The Trump Shutdown

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I will happily pick up this conversation in the morning if anyone wishes to.

 

I will read your sources and pick up the convo tomorrow - got side tracked with the buzzfeed news.  

[IDBillzFan]

1 hour ago, BigMcD said:

***** you guys are lame. Trump is making your entire country dumber! 

 

Says the guy whose country can't even keep good hockey players from leaving his country.

 

Do you honestly think hockey players want to claim allegiance to a country whose prime minister's biggest accomplishment is dressing like all the Village People?

 

Please. Worry about your own country. America is fine, with or without all the Canadians who come here for real opportunity and health care.

 

 

54 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I will read your sources and pick up the convo tomorrow - got side tracked with the buzzfeed news.  

 

Embarrassing evening for the left.

 

Again.

[Q-baby!]

32 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

Says the guy whose country can't even keep good hockey players from leaving his country.

 

Do you honestly think hockey players want to claim allegiance to a country whose prime minister's biggest accomplishment is dressing like all the Village People?

 

Please. Worry about your own country. America is fine, with or without all the Canadians who come here for real opportunity and health care.

 

 

 

Embarrassing evening for the left.

 

Again.

You are clueless! 

[Deranged Rhino]

3 minutes ago, BigMcD said:

You are clueless! 

[Q-baby!]

Look at that fat *****! 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 hours ago, Logic said:

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/trump-human-rights-autopsy-report

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/united-states

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/421814-us-risks-human-rights-abuses-by-funding-border-wall

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/trump-human-rights-and-hypocrisy/

http://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/the-trump-human-rights-tracker/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/06/withdraws-human-rights-council-180619173311272.html

Above are six links from a variety of places, including Amnesty International, The Hill, The Seattle Times, and Columbia Law School's "Trump Human Rights Tracker". The second to last of these lists, among others, the following (and goes into further detail, if you click the link):

- Ended Deferred Action for DACA program
- Secretary of State lifted the human rights conditions on arms sales to Bahrain
- Revoked protections for women in the workplace
- Repealed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping mine waste into streams

And as the Al Jazeera article discusses, the United States, under Trump's watch, withdrew from the Human Rights Council. 

As the above links detail, there have been a litany of human and civil rights abuses under Trump. Instead of immediately insulting me, feel free to click through the links and read the things that I'm reading that make me say that Trump is a human and civil rights NIGHTMARE.

And before anyone comes back with "none of those are worse than human trafficking!": I NEVER SAID THEY WERE! NOT ONCE! I only said that to selectively be outraged about one (admittedly horrendous and important) thing while conveniently ignoring many OTHER horrendous and important issues (ranging from environmental destruction that will have far-reaching impact on many American citizens to civil rights abuses against immigrant and LGBTQ populations) was hypocritical. That's all. To keep claiming that I dismiss or don't recognize the importance of the human trafficking issue -- or that my dislike for Trump's wall plan means that I don't recognize the seriousness of said issue -- is just dishonest.
 

These basically amount to 6 op-eds and the write up for the back page of the Columbia law school year book.  One of the central themes of the op-eds is they are dishonest.  There is a legitimate concern about the socioeconomic impact of illegal immigration and it's something that has been discussed for decades.  It's fundamentally dishonest to suggest there is an assault on immigration when there simply is not. 

 

You have  to take yourself seriously to be taken serious here.  I agree with you that the Trump border plan and the negotiations with the House is not the only solution to the crisis.  Another president, let's call her Hillary, well she might have had a different plan. But, she overslept on Election Day and went away. 

[Hedge]

Knock knock.

Who's there?

Secret Service.

 

 

 

[reddogblitz]

On 1/17/2019 at 8:55 AM, SoCoBills said:

if Trump gets his way at this could set an extremely dangerous precident. 

 

I agree with this 110%, no, make that 210%.

 

I don't really care if they build a wall of not.  I can see both sides of the argument. But what I do care about is setting a new precedent and normal that when the President wants to fulfill a campaign promise, instead of working with Congress as he/she should, they can hold private  citizens' pay checks hostage until Congress caves in and gives it to them.

 

If it works, it will be used again by either Trump and/or the next president. Imagine that Joe Biden (picking a name out out the proverbial hat) wins and his campaign promise is "Mr. Trump, tear down this wall".  Then he refuses to sign any funding extension until he gets it.  Don't think he won't. It worked for Trump and now  it's payback time.  How will you shutdown enthusiasts feel about it then?

 

Would be nice if after this is all over Congress can come up with a legislative solution to this going to the President hat in hand for more money at least once a year.  Probably won't though.  I think they like it.  Great political theater in their never ending pursuit of the next election and more money and more power.  That's what this is all about IMHO.

Edited January 19, 2019 by reddogblitz

[The_Dude]

9 hours ago, BigMcD said:

Look at that fat *****! 

 

I’m more disgusted by the socialist who’s selling his country out to Muslims. Enjoy your caliphate, eh. 

[boyst]

we have a TV at work that displays headlines as well as weather another company information... It's due at service but it's said "Nancy Pelosi cancels trip to visit troops overseas due to shutdown." 

[3rdnlng]

5 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I agree with this 110%, no, make that 210%.

 

I don't really care if they build a wall of not.  I can see both sides of the argument. But what I do care about is setting a new precedent and normal that when the President wants to fulfill a campaign promise, instead of working with Congress as he/she should, they can hold private  citizens' pay checks hostage until Congress caves in and gives it to them.

 

If it works, it will be used again by either Trump and/or the next president. Imagine that Joe Biden (picking a name out out the proverbial hat) wins and his campaign promise is "Mr. Trump, tear down this wall".  Then he refuses to sign any funding extension until he gets it.  Don't think he won't. It worked for Trump and now  it's payback time.  How will you shutdown enthusiasts feel about it then?

 

Would be nice if after this is all over Congress can come up with a legislative solution to this going to the President hat in hand for more money at least once a year.  Probably won't though.  I think they like it.  Great political theater in their never ending pursuit of the next election and more money and more power.  That's what this is all about IMHO.

The Left has given lip service to border security for years. They vote for a wall but refuse to actually appropriate money. We had a verbal agreement a year ago that would have fully funded the wall. The dems backed away when a ***** federal judge took Trump's leverage away. We had a compromise bill prior to 1-3-19 that would have gotten Trump's signature except Schumer blocked it in the Senate. People who have voted for border security in the past are now refusing to go along with it solely because of dem leadership (actually lack of leadership).

 

Why are we at the place where we are at today? It's simple. The dems want to deny Trump a campaign promise in order to weaken him in 2020. It isn't just about a campaign promise with Trump. He knows about the tragedies happening there every day. Little girls and little boys are being smuggled and sold into a life of getting *****. Drugs are entering into our country by the truckload. Illegal aliens are not being vetted. We could have terrorists, diseased people or hardened criminals (including MS-13) coming in here.

 

You say that this shutdown will set a precedent. That's just a silly canard. One side or the other will always get blamed for a shutdown but both sides are responsible for this shutdown. That's true with any shutdown for any reason. The public will eventually decide who they think was right.

[Q-baby!]

2 hours ago, The_Dude said:

 

I’m more disgusted by the socialist who’s selling his country out to Muslims. Enjoy your caliphate, eh. 

They are coming over the border to get you! 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

6 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I agree with this 110%, no, make that 210%.

 

I don't really care if they build a wall of not.  I can see both sides of the argument. But what I do care about is setting a new precedent and normal that when the President wants to fulfill a campaign promise, instead of working with Congress as he/she should, they can hold private  citizens' pay checks hostage until Congress caves in and gives it to them.

 

If it works, it will be used again by either Trump and/or the next president. Imagine that Joe Biden (picking a name out out the proverbial hat) wins and his campaign promise is "Mr. Trump, tear down this wall".  Then he refuses to sign any funding extension until he gets it.  Don't think he won't. It worked for Trump and now  it's payback time.  How will you shutdown enthusiasts feel about it then?

 

Would be nice if after this is all over Congress can come up with a legislative solution to this going to the President hat in hand for more money at least once a year.  Probably won't though.  I think they like it.  Great political theater in their never ending pursuit of the next election and more money and more power.  That's what this is all about IMHO.

Sensible approach in 1974.  Sensible approach if this issue hasn't been booted down the road with promises of "Let's do my thing and catch up later!"for decades.  Sensible approach if all players were honest brokers. Besides, the duly elected President should fight like hell to implement the programs he promised to implement.  

 

And, as a business owner, it would be nice now and again if there was a brief uptick in outrage from the public sector when onerous regulation and govt overreach directly impacted employees/employers of the private sector.  Hell, the potential for financial ruin increased exponentially just due to the nys family leave act.  

 

time to resolve this one way or another.  I'm sorry for people who are struggling, but that is hardly limited to federal employees on furlough with guaranteed income replacement when this is resolved. 

27 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

The Left has given lip service to border security for years. They vote for a wall but refuse to actually appropriate money. We had a verbal agreement a year ago that would have fully funded the wall. The dems backed away when a ***** federal judge took Trump's leverage away. We had a compromise bill prior to 1-3-19 that would have gotten Trump's signature except Schumer blocked it in the Senate. People who have voted for border security in the past are now refusing to go along with it solely because of dem leadership (actually lack of leadership).

 

Why are we at the place where we are at today? It's simple. The dems want to deny Trump a campaign promise in order to weaken him in 2020. It isn't just about a campaign promise with Trump. He knows about the tragedies happening there every day. Little girls and little boys are being smuggled and sold into a life of getting *****. Drugs are entering into our country by the truckload. Illegal aliens are not being vetted. We could have terrorists, diseased people or hardened criminals (including MS-13) coming in here.

 

You say that this shutdown will set a precedent. That's just a silly canard. One side or the other will always get blamed for a shutdown but both sides are responsible for this shutdown. That's true with any shutdown for any reason. The public will eventually decide who they think was right.

This is a republican issue as well, and imo blood is on their hands as well. Where the :::: was John McCain, the great maverick, cutting deals or compromises on this for 4 decades?  You needed a Trump to flush these people out. 

[3rdnlng]

12 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Sensible approach in 1974.  Sensible approach if this issue hasn't been booted down the road with promises of "Let's do my thing and catch up later!"for decades.  Sensible approach if all players were honest brokers. Besides, the duly elected President should fight like hell to implement the programs he promised to implement.  

 

And, as a business owner, it would be nice now and again if there was a brief uptick in outrage from the public sector when onerous regulation and govt overreach directly impacted employees/employers of the private sector.  Hell, the potential for financial ruin increased exponentially just due to the nys family leave act.  

 

time to resolve this one way or another.  I'm sorry for people who are struggling, but that is hardly limited to federal employees on furlough with guaranteed income replacement when this is resolved. 

This is a republican issue as well, and imo blood is on their hands as well. Where the :::: was John McCain, the great maverick, cutting deals or compromises on this for 4 decades?  You needed a Trump to flush these people out. 

Obviously republicans similar to the dead RINO John McCain have contributed to this crisis. It's time for the Trump backbone to encourage those on the Republican side to hold fast.

[The_Dude]

27 minutes ago, BigMcD said:

They are coming over the border to get you! 

 

 

 

They don’t need to jump a border. Liberals are basically importing them. 

[B-Man]

........................

 

 

 

 

............

Edited January 19, 2019 by B-Man

[Q-baby!]

Just now, B-Man said:

........................

 

 

 

 

Hey Donald! How’s the wall coming along? Just waiting on the check in the mail are yah? 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Expect a jump in these numbers when Trump offers (again) a deal on DACA for the wall and the democrat leadership balks. 

[Chandemonium]

20 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Expect a jump in these numbers when Trump offers (again) a deal on DACA for the wall and the democrat leadership balks. 

You reckon this is what the 4:00 announcement is/could be?

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Chandemonium said:

You reckon this is what the 4:00 announcement is/could be?

 

Those are the rumblings, and it makes sense. Offer a deal on DACA - he gets to publicly attempt to compromise with the DNC putting the entire pressure on them. They'll say no, because they have to say no, and the optics will get even worse for Pelosi and Schumer. 

 

... Then he'll (likely) declare the emergency next week after the offer is rejected in a "hey, I tried everything". 

 

Part of me is hopeful that the announcement at 4pm will be a bit... bigger but I'm not going to hold my breath quite yet.

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Those are the rumblings, and it makes sense. Offer a deal on DACA - he gets to publicly attempt to compromise with the DNC putting the entire pressure on them. They'll say no, because they have to say no, and the optics will get even worse for Pelosi and Schumer. 

 

... Then he'll (likely) declare the emergency next week after the offer is rejected in a "hey, I tried everything". 

 

Part of me is hopeful that the announcement at 4pm will be a bit... bigger but I'm not going to hold my breath quite yet.

This is basically my take on it too. I doubt the dems will move enough (or at all) to keep him from declaring the emergency. Once he declares it he gets held up in court but the government has already been opened and the blame for no wall gets placed on the courts & dems. The key is how long it will take for the year old injunction (on DACA) to end up at the SCOTUS and for the expected injunctions coming out of his declaration of an emergency. Fun times ahead.

[3rdnlng]

[B-Man]

 

 

.

Trump Puts Schumer and Pelosi in a Brilliant Vise Grip American Thinker, by Jim Davis

Original Article

The federal government shutdown has presented a unique opportunity for President Donald Trump to clear out the deadwood in the federal bureaucracy, saving U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars in salaries, perks, and rented office space for people who aren't doing anything productive. At the same time, Trump can get rid of dozens, possibly even hundreds of Deep State operatives in the government, handpicked by Barack Obama and Bill Clinton

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

 

 

.

Trump Puts Schumer and Pelosi in a Brilliant Vise Grip American Thinker, by Jim Davis

Original Article

The federal government shutdown has presented a unique opportunity for President Donald Trump to clear out the deadwood in the federal bureaucracy, saving U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars in salaries, perks, and rented office space for people who aren't doing anything productive. At the same time, Trump can get rid of dozens, possibly even hundreds of Deep State operatives in the government, handpicked by Barack Obama and Bill Clinton

so the deep State will be gone. Cool, you clowns can't cry its out to get your God Trump then 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Those are the rumblings, and it makes sense. Offer a deal on DACA - he gets to publicly attempt to compromise with the DNC putting the entire pressure on them. They'll say no, because they have to say no, and the optics will get even worse for Pelosi and Schumer.

 

If this were the trap Trump lays today, no one can ever question his political brilliance again.

[Deranged Rhino]

24 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

If this were the trap Trump lays today, no one can ever question his political brilliance again.

 

Annnnnnd... 

 

Before they even hear the offer, they're saying they will reject it. 

 

This will be fun.

[DC Tom]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Annnnnnd... 

 

Before they even hear the offer, they're saying they will reject it. 

 

This will be fun.

 

Trump cancels 4pm speech, saying "Well, I was going to offer to reopen the government and talk about the wall later, but since the House Democrats have already rejected it a priori..."

[The_Dude]

14 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Annnnnnd... 

 

Before they even hear the offer, they're saying they will reject it. 

 

This will be fun.

 

I wouldn’t go off of the Drudge Report. But since all liberals think he’s the spawn of Voldemort and Hitler so that makes sense. 

[B-Man]

"President Trump plans to use remarks from the Diplomatic Reception Room on Saturday afternoon to propose a notable immigration compromise, according to sources familiar with the speech."

 

"The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.... Advocates for the plan argue that by offering the new proposal, Trump is showing he’s willing to negotiate while Pelosi remains unmoved. But even some top Republicans are skeptical Trump's overture will be enough to break the logjam."

Says Axios.

Even if its not "enough to break the logjam," it's enough to allow him to say I offered a specific compromise and you didn't... unless and until they do make a specific counteroffer.

 

.

[Q-baby!]

15 minutes ago, B-Man said:

"President Trump plans to use remarks from the Diplomatic Reception Room on Saturday afternoon to propose a notable immigration compromise, according to sources familiar with the speech."

 

"The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.... Advocates for the plan argue that by offering the new proposal, Trump is showing he’s willing to negotiate while Pelosi remains unmoved. But even some top Republicans are skeptical Trump's overture will be enough to break the logjam."

Says Axios.

Even if its not "enough to break the logjam," it's enough to allow him to say I offered a specific compromise and you didn't... unless and until they do make a specific counteroffer.

 

.

Has he thought about asking Mexico for the check? I mean, it's easy to get the money from Mexico. 

[Deranged Rhino]

When you can't argue substance or facts, just emote. It works every time. 

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, BigMcD said:

Has he thought about asking Mexico for the check? I mean, it's easy to get the money from Mexico. 

Maybe we'll just make Canada pay tribute to us.

[B-Man]

We have done this once already today

 

Ignore his childish replies.

 

and if, by chance, he does offer something worth a response................fine.

 

.

[Chef Jim]

10 minutes ago, B-Man said:

We have done this once already today

 

Ignore his childish replies.

 

and if, by chance, he does offer something worth a response........he got lucky. 

 

.

 FTFY

[DC Tom]

34 minutes ago, B-Man said:

"President Trump plans to use remarks from the Diplomatic Reception Room on Saturday afternoon to propose a notable immigration compromise, according to sources familiar with the speech."

 

"The offer is expected to include Trump’s $5.7 billion demand for wall money in exchange for the BRIDGE Act — which would extend protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) — and also legislation to extend the legal status of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, according to a source with direct knowledge.... Advocates for the plan argue that by offering the new proposal, Trump is showing he’s willing to negotiate while Pelosi remains unmoved. But even some top Republicans are skeptical Trump's overture will be enough to break the logjam."

Says Axios.

Even if its not "enough to break the logjam," it's enough to allow him to say I offered a specific compromise and you didn't... unless and until they do make a specific counteroffer.

 

.

 

The Democrats' response will be "We offered a specific compromise: you don't get a wall, and we get everything we want.  You need to accept this."  

 

It's Pelosi's definition of "compromise."  She's done it before.

[Foxx]

hopefully one of these feeds work.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LMKwsayAZE

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q2x4CWgXEc

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Foxx

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Doc Brown]

I'm guessing he's not offering permanent citizenship for the DACA kids.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

I'm guessing he's not offering permanent citizenship for the DACA kids.

 

Three year extension for Congress to pass DACA reform.

 

Which is better than another (illegal) EO dealing with it.

(and TPS)