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.
They must be putting that nonsense out on NPR because many liberals I know claim the same thing. "Drugs are coming across at points of entry." Say what you will, most drug runners are NOT coming through a port of entry with their contraband. Be serious.
"For example, the majority of the heroin flow on the southern border into the US is through privately owned vehicles at legal ports of entry, followed by tractor-trailers, where the heroin is co-mingled with legal goods, according to the DEA's 2018 annual drug threat assessment.
A closer look at the numbers shows that in fiscal year 2018, Customs and Border Protection seized 67,292 pounds of methamphetamine at legal ports of entry, compared with 10,382 pounds by Border Patrol agents in between ports, based on available data".
"For example, the majority of the heroin flow on the southern border into the US is through privately owned vehicles at legal ports of entry, followed by tractor-trailers, where the heroin is co-mingled with legal goods, according to the DEA's 2018 annual drug threat assessment.
A closer look at the numbers shows that in fiscal year 2018, Customs and Border Protection seized 67,292 pounds of methamphetamine at legal ports of entry, compared with 10,382 pounds by Border Patrol agents in between ports, based on available data".
In other words you have nothing to dispute what is or isn't being detected in between ports of entry. The border patrol doesn't either. The parts of the border that have no protection or agents to catch things coming through obviously won't be identified as areas where major seizure of contraband is taking place.
Ask the border patrol if we have unprotected areas/open borders and they say, yes. Ask them is there are areas they can't protect 24/7 and they say, yes. They can't tell you what or how much is coming through those areas when there is no one monitoring or detecting what passes through.
Its not a difficult concept to understand.
The highway patrol gives out a lot of speeding tickets but are they everywhere speeding is taking place on the highways. Of course not and everyone that drives on the highway knows it. Some get caught and some are undetected and don't get a ticket. Can we put a number on it. No, b/c we don't know what we don't know and that's how many got away with speeding.
I'll have to watch the show on youtube when they put it up. I thought Rush Limbaugh was supposed to be a guest today.
Wallace followed up with the Rush segment. Notice he ask Rush the same question he ask Miller on the constitutionality of the national emer. or EO, as if he was expecting Rush to bale him out. Rush didn't bale him out, he straightened him out.
Wallace is smart enough to know the constitution isn't the document it was on the day it was signed hundreds of years ago. Its the 10 pounds of paper that change it with legislation and SCOTUS rulings and opinions to what it is today. Wallace's line of questioning was all false premise to appeal to the knuckle draggers in the lefts collective.
Here is the Rush segment. Included b/c it deals with Wallace's continuing the same ideas as was addressed with Miller but goes into more depth.
Well the vast majority of drug busts happen at border entries. Whether or not that indicates most of the drugs must be going through those points is a matter up for debate though.
Maybe I should do some research LOL. So, what do the 'vast majority of drug busts at border entries' involve? A few joints? a few pounds of this or that hidden in a vehicle, or even larger amounts hidden in product carried by commercial vehicles across the border. I'll concede that. But Steven Miller was right. We know drugs are very likely coming across unsecured areas of the border (which are vast) but we also very likely have no idea how much.
In other words you have nothing to dispute what is or isn't being detected in between ports of entry. The border patrol doesn't either. The parts of the border that have no protection or agents to catch things coming through obviously won't be identified as areas where major seizure of contraband is taking place.
Ask the border patrol if we have unprotected areas/open borders and they say, yes. Ask them is there are areas they can't protect 24/7 and they say, yes. They can't tell you what or how much is coming through those areas when there is no one monitoring or detecting what passes through.
Its not a difficult concept to understand.
The highway patrol gives out a lot of speeding tickets but are they everywhere speeding is taking place on the highways. Of course not and everyone that drives on the highway knows it. Some get caught and some are undetected and don't get a ticket. Can we put a number on it. No, b/c we don't know what we don't know and that's how many got away with speeding.
So you understand the flow of illegal drugs into this country better than the folks at the DEA - that's what you'd like us to believe?
Maybe I should do some research LOL. So, what do the 'vast majority of drug busts at border entries' involve? A few joints? a few pounds of this or that hidden in a vehicle, or even larger amounts hidden in product carried by commercial vehicles across the border. I'll concede that. But Steven Miller was right. We know drugs are very likely coming across unsecured areas of the border (which are vast) but we also very likely have no idea how much.
There's obviously no "maybe" about it.
The DEA's 2018 drug threat assessment would be a wonderful place to start. Let us know when you're finished.
Stephen Miller owned Chris Wallace on his own program Fox News Sunday crushing Wallace's anti-Trump narrative.
Stephen Miller made the case upending Wallace on every point. Wallace use old data to try and make the case of what is relevant today. Facts at one time were correct but that no longer represent the problems or situation today.
Wallace tried to use the constitutional argument selectively and it backfired big time.
Stephen correctly pointed out the false premise of Wallace's question.
Yet he bested what some consider one of the best in media. What does that tell ya ?
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.
