[Geoist]

He is just playing to the crowd.

So what? That is what every politician does. No one does it more than Trump.

Get used to the Orange Blob because he is going to be president for 6 more years. :lol:

And if he loses you'll likely put on the tin foil hat like all the rest of the Trumpcult and claim the election was 'rigged.'

 

[Geoist]

CARE!

Ummm, what? :lamo

 

[Geoist]

OK more apprehensions since 2006 then that is even worse than 2009

No, it isn't. Dude, cut your losses now and quit embarrassing yourself. Go learn how to read a bar graph.

 

[Geoist]

so just because we had WAY to many illegal crossings in the past it’s OK that we are projected to have about a million times his year. That is some crazy rationalization there. :lol:

How many is too many is subjective. You've been proven objectively wrong on the stats in this thread.

 

[holbritter]

To the bolded:

Because it would not be right to allow Trump to hold the U.S. government "hostage" to his demands.

Congress, holding the "power of the purse", allowed Trump the customary amount they historically have been providing.

Then they should be truthful about their reasons. I’m sure, from past shutdowns, that they knew it would be costly, so they refused the budget request anyway.