And the Sun!
Why Don't the Liberals Want a Wall?
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
And the Sun!
Every Border guard interviewed says that walls work and they need them, but Barbarian says they don't work. Gee whiz who should I listen to
The Chinese. They built a really wonderful wall. Didn't work. Aliens got in. Mongols and Manchus went right through and conquered China twice.
You know what they say about doing the same thing again and expecting the outcome to be different.
But today, we have a bigger reason. More and more, the illegal aliens are coming through at ports of entry, not on rural borders. Guess why the Maginot line didn't work.
Right. And Trump has no excuse:
Trump Learns Why a Wall Won’t Work From a Border Patrol Agent
What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall)
Officials at Customs and Border Protection called the report inaccurate, saying it confused how agents’ feedback about security vulnerabilities is used to develop programs to counter threats.
The documents show that the Border Patrol identified what it called 902 “capability gaps,” or vulnerabilities, on the Southwest border. The word “wall” was suggested as a possible solution for just three of those gaps.
Agents mentioned a “fence” or “fencing” as a possible solution 34 times — less than 4 percent of the 902 vulnerabilities identified, the report found.
Customs and Border Protection officials said Border Patrol agents were asked to identify “gaps” in border security, not to propose solutions. They said that Border Patrol sector chiefs, from San Diego to the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, have voiced support for a border wall.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/...-wall-immigration-trump-senate-democrats.html
Officials at Customs and Border Protection called the report inaccurate, saying it confused how agents’ feedback about security vulnerabilities is used to develop programs to counter threats.
The documents show that the Border Patrol identified what it called 902 “capability gaps,” or vulnerabilities, on the Southwest border. The word “wall” was suggested as a possible solution for just three of those gaps.
Agents mentioned a “fence” or “fencing” as a possible solution 34 times — less than 4 percent of the 902 vulnerabilities identified, the report found.
Customs and Border Protection officials said Border Patrol agents were asked to identify “gaps” in border security, not to propose solutions. They said that Border Patrol sector chiefs, from San Diego to the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, have voiced support for a border wall.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/...-wall-immigration-trump-senate-democrats.html
Border Patrol Union Just Deleted a Webpage Saying a Wall Would Be 'Wasting Taxpayer Money'
Digital archives show that the page was deleted after the union's president supported building a border wall with Donald Trump in the White House Briefing Room.
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...saying-a-wall-would-be-wasting-taxpayer-money
Digital archives show that the page was deleted after the union's president supported building a border wall with Donald Trump in the White House Briefing Room.
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...saying-a-wall-would-be-wasting-taxpayer-money
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Your lying New York Times article is a baldfaced lie. Period. I'll give you agents themselves on camera saying the wall works. As usual you post lies and falsehoods.
MUST READ:
How the Democrats Lost Their Way on Immigration
In the past decade, liberals have avoided inconvenient truths about the issue.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/the-democrats-immigration-mistake/528678/
"...........Between 2008 and 2016, Democrats became more and more confident that the country’s growing Latino population gave the party an electoral edge. To win the presidency, Democrats convinced themselves, they didn’t need to reassure white people skeptical of immigration so long as they turned out their Latino base. “The fastest-growing sector of the American electorate stampeded toward the Democrats this November,” Salon declared after Obama’s 2008 win. “If that pattern continues, the GOP is doomed to 40 years of wandering in a desert.”
As the Democrats grew more reliant on Latino votes, they were more influenced by pro-immigrant activism. While Obama was running for reelection, immigrants’-rights advocates launched protests against the administration’s deportation practices; these protests culminated, in June 2012, in a sit-in at an Obama campaign office in Denver. Ten days later, the administration announced that it would defer the deportation of undocumented immigrants who had arrived in the U.S. before the age of 16 and met various other criteria. Obama, The New York Times noted, “was facing growing pressure from Latino leaders and Democrats who warned that because of his harsh immigration enforcement, his support was lagging among Latinos who could be crucial voters in his race for re-election.”
Alongside pressure from pro-immigrant activists came pressure from corporate America, especially the Democrat-aligned tech industry, which uses the H-1B visa program to import workers. In 2010, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, along with the CEOs of companies including Hewlett-Packard, Boeing, Disney, and News Corporation, formed New American Economy to advocate for business-friendly immigration policies. Three years later, Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates helped found FWD.us to promote a similar agenda.
This combination of Latino and corporate activism made it perilous for Democrats to discuss immigration’s costs, as Bernie Sanders learned the hard way. In July 2015, two months after officially announcing his candidacy for president, Sanders was interviewed by Ezra Klein, the editor in chief of Vox. Klein asked whether, in order to fight global poverty, the U.S. should consider “sharply raising the level of immigration we permit, even up to a level of open borders.” Sanders reacted with horror. “That’s a Koch brothers proposal,” he scoffed. He went on to insist that “right-wing people in this country would love … an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don’t believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country.”
Sanders came under immediate attack. Vox’s Dylan Matthews declared that his “fear of immigrant labor is ugly—and wrongheaded.” The president of FWD.us accused Sanders of “the sort of backward-looking thinking that progressives have rightly moved away from in the past years.” ThinkProgress published a blog post titled “Why Immigration Is the Hole in Bernie Sanders’ Progressive Agenda.” The senator, it argued, was supporting “the idea that immigrants coming to the U.S. are taking jobs and hurting the economy, a theory that has been proven incorrect”........(SNIP)
Barbara Aryan has posted the LIES from the New York Times. (Barbara loves lies.) Now let's hear from some border agents, most of whom are Hispanic by the way:
What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall)
Trump's appointees downplayed the results of the survey of Border Patrol agents, for the obvious reasons. The people actually enforcing the law didn't think fences or walls would do much good.
So they say that it's "confused" and it isn't the way they use that feedback to develop counter measures.
Maybe they should be using that information; these are the men and women who actually have to do the work. They should know what works and what does not:
The report was based on internal Customs and Border Protection documents from the 2017 fiscal year. It concluded that less than one half of 1 percent of the agents’ suggestions to secure the Southwest border mentioned the need for a wall.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/...-wall-immigration-trump-senate-democrats.html
Perhaps, when they took the survey, there should have been a WH representative, looking over their shoulders to make sure that they didn't write something Trump didn't want to hear.
Trump's appointees downplayed the results of the survey of Border Patrol agents, for the obvious reasons. The people actually enforcing the law didn't think fences or walls would do much good.
So they say that it's "confused" and it isn't the way they use that feedback to develop counter measures.
Maybe they should be using that information; these are the men and women who actually have to do the work. They should know what works and what does not:
The report was based on internal Customs and Border Protection documents from the 2017 fiscal year. It concluded that less than one half of 1 percent of the agents’ suggestions to secure the Southwest border mentioned the need for a wall.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/22/...-wall-immigration-trump-senate-democrats.html
Perhaps, when they took the survey, there should have been a WH representative, looking over their shoulders to make sure that they didn't write something Trump didn't want to hear.
genuineoriginal
New member
genuineoriginal
New member
| New Report Exposes Thousands of Illegal Votes in 2016 Election A new bombshell study released by the Government Accountability Institute shows why President Donald Trump’s Advisory Commission on Election Integrity has such an important job ahead of it. The Institute concluded in its report that thousands of votes in the 2016 election were illegal duplicate votes from people who registered and voted in more than one state. |
The problem was, they could only find actual evidence for two such cases.
Both of them voted twice for Trump.
lain:Well, actually, there was a third case of voting illegally for one's former address:
WASHINGTON — As President Trump’s voter integrity commission looks under rocks for possible voter malfeasance, its members might want to examine a presidential nominee awaiting confirmation by the Senate Finance Committee.
Documents indicate that Jeffrey Gerrish, the president’s pick to be a deputy United States Trade Representative, moved from Virginia to Maryland last year, but opted in November to vote in the more competitive state of Virginia than his bright blue new home.
The Senate Finance Committee, which has been considering Mr. Gerrish’s nomination, was briefed on the matter on Tuesday, including the fact that Mr. Gerrish had almost certainly voted illegally, according to three Democratic congressional aides familiar with the briefing. Public records back up that notion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/20/...nominee-virginia-maryland-jeffry-gerrish.html
Which is, as you just learned, why his voter fraud commission fell apart. There was some fraud discovered, but it was by Trump voters.
There was no evidence then, and there has been no evidence since, of "large scale voter fraud."
The Washington Post reported that so far there were a total of four confirmed cases of voter fraud nationwide in the 2016 election. That’s out of about 135 million votes cast.
Trump’s upset victory didn’t change his message. Trump touted California, New Hampshire and Virginia (all states he lost) as centers of "serious voter fraud." PolitiFact’s partners in those states dug in and found nothing. Even the head of the Trump campaign in Virginia said there was no there there.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/dec/17/fact-checking-claims-voter-fraud-2016/
Didn't your voter suppression group hand over their findings to Trump's commission? Of course they did. But without any supporting evidence...
genuineoriginal
New member
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
So did Trump. But when people checked, they found two of them. Both were by Trump supporters. Without evidence, you're done.
For example:
The agency hired Boca Raton-based DTS Technologies, a subsidiary of ChoicePoint in Atlanta, for about $4 million to produce a list of probable and possible felons before the election. (Unlike most states, in Florida a felon's civil rights are not restored unless he or she is granted clemency by the governor and Cabinet.)
The company warned the state that many people on the list would not be felons, but officials wanted DTS to use broad parameters — that meant more felons off the rolls.
People whose names appeared on the list of more than 50,000 names had to prove their innocence or automatically be dropped from the rolls within several weeks of receiving written notice. Twenty counties ignored the state's directive because they found the data unreliable, including the Madison County elections supervisor, who found her own name among suspected felon voters.
News organizations unearthed numerous accounts of law-abiding citizens turned away at the polls because they could not prove their innocence. Several thousand people appealed to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and half were found to not be felons.
The precise damage is pretty hard to calculate.
"I've seen numbers all over the map," said Myrna Perez, senior counsel in the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, which is investigating the purge ordered by Scott.
Nelson's figure comes from a 2001 Palm Beach Post investigation, the crux of which asserts at least 1,100 eligible voters were wrongly purged before the 2000 election — "the collateral damage from an aggressive and ill-conceived state plan to prevent felons from voting."
The Post's count included at least 108 citizens who were cleared after the election
https://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/florida-voters-mistakenly-purged-in-2000/1235456
At least a thousand legal voters had their right to vote fraudulently taken by the State of Florida in just one election.
That's about 250 times the number of fraudulent votes cast in the United States in the 2016 presidential election.
See above. Florida isn't the only state fraudulently removing voters from the rolls.
No kidding. Four illegal votes in the 2016 election, with over a thousand voters fraudulently disenfranchised in one state alone. This is not what Trump was hoping for, and why the commission fell apart.
But no evidence, yet again. On the other hand, one of Trump's appointees did that. Would you like me to show you, again?
If it's the right kind, of course. That's why the voter commission adjourned with no report; all the fraud was happening from republicans.
Which is not to say real fraud isn't an issue...
Judge refuses to certify N.C. congressional race amid fraud allegations
A judge ruled Tuesday against certifying Republican candidate Mark Harris as the winner of North Carolina's disputed 9th congressional district seat until the investigation into election fraud by the Harris campaign has concluded.
The investigation won't continue until the state's election board, which was disbanded in December, is replaced on Jan. 31. The state has not officially certified his victory due to an ongoing investigation into alleged fraud involving a contractor for Harris' campaign unlawfully collecting mail-in absentee ballots.
https://www.axios.com/mark-harris-d...aud-197809d2-ec20-4acd-906e-58fbd4a9dffc.html
Apparently, they've concluded that it's impossible for two people to have the same name.
Because it's absurd to imagine that there are 45,000 people in the United States who have the same name. WFTH-I
Notice that such a purge removed over a thousand legal voters in Florida. So "close to 100 percent" means "not close enough to avoid disenfranching a lot of legal voters.
Again, you would think if they had all these names, they could come up with just a few illegal voters.
One of the issues is that people being illegally registered is not the same thing as illegally voting.
There are a huge number of dead people on rolls, for example, when no one thought to call the voter registrar to tell them. In 2016, there was one such dead person voting.
He voted for Trump.
Get some data, and you'll do better next time.