The reason why Pelosi won't negotiate on the wall

Of course I have please note that wall had machine gun turrets and mine fields. And no one was trying to go the other way.

 

700 miles of barrier is not a wall.

We don't have a Muslim Ban. That would be immoral.

 

This is all new.

For 2 years Donald has not has a single plan. Donald has had plans

 

Donald can not negotiate the terms of the deal for the Dems to sign.

that is not negotiations. Both parties have to be presents hammering out the details.

I thought Donald was supposed to be some hot-shot deal maker. He acts like he doesn't have a clue

 

Semantics. Trump will provide what the border patrol wants.

Yes, American security is not a democrat priority.

 

Go try to negotiate a loan from your banker...when he asks you to sign the contract...tell him Semantics.

Words have meaning.


Secondly since when do we ask the Border Patrol rank and file how to fund immigration projects? That is like asking the Troops what planes and ships they want for the government to build for them.

 

They might know something about keeping criminal alien Democrat voters in Mexico so we don't have to spend billions in court costs trying to deport them or tens of billions feeding them.

Perhaps Democrats should adopt their criminal aliens so they aren't a burden on everyone else.

Must have lost my head. That's not their way.

 

Indeed.

In every previous government shutdown since Gingrich first weaponized the Federal payroll to push an agenda, the President has alway held the high ground. Institutionally, this is as it should be. Under the Budget Act the President proposes, and the hCongress disposes.

But Trump bellowed one thing in public and did something else in private.

But since we've all seen him do this before, the right wing media called him out. He caved and went back on his word. That was the end of the Presidential high ground.

Frankly, I think the next move belongs to Federal workers. I think we're going to see wildcat strikes and delays throughout the bureaucracy whereever people are being ordered to work without pay. The pawns will stand up to the king.

And if that happens, WAll Street will be calling the White House. They speak louder than Ann Coulter (even though her father was a Wall Street lawyer).

I think that's where this is going to end up.

The noise machine will make much ado about the Senate voting on Trump's non commital plan.

They will certainly pass it (this will be the third time the Senate has voted on the same issue). And that will be the end of it.

 

It is a political stunt. The dems are trying to get President Trump to fold on a campaign promise like they did G HW Bush. Remember: "Read my lips, no new taxes"? That cost Bush re-election.

 

The Border Patrol and Homeland Security experts know what is needed. Your opinion means nothing.

 

I have no idea what your political beliefs are but you are so wrong on this one. If you think high ranking politicians are run by anything but their desire for power you are extremely young or have been living on a different planet.
Pelosi is in opposition to this for one reason and one reason only, Trump promised a wall and the democrat party is against anything Trump. Get that, learn that, and you will have a great grasp of what will be going on for the next two years.

 

George HW Bush was not forced into a tax increase by Democrats.

He was forced into it because of the towering deficits taht Ronald Reagan stuck him with. By the end of the 1980's, the speculative boom that had been inaugurated by Reagan's tax cuts had run its course and the Japanese economy was sinking into recession.

Since Japan was the largest buyer of US government debt at the time, and they stopped buying, the cost of US government debt was going up rapidly. Indeed, the banks and the Fed were worried enough about it that Treasury auctions were being covered on the front page of the WSJ, which is precisely where we are headed with Trump rapidly exploiding debt.

 

I don't know the answer to this, so forgive my ignorance...did his 'announcement' on Saturday include a detailed written plan for anyone to review?

 

None. They have no plan, besides mentions of suing employers. But thats it. They want to ease restrictions. They want amnesty for everyone here already. They want an open border because thats what their actions say. Its just pure denial. WHen asked, they come up with the same gobbledygook about a strong policy, but they don't say what is strong about anything. Kamala Harris this morning said NOTHING when asked about her stance on immigration policy. It was a complete non answer.

 

All True. So you see -a wall can be used to keep people in and keep people out. Don't get me wrong - I am all for keeping people out - but, this does not change the fact that a wall also keeps people in.

Can you guarantee that in the future - or even in the present - the wall will never serve that purpose ?

 

I keep hearing this but for the life of me I cannot understand what is immoral about it. Can you explain?

 

I can guarantee that you'll have a hell of a lot of warning before that happens because there is a whole lot of border in this country and a few miles down south won't cut it

 

Two words for you; future Democrats.

 

Nonsense we had an exploding deficit because there is no amount of money that Neocons and Democrats, brothers under the skin, will not spend on vote buying

 

Great question. It's NOT immoral - she's just not going to let Trump win a political fight since she has TDS, obviously.

 

Gary gets it!

 

I wonder why Trump hasn't pointed this out, since it's so obvious as to why the leftists want open borders.

 

If one reads the Islamic texts, with it's constant call to Jihad against non-believers, then a Muslim Ban makes more and more sense with every passage that one reads.

 

A whole lot of warning before what happens ? If a wall is built - people wanting to leave the country (without notifying authorities) via the southern border will be prevented from doing so. Not sure what being warned has to do with this ?

 

A Muslim ban made ZERO sense when Trump first proposed one.

A Muslim ban makes ZERO sense today to the US Constitution.