Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Kapture1]

First, politicians politic. That's why Schumer (and the Ds) would never vote for an R bill that resolves child separation. But then you lose your point when you say they implicitly or explicitly support child trafficking and rape.

Second, crazy people exist. I find it remarkably wrong to attribute the actions of crazy people to others that are sufficiently removed from the act. On this point, I analogize to the Supreme Court's First Amendment test -- inciting imminent illegal action. Both parties blame, castigate, scapegoat, hate, etc various groups, individuals, organizations, etc. It's the game. If a crazy person runs with that it's on the crazy person.

even if by accident, their policies encourage and incentive child trafficking and rape. And est 80% of women are raped making their way through Mexico to cross our border. Our border agents have seen case after case of 11 year old girls put on birth control by their parents because they know getting raped is a part of the journey north. If we are encouraging them through our lack of border enforcement to come here illegally, then YES that incentives child trafficking and rape. Those claiming asylum can do so at any of the 10 US consulates in Mexico, plus our US embassy in Mexico.

If Nazis took over this country, you would have a moral obligation to not just resist but to violently resist.

[Kapture1]

hm2Rwjl.png

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump just announced he's imposing a 20% tariff on all imported cars. Good luck to whichever aide draws the short straw and has to craft the "national security" justification for this. Without it, Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs. Will the Republicans in Congress challenge him in any real way?

[Kapture1]

rA7fACNbxshAqNT_To9dmwNqQfc7pqdUO4L6F-JB_WA.jpg?w=557&s=5748390ef70088cab558c872ecfc30f8.jpg

[Kapture1]

88JoZR9l.jpg

[Ghengis Jon]

Correct. Schumer is on record as saying he (and the Ds) wouldn't vote for it. A modest legislative solution to the horrors and horrors of child separation and they wouldn't vote for it.

Since Nazi comparisons are so in vogue, it's like voting against legislation ending the Holocaust because it's not perfect.

The wall is the deal breaker for Dems. Don't include that provision and the bill(s) sail through Congress.

Hey President FuckFace - thought Mexico was paying for the wall. How's that going?

[iam416]

Ok. If that's true then the Ds would rather stop PDJT from building his wall than end child separation.

[CGVT]

Child separation has ended because FDT's political ploy to get his wall funded failed. He signed it away.

Winning!

[Kapture1]

h00XrgINjx_9cbWErv43oz8VAOoVc2cY99JMWn0gVUQ.jpg?w=576&s=3214833efafc5165661e52150c48ade7.jpg

[WingsFan]

DgUJI8bUwAANs2Z.jpg:large.jpg

[Ghengis Jon]

.

[millenwasmyfavorite]

Ok. If that's true then the Ds would rather stop PDJT from building his wall than end child separation.

Isn't this pointless?

maybe Trump wanted to use kids as leverage to get his wall... maybe not....

the two aren't and shouldn't be related. Operating on that principle doesn't disclose some hidden heirarchy -- it simply demonstrates a failed gambit.

[WingsFan]

DgUUDfUXUAAMZs1.jpg:large.jpg

[froot loops]

I encountered an incident this morning at the local Speedway. A old white guy and middle aged black lady at the gas pumps. He was in her face screaming at her and she was giving it back. I had to say something when I heard him say some he'll put a bullet between her eyes. He also said something about "you people" and respect, it was getting pretty heated to the point where I think I would have witnessed a shooting if anyone was carrying a weapon. 3 or 4 of us bystanders intervened until the police came, fortunately it was within a minute that the police officer came. on top of the us bystanders there was the obligatory person with the cell phone camera hoping to go viral. What a mess witht wo hotheads.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Ok. If that's true then the Ds would rather stop PDJT from building his wall than end child separation.

It's my understanding that the bills being developed by the R's in Congress do far more than a simple no family separation for full Wall funding trade. The R's, but mainly the Freedom Caucus guys and the Trump Nationalist crowd, want drastic changes to legal immigration and the asylum process on the basis that we should let in far fewer people than we currently do because the economy can't absorb them (Caveat below) This despite it becoming Republican orthodoxy to say that Trump's economy is the greatest in the history of America.

Caveat- There are at least SOME members of Congress, Steve King among them, who object to immigrants on racial/religious/ethnic grounds.

I'd add that the Dems were willing to give Trump the Wall, full funding, in exchange for DREAMers protection. Heck, I'm willing to make that deal. He refused because he expects to get more than that in an immigration deal.