Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
he has a Constitutional right to do this. Courts will be overturned at SCOTUS if it goes that far..
Great! I hope that SCOTUS upholds it, it will make it so easy for a Democratic president to solve major problems in this Country, just think!
Poverty - National emergency
Pollution - National emergency
Gun violence - National emergency
Inadequate Healthcare - National emergency
Failing schools - National emergency
Low wages - National emergency
Voter Suppression - National emergency
I can't wait
and if the Supreme Court backs him.....what will the lib response be?
The Supreme Court is comprised of lawyers. Unless they are totally corrupt, they will vote to uphold the law. Are you hoping they are totally corrupt so they will okay this unconstitutional executive power grab? That seems to be what you want.
“Thoughts and Prayers” for everyone. Even the right wing stars of the moment, The Angel Mothers
Exactly. If thoughts and prayers are good enough for all of the families of victims of gun violence then thoughts and prayers are good enough for the Angel Moms too. What makes their loss any greater than the losses of the thousands of families who are victims of gun violence year after year after year?
The Angel Moms should get exactly what the families of victims of mass shootings get from the right wingers here, which is essentially nothing. Sounds fair to me.
Great! I hope that SCOTUS upholds it, it will make it so easy for a Democratic president to solve major problems in this Country, just think!
Poverty - National emergency
Pollution - National emergency
Gun violence - National emergency
Inadequate Healthcare - National emergency
Failing schools - National emergency
Low wages - National emergency
Voter Suppression - National emergency
I can't wait
Poverty.....don't make me laugh..... we've been at it since 1964 and this is the only country in the world where the poor own big screen TV's
Gun violence --- you're not getting my gun
Healthcare --- gonna throw more money at that one? LOL
Failing schools -- start with telling your ghetto dwellers to stop having kids they can't afford while they live in places that have no jobs
Low wages --- LOL what are you going to do to solve this problem, Einstein? Communism?
The Supreme Court is comprised of lawyers. Unless they are totally corrupt, they will vote to uphold the law. Are you hoping they are totally corrupt so they will okay this unconstitutional executive power grab? That seems to be what you want.
It shows the undemocratic, dictatorial traits of Trump, the same kind of person as Putin for instance.
And it shows that the US system has loopholes regarding checks and balances. Basically the strategy is declaring the state of emergency, then losing all court battles until the issue goes to the supreme court, which however is a highly politicized instrument, which should not be the case in a solid democracy. Its judges should be chosen from a huge pool of qualified judges of all political orientations by a random generator, not by governments. And their term should be limited to, say, 6 years.
Because the formatting is now weird ... I'll extract text and snip some of the anecdotal reports. My response is in italics.
This thread is not to revisit the wall so I didn't initially respond to all your comments. I DID, however, mention the wall in connection with the asylum situation. That's pertinent for two reasons: (1) That is the "crisis" on the border and (2) If Trump is not to work with Congress on this and just had to use the National Emergencies Act, might there have been provisions within that Act to address the caravan issue? I've posed that question elsewhere on this thread. I'm really curious.
Here goes:
ME - "About the only real change to the immigration picture is that there are far more asylum seekers, many who are women and children, seeking legal admission."
YOU - Did you NOT read mu post with the NUMBERS of crime committed by ILLEGALS
The number of illegals now in the United States is irrelevant. Asylum seekers are admitted legally.
ME - "A wall helps here, how?
YOU - Such a STUPID question doesn't deserves a response but, I will anyway.
The WALL is NOT at ports of entry where the caravan people are. ...
Here, I think you're moving away from the caravan issue with your point brought up below. Skip there. But before moving on ... about half the asylum seekers actually enter outside the POEs, due, in part, to metering at the ports. Walls in the Rio Grande Valley won't prevent migrants who enter illegally from subsequently requesting legal asylum. Those walls are set back from the river, so anyone crossing will be on US soil and can apply.
YOU - Did you NOT see the caravan criminals trying to overtake the border Patrol and run in b ycrash9ing the fences
Fencing in urban areas, ports-of-entry, and other hots spots is perfectly appropriate. And needed. The issue is do we want more and where. Congress says 55 miles.
YOU - "Can this wall-thing via national emergency action match that?" If you STILL don't believe, after reading these stat that we so NOT have national emergency, I have nothing else to say to you!
There is a crisis, yes. It may surprise you to hear this but I concur that our current asylum system is not designed to handle large number of applicants, many of whom may be economic migrants. That is not the intent of the law. That overwhelms resources. That is a barrier for those who do meet a narrower definition of asylum. That is a humanitarian issue for migrants who come north under "false pretenses."
But ^^^ a wall really does not handle.
YOU - "What they aren't telling you is border patrol agents apprehendedmore than 100,000 people trying to enter the country illegally in just October and November of last year. Or that that number is way up from the same two months the year before. Nor do they mention that last year, the border patrol apprehendedmore than half a million people trying to get into the country illegally. And that number, too, is up from the year before."
Here you've moved away from my original points ... but, yes, there are some substantial numbers of non-asylum seeker illegals included in the data. The overall trend is down. There is an uptick in 2018 from a real low of 2017 that resulted in, part, from Trump policies at the border, some which have been overturned by the courts.
We need border security. We need to keep apprehending illegals. The question is our effectiveness rate. Trump said in December that the "border is tight" - and it IS, compared to previous eras. This then gets to ...
YOU - THIS IS IMPORTANT AND WHAT THE LSM WILL NOT TELL YOU!
"The Department of Homeland Security claims that about 20% of illegal border crossers make it into the country. Other studies, however, say border agents fail to apprehend as much as 50% of illegal crossers.
Even at the lower percentage, that means that 104,000 illegals made it into the country in 2018 alone.
Is that not a crisis at the border?"
This ^^^ IS the key statistic but one we can only estimate. Not only does LSM not address it much, more to the point Trump did not. How good is what we're now doing? How can it be improved? On another thread, we dissected these data so again no need to revisit. Estimates range as high as 90% already "caught" (also DHS) but the figure of 80% appears reasonable. This is why many advocated for a cost-benefit-analysis: Given current patterns, how much of a percentage increase in apprehensions can be expected from additional footage. How best to allocate resources?
BOTTON LINE: When Trump did not undertake that kind of analysis - or, at a minimum, present it to the public - Congress did it for him. And came up with a 55 mile additional footage figure. Trump doesn't like it - often saying things like "I know better - and so here we are.
It is the drug addicts in the US and Europe who keep drawing criminals from Latin America to the north like a magnet.
Drug addicts keep the whole drug mess going, they are the real culprits as they create the demand for drugs.
Drug addiction should be fought mercilessly, then drug supply and crime would collapse all by itself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
