• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Immigration & Trumps Wall

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump attacks protections for immigrants from ‘shithole’ countries in Oval Office meeting


The Washington Post
Josh Dawsey
24 mins ago


President Trump grew frustrated with lawmakers Thursday in the Oval Office when they floated restoring protections for immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African countries as part of a bipartisan immigration deal, according to two people briefed on the meeting.

“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to African countries and Haiti. He then suggested that the United States should instead bring more people from countries like Norway, whose prime minister he met Wednesday.

The comments left lawmakers taken aback, according to people familiar with their reactions. Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) proposed cutting the visa lottery program by 50 percent and prioritizing countries already in the system, a White House official said.

A White House spokesman defended Trump’s position on immigration without directly addressing Trump’s remarks.

“Certain Washington politicians choose to fight for foreign countries, but President Trump will always fight for the American people,” spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement issued after The Washington Post first reported Trump’s remarks. “. . .Like other nations that have merit-based immigration, President Trump is fighting for permanent solutions that make our country stronger by welcoming those who can contribute to our society, grow our economy and assimilate into our great nation.”

Outlining a potential bipartisan deal, the lawmakers discussed restoring protections for countries that have been removed from the temporary protected status program while adding $1.5 billion for a border wall and making changes to the visa lottery system.

[Trump wants to remove these immigrants. An ugly bit of history tells us what it could do to the economy.]

The administration announced this week that it was removing the protection for citizens of El Salvador.

Trump had seemed amenable to a deal earlier in the day during phone calls, aides said, but shifted his position in the meeting and did not seem interested.

Graham and Durbin thought they would be meeting with Trump alone and were surprised to find immigration hard-liners such as Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) at the meeting. The meeting was impromptu and came after phone calls Thursday morning, Capitol Hill aides said.

After the meeting, Marc Short, Trump’s legislative aide, said the White House was nowhere near a bipartisan deal on immigration.

“We still think we can get there,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said at the daily White House news briefing.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ffice-meeting/ar-AAuzqTo?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
White House: No deal yet on immigration


The Washington Post
Ed O'Keefe, Erica Werner
1 hr ago




A bipartisan group of senators working to resolve the status of young undocumented immigrants, border security and restrictions on legal migration has offered an opening bid on an agreement and is seeking support from fellow senators and President Trump.

Six senators working on immigration issues “have an agreement in principle. We’re shopping it to our colleagues,” Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) told reporters on Thursday afternoon.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), another member of the group, added that “we have answered the call” of Trump, who brought a cross-section of Democrats and Republicans together at the White House this week and called on them to reach a deal he can sign.

In addition to Flake and Graham, the group included Sens. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), all of whom have worked on immigration issues for several years and hail from states with large immigrant populations.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters that there is no deal yet on immigration, “However, we still think we can get there.”

The fast-moving developments included a hastily-arranged Oval Office meeting with Trump, where Graham and Durbin presented details of their plan. The surprise move angered senior Republican leaders and conservatives who are eager to fulfill Trump’s campaign pledges on immigration and control floor debate on the issue. But any attempt to pass immigration and border security legislation will require Democratic support in the closely-divided Senate.

Graham wouldn’t say how the president responded, but said that coming up with bipartisan support in the coming days “will matter to the president.”

Flake and Graham said they would not be publicly discussing details of their plan until they share it with colleagues. In a joint statement, the group said, “We are now working to build support for that deal in Congress.”

But Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), an immigration hard-liner and ally of Trump who attended the Oval Office meeting, said that the bipartisan plan “is unacceptable” because of how it deals with family-based migration policy, a practice that conservatives deride as “chain migration,” and on ending the diversity lottery program that grants visas to 55,000 people from countries with low immigration each year.

“It doesn’t end chain migration,” Cotton said of the bipartisan plan. “It merely delays it for an extremely small class of persons. On the diversity lottery, it simply takes all those visas and gives them away to other people for no rhyme or reason, it doesn’t just end the diversity lottery.”

Cotton added that the group’s border security proposal “doesn’t give near enough resources to meet the president’s demands.”

Told of Cotton’s public criticisms, Graham snapped back: “Sen. Cotton can present his proposal. We presented ours. I’m not negotiating with Sen. Cotton and let me know when Sen. Cotton has a proposal that gets a Democrat. I’m dying to look at it.”

Flake added that “I don’t think we’ll get all Republicans — I never thought that.”

The breakthrough comes just days before a spending deadline that most Democrats are using as leverage for an immigration agreement.

Government funding expires on Jan. 19, and Democrats say they will support legislation to keep the government operating only if the legislation includes plans to protect “dreamers.” But the talks have deadlocked for weeks amid Republican demands that any changes in the young immigrants’ legal status be coupled with changes in border security and some legal immigration programs.

[DACA injunction adds to limbo for ‘dreamers’ as Trump crackdown, Hill talks continue]

Complicating the talks, Republicans released a flurry of new legislation in recent days designed to placate concerns of conservatives wary of a potential bipartisan deal — and to address the fate of hundreds of thousands of other people living in the country under temporary legal protection.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) and Reps. Raúl R. Labrador (R-Idaho) and Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) on Wednesday unveiled a conservative plan that would grant dreamers an opportunity to apply for a legal residency that would be renewed every three years. Democrats and some Republicans reject such a plan.

The bill also would authorize construction of border walls and fencing; allow federal immigration and security agencies to hire at least 10,000 new agents; end the diversity lottery program; end the ability of new U.S. citizens to legally move family members into the United States; withhold federal funding from cities that refuse to help federal agencies enforce immigration laws; and intensify use of the E-Verify system to check an employee’s immigration status.

The proposals have been previously rejected by other Republicans, who say that such a comprehensive proposal could not pass the badly fractured Congress and that the bill’s border security measures are too aggressive. Privately, aides to GOP leaders say the bill would not be able to pass in the House.

Meanwhile, Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), whose Denver-area district is being closely targeted by Democrats this year, introduced a bill to grant permanent legal residency to hundreds of thousands of people from El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua and other countries granted residency through the Temporary Protection Status program.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...n-immigration/ar-AAuz1yk?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump asks lawmakers in Oval Office immigration meeting: 'Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?' then says he'd welcome arrivals from Norway
  • President was meeting in the Oval Office with senators from both parties about proposals for immigration reform
  • He reportedly asked them why the U.S. had to shoulder the burden of refugees coming to the U.S. after Third World natural disasters
  • 'Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?' he asked, according to a Washington Post report
  • Trump has been rescinding 'Temporary Protected Status' for otherwise-illegal immigrants who came from Haiti, Nicaragua and El Salvador because of earthquakes and hurricanes
  • In addition to Haitians, he was referring Thursday to people from African countries
  • Trump said he wanted people from countries like Norway, whose prime minister he held a press conference with Wednesday


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5260595/Trump-asked-U-S-people-s-hole-countries.html#ixzz53vHWBfrH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

hammerhead

Not just a screen name
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
4,251
Likes
4,128
Location
On a speck of dust
Something is in the water in California.

Pelosi: 'Five white guys' leading DACA talks should open a 'hamburger stand'

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi complained Thursday that immigration negotiations are being led by "five white guys" — and was quickly rebuked by her No. 2, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, himself one of those white guys involved in the talks.

“The five white guys I call them, you know," Pelosi said at her weekly news conference. "Are they going to open a hamburger stand next or what?” Pelosi said, complaining that minority members of Congress were not involved in deciding the fate of Dreamers.


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/11/pelosi-white-guys-daca-hamburger-stand-

BTW Nancy, It's their job to deal with this issue.
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
7,082
Likes
12,235
Location
North Carolina
Dementia

Don't knock it until your forget to try it
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,364
Likes
1,869
Last I heard, Tramp was open to the idea being floated of a surveillance only style wall, a "virtual" wall would be ok by him. Also, he is now asking the USA to pay for it now in this doca bill being addressed by CONgress and instead having Mexico "eventually" pay.

Next up, "a crypto currency with said virtual wall as it's technology backing.
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Oops..............

Trump’s ‘s***hole’ comment is intolerable ‘bigotry’ – civil rights attorney
RT America


Published on Jan 11, 2018
President Trump’s team is carrying out damage control tonight after he referred to El Salvador, Haiti and some African countries as “s***hole” countries during immigration talks. For more, RT America’s Ed Schultz is joined by civil rights attorney Robert Patillo and conservative commentator Steve Malzberg.
 

Libertaurum

Freedom First
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
3,539
Likes
2,622
Just ask China and Germany how their walls worked out. Any wall that is effective at keeping people out will be effective at keeping people in. It's no coincidence that countries that build walls become countries people want to escape.
It's the Welfare State that's the problem, not immigration.
There's no wall between Mexico and Guatemala, btw...
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
How a day that started with a bipartisan immigration deal ended with a “shithole”

Vox.com

Tara Golshan
10 hrs ago


In the span of a few hours on Thursday, prospects for a deal on immigration in Congress — including a solution for immigrants fearing the demise of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — had gone from one senator calling negotiations “all peachy” to President Donald Trump announcing he’s tired of helping people from “shithole” countries.

What looked like a breakthrough day for DACA ended in limbo.

Early in the afternoon, Republicans and Democrats sounded like they’d made progress.“We have an agreement in principle and we are shopping it to our colleagues,” Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), who is part of a bipartisan immigration working group with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and three Democrats, said.

“It’s all peachy,” Flake said with a laugh in the early afternoon, noting that the agreement covered Trump’s four requirements: addressing DREAMers, border security, family-based immigration, and the visa lottery system.

The sentiment was short-lived.

Graham’s pitch to the president Thursday afternoon wasn’t a success. The White House’s congressional liaison, Marc Short, said there was a “ways to go,” and by mid-afternoon, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said there was no deal.

By late afternoon, the Washington Post was reporting that the president had shocked the senators by complaining about immigrants from “shithole” countries like Haiti and saying the US should take more immigrants from Norway instead.

Democrats and Republicans are trying to come to an agreement by the end of next week on what to do about the 690,000 unauthorized immigrants who are losing or set to lose their deportation protections under the DACA program. Congress has to come up with a deal to keep the government open in the next eight days, a deadline that has managed to escalate movement and action on DACA. But so far, it has yet to produce a proposal that has the blessing of Congress and the White House.

Senators push ahead with their idea
The Senate is pushing ahead with a proposal, even though Trump seemed to reject it today (after supporting it 48 hours ago). It’s impossible to know how the bill will fare in the Senate — until Thursday, the only people who knew what was in it were the six senators hashing out the deal — but it represents what experienced legislators in both parties think can pass.

The deal follows the contours laid out in Tuesday’s televised immigration meeting: It would give DREAMers a chance at legal status and a path to citizenship, while restricting them from sponsoring their parents; eliminating the diversity visa lottery; and funding some border projects.

Here’s what we know so far the deal would include:

Allowing young unauthorized immigrants who came to the US as children to get legal status — and eventually citizenship. The deal would allow hundreds of thousands of unauthorized immigrants who came to the US as children, and meet other requirements (which aren’t yet clear), to apply for provisional legal status in the US. After a certain number of years, they’d be eligible to apply for green cards — and after another three or five years, like other green-card holders, they would be able to apply for US citizenship.

Legalization wouldn’t just be open to the 690,000 immigrants who were protected under the DACA program when Trump started winding it down in September; it would also include immigrants who qualified for DACA and never applied (or whose protections expired without renewal), or who meet the requirements set forward in the bill, as well as immigrants under 15 who weren’t able to apply for DACA. And unlike DACA, it would be permanent.

Preventing “chain migration” by preventing parents of Dreamers from becoming US citizens. In order to make it impossible for people legalized under this bill to sponsor their parents for citizenship, the bill would make parents of Dreamers ineligible to get green cards, making it impossible for them to naturalize. It would instead provide them with a form of legal status that could be renewed every three years.

By putting the restriction on parents of Dreamers, rather than directly restricting Dreamers’ ability to sponsor relatives after becoming citizens, the bill could avoid a constitutional pitfall. But it could end up locking out immigrant parents who have both a Dreamer and a native-born US citizen in the family — who would currently be eligible for green cards when their citizen children ruened 21.

Eliminating the diversity visa lottery, and reallocating the 50,000 visas currently used for it. As first reported by Politico’s Seung Min Kim, the proposed DACA deal would kill two birds with one stone. It would eliminate the visa lottery. But instead of just allowing 50,000 fewer immigrants into the US legally each year, it would reallocate those visas. Some of them would go to immigrants from underrepresented countries, just on some non-lottery basis; other visas would go to immigrants whose Temporary Protected Status is about to expire thanks to the Trump administration’s aggressive moves to end the program. (Right now, people with TPS can’t get green cards; under this deal, they could.)

A few billion dollars for the border. NBC’s Leigh Ann Caldwell reported that the deal as presented to Trump would have included $1.6 billion for physical barriers (which Caldwell called a fence but the White House would probably call a wall), surveillance tech, and agent training — and another $1.2 billion for “other priorities” on border security. Those numbers are roughly in line with what the White House asked for for a single year on the border in its 2017 supplemental funding requests.

Trump appears to have changed his mind since Tuesday about what sort of bill he’d sign
On Tuesday, Donald Trump said he’d be open to a DACA bill with no strings attached (though that admission was struck from the official White House transcript). By Thursday, the hang-ups were multiple.

Legislative director Marc Short outlined several demands:
  • The bill needs to allocate more money for the border (a potentially easy demand to meet)
  • It needs to restrict categories of family-based visas for future legal immigrants, not just the families of Dreamers.That’s almost certainly a dealbreaker for Democrats — especially if the White House isn’t interested in reallocating those visas elsewhere.

Trump’s own problems with the deal appear to be ... different.

During talks Thursday, Trump said, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” He was referencing immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and African nations, the Washington Post reported, citing people briefed on the meeting. In the context of the bill, that looks like an objection to giving green cards to immigrants with TPS — even though Trump administration officials have said repeatedly Congress needs to address TPS holders.

But the worst sign for the deal came when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) walked into the Oval Office expecting to meet the president alone, but instead saw Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) in the room. At the risk of torpedoing a deal, the White House continues to engage immigration hardliners — who are ideologically closer to the anti-immigration platform Trump ran on in 2016, and the views espoused by his top advisers.

Flake, candidly, said he doesn’t think Cotton will be signing on to “anything we can get 60 votes on.”

“We are going to lose some on either side,” Flake said. “I don’t think we are going to get all the Republicans.”

“I’m not sure what the next step will be,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill) who has been working with Flake and Graham, told reporters. “The President invited us to — at his little get-together in the Cabinet room — to come up with proposals, and we did. It’s a bipartisan proposal which we’ve worked on for four months in the Senate, and I don’t know what happens next.”

Who is in charge of negotiations?
If not Flake and Graham’s plan, then whose? The answer to that question is complicated — and why negotiations have been so chaotic. Ever since Trump said he would be ending the DACA program, the debate on Capitol Hill has become as much a fight over who’s running the show as it is about policy.

In the Senate there are two important groups have risen to the top:

1) The Flake-Graham “Gang of Six,” which includes Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill), Michael Bennet (CO), Bob Menendez (NJ) and Republican Sen. Cory Gardner (CO).

2) A group of Democratic and Republican leadership deputies that have been dubbed the “No. 2s.” It’s a bipartisan group between top-ranking House and Senate members, and the only one with White House involvement. This group includes Durbin, again, and House leaders: Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Majority Whip Sen. John Cornyn and Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

The latter team came together as a reaction to a splintering landscape.

“We are not going to default to existing groups,” Cornyn told reporters. “There were too many groups to count and they were basically getting nowhere. So that’s why, I think, the need to move to this level.”

Meanwhile, progressives including Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have banded together in the Senate, as have Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Congressional Black Caucus members in the House, who have raised deep concerns about the bipartisan proposals’ approach to the visa lottery program and family-based immigration.

Among conservatives, Sens. Chuck Grassley (IA), Perdue (GA) and Cotton (AR) have had the president’s ear, as has Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) in the House. Another bipartisan agreement in the lower chamber between Reps. Will Hurd (R-TX) and Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA), also reached an accord similar to the “Gang of Six” proposal.

While having the input of the White House, the “No. 2s” have yet to come forward with an agreement.

Ultimately, any deal will have to meet only two conditions: It will have to be bipartisan enough to get 60 votes in the Senate, and it will have to win the president’s approval. Until Congress manages to agree on who is doing the negotiating and writing the bills, we won’t know if it’s managed to meet the first condition.

As long as Trump is relying on the Republicans least interested in an immigration compromise to advise him, like Goodlatte and Cotton, no bill that meets the first condition will be able to meet the second.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-a-“shithole”/ar-AAuzzUx?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
'The President is tired of so many black people coming to this country': Anderson Cooper chokes back tears as he calls Trump's 's**thole countries' comments 'racist' and recalls his time in Haiti during devastating earthquake
  • Cooper's statement was in reference to remarks the President reportedly made during a meeting held at the White House earlier in the day
  • In 2010, Haiti was rocked by 7.0 magnitude earthquake that led to an estimated 200,000 deaths and the displacement of nearly a million more
  • The CNN host could be seen fighting back tears as he recalled how he witnessed a 5-year-old Haitian boy being rescued after being buried for more than a week
  • 'Why are we having all these people from s***hole countries come here?' he asked, according to a Washington Post report
  • He also said: 'Why do we need more Haitians? Take them out'
  • In addition to Haitians, he was referring Thursday to people from African countries
  • Trump said he wanted people from countries like Norway, whose prime minister he held a press conference with Wednesday
  • The White House did not deny Trump made the comments in a statement


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5261529/Anderson-Cooper-chokes-tears-broadcast.html#ixzz53xs7wc2H
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Sen. Sanders: Trump's 'shithole' comment appalling
CNN


Published on Jan 11, 2018
Sen. Bernie Sanders responds to President Trump's comments referring to "shithole countries."
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
'Why would anyone migrate to the US from Norway? Why would you give up healthcare?' Scandinavian Twitter mocks Trump after he said he wanted Norwegians rather than people from 's***hole' countries
  • Twitter users erupted on Thursday after Trump lashed out demanding to know why the US should accept citizens from what he called 's**thole' countries
  • He was speaking about people from Haiti, El Salvador and African nations
  • Trump suggested the US should welcome immigrants from places like Norway
  • But Twitter users, some of them even from Norway, quickly lashed out asking Trump: Why would Norwegians want to come to America?


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5261545/Twitter-tells-Trump-no-one-Norway-wants-US.html#ixzz53y4w8R4W
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
5,055
Likes
6,954
January 12, 2018
Trump has his enemies dancing to his tune with 's-hole countries' comments
By Thomas Lifson

Do I really have to explain President Trump's strategy in reportedly using a vulgar expression to describe countries from which he believes the United States is taking far too many immigrants? I believe that many readers of this publication already get it, but it is obvious that none of President Trump's haters – Democrats, NeverTrumps formerly regarded as conservative, and those who cling to the notion that civility is to be demanded only of Republicans – has the faintest notion of the way they are being used.

For anyone who has not been watching cable news since yesterday afternoon, the background is provided by the Associated Press (language warning):

In bluntly vulgar language, President Donald Trump questioned Thursday why the U.S. would accept more immigrants from Haiti and "shithole countries" in Africa rather than places like Norway, as he rejected a bipartisan immigration deal, according to people briefed on the extraordinary Oval Office conversation.

Trump's contemptuous description of an entire continent startled lawmakers in the meeting and immediately revived charges that the president is racist. The White House did not deny his remark but issued a statement saying Trump supports immigration policies that welcome "those who can contribute to our society."

The context is important:

Trump's comments came as two senators presented details of a bipartisan compromise that would extend protections against deportation for hundreds of thousands of young immigrants [sic] – and also strengthen border protections, as Trump has insisted.

President Trump has now tweeted that he did not use the word "s‑‑‑‑‑‑‑" but did use "tough language."

The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used. What was really tough was the outlandish proposal made - a big setback for DACA!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
January 12, 2018

I wasn't there, and I don't know. But is "s‑‑‑‑‑‑‑" used in private any worse than then-V.P. Biden privately (but near a live microphone) calling Obamacare a "big [f‑‑‑‑‑‑] deal"? Both are vulgarisms stated in private that reached the public.

Scott Adams has explained the first layer of strategy several times in the past, most recently on the "stable genius" outrage. It is still early on the West Coast, where Adams lives, so he has not yet applied his logic to the current kerfuffle. Trump has forced everyone whom he outraged to repeat the words he wants to sink in with the public. The entire chattering class is now repeating that Haiti and some African countries and El Salvador and other TPS-abusers (changing a visa explicitly labeled as "temporary" into a permanent one) are bleep-holes. The best of examples comes from Trump's sworn enemy, Jim Acosta, who repeated the vulgarism in its raw state over and over again:


Trump is thus forcing the country to have a conversation about a topic that political correctness forbids: which countries, and which cultures, we want more of in the United States. In this era, immigrants tend to maintain their old country culture because they have full access to the media from old countries (including TV channels in their native languages), because our ballots are often printed on scores of languages in big cities, and because ethnic enclaves exist where life can be led in the old country culture. Take, for instance, Somalis in Minneapolis:


Life in Little Mogadishu in Minneapolis.

But there is a second layer to Trump's strategy: he is forcing his opponents to argue for a position that is plainly untrue. No one can honestly state that Norway – the country Trump used as an example of non-bleep-hole countries (because he had just had a joint press conference with Norway's P.M. and because Norway is the richest country in the world) – is just as desirable a place to live and a culture to import here as Haiti.


Life in Haiti today.

But of course, some fanatics like Joan Walsh are willing to beclown themselves by refusing to state that Haiti is not as desirable place to live as Norway. Via Mediaite:

Lowry took this opportunity to jump in and push Walsh to answer [in] which country she'd prefer to live – Haiti or Norway. After badgering her a bit on this issue, saying she couldn’t answer the question, Walsh didn't even bother to hide her irritation.

"It's none of your business, actually," she exclaimed.

Here is the entire segment via Grabien, for your viewing pleasure.


I use the words "viewing pleasure" advisedly, because Walsh is playing Margaret Dumont to Trump's Groucho Marx. The pretensions and lies of the ruling class, expressed through politically correct limits on discussions, are mocked by both Trump and Groucho Marx. Again.



Now let Trump's opponents try to discuss TPS, DACA, and immigration and avoid the question of which culture we want more of here.


source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...o_his_tune_with_shhole_counties_comments.html
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
5,055
Likes
6,954
sholes.jpg
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,364
Likes
1,869
Trump's an idiot or a shill. Very similar to 99.99% of the politicians before him, they use this tactic to tie one piece of legislation to some other piece of legislation and thus keep any problems from getting solved!
He won't determine the status of kids brought here when they were 4 years old and who are now much older UNLESS there's border security.

What's wrong with doing border security first , and then worry about those kids later. What would be wrong with that? Oh yeah, then the gov't might function correctly - can't have that.
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
5,055
Likes
6,954
Trump's an idiot or a shill. Very similar to 99.99% of the politicians before him, they use this tactic to tie one piece of legislation to some other piece of legislation and thus keep any problems from getting solved!
He won't determine the status of kids brought here when they were 4 years old and who are now much older UNLESS there's border security.

What's wrong with doing border security first , and then worry about those kids later. What would be wrong with that? Oh yeah, then the gov't might function correctly - can't have that.
Idiot? I seriously doubt it.
Shill? History will determine that.

Trump Puts Congress on the Spot, Live on TV, to Fix Immigration Problems (54 min 48 sec):


Published on Jan 11, 2018 by Mark Dice
In a rare move, President Trump put Congressmen on the spot live on TV by inviting cameras into their meeting to discuss immigration reform.
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,364
Likes
1,869
That's been the latest excuse, ask CONgress to MAGA.

Making America Great Again - One CONgress critter put on the spot at a time.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,293
Likes
6,423
Location
Instant Gratification Land
That's been the latest excuse, ask CONgress to MAGA.

Making America Great Again - One CONgress critter put on the spot at a time.
That's how it works. Can't enact any laws without Congress. Unless you're wanting Trump to become a dictator?
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
5,055
Likes
6,954
That's been the latest excuse, ask CONgress to MAGA.

Making America Great Again - One CONgress critter put on the spot at a time.

If you take the time to watch the video, they mention the previous failures and reasons. They mention the need to keep the scope of this small and get it passed.

Time will tell whether this attempt gets bogged down like the previous ones.

The cynical side of me says they will get bogged down and turn partisan and accomplish nothing, just like the previous attempts.
A part of me hopes for the best.

Time will tell. Some folks may have to eat crow. Then again, perhaps not. Either way, we shall see.
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,364
Likes
1,869
That's how it works. Can't enact any laws without Congress. Unless you're wanting Trump to become a dictator?
I understand your point. We can agree to disagree about how much power and actual pull the POTUS has. My belief is he could divorce those 2 issues if he wanted to and force things one at a time as I described already. But maybe he's unwilling or believes it wouldn't work out for him that way. But again, I disagree with him and think he's very poor at doing political strategy.
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump supporters weigh in on 'shithole' remark
CNN


Published on Jan 13, 2018
CNN's Gary Tuchman travels to Anniston, Alabama, to hear from Trump supporters after President Trump referred to African nations as "shithole countries" in an immigration meeting.
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump tweets about DACA amid 's**thole' controversy

CNN

By Zachary Cohen, CNN
2 hrs ago




President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Saturday morning to blame Democrats for stalled immigration negotiations amid backlash over vulgar comments he reportedly made in the Oval Office while meeting with lawmakers this week.

"I don't believe the Democrats really want to see a deal on DACA. They are all talk and no action," Trump tweeted. "This is the time but, day by day, they are blowing the one great opportunity they have. Too bad!"

Trump preceded that message with a tweet that simply said: "America First!"

Negotiations over a deal on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which has protected undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children from being deported, froze this week after Trump, reports say, derided African nations as "shithole countries" and asked why more immigrants couldn't come from Norway during a closed-door meeting with lawmakers to discuss a bipartisan immigration proposal.

Trump has denied making the remarks, but Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, who was at the White House meeting, said Friday that the president "said these hate-filled things and he said them repeatedly."

Democrats are demanding protections for DACA recipients in exchange for border security funding that could include money for Trump's promised border wall.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...e-controversy/ar-AAuDsg8?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump defends vulgar immigrant comments, partly denies them 2 / 21


Associated Press
By JILL COLVIN and ALAN FRAM, Associated Press
1 hr ago

Trump blames Dems amid 's**thole' uproar



WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump offered a partial denial in public but privately defended his extraordinary remarks disparaging Haitians and African countries.

Trump said he was only expressing what many people think but won't say about immigrants from economically depressed countries, according to a person who spoke to the president as criticism of his comments ricocheted around the globe.

Trump spent Thursday evening making a flurry of calls to friends and outside advisers to judge their reaction to the tempest, said the confidant, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to disclose a private conversation. Trump wasn't apologetic about his inflammatory remarks and denied he was racist, instead, blaming the media for distorting his meaning, the confidant said.

Critics of the president, including some in his own Republican Party, took time Friday blasting the vulgar comments he made behind closed doors. In his meeting with a group of senators, he had questioned why the U.S. would accept more immigrants from Haiti and "shithole countries" in Africa as he rejected a bipartisan immigration deal, according to one participant and people briefed on the remarkable Oval Office conversation.

The comments revived charges that the president is racist and roiled immigration talks that were already on tenuous footing.

"The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used," Trump insisted in a series of Friday morning tweets, pushing back on some depictions of the meeting.

But Trump and his advisers notably did not dispute the most controversial of his remarks: using the word "shithole" to describe African nations and saying he would prefer immigrants from countries like Norway instead.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the only Democrat in the room, said Trump had indeed said what he was reported to have said. The remarks, Durbin said, were "vile, hate-filled and clearly racial in their content."

He said Trump used the most vulgar term "more than once."

"If that's not racism, I don't know how you can define it," Florida GOP Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen told WPLG-TV in Miami.

Tweeted Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona: "The words used by the president, as related to me directly following the meeting by those in attendance, were not 'tough,' they were abhorrent and repulsive."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called the comments "beneath the dignity of the presidency" and said Trump's desire to see more immigrants from countries like Norway was "an effort to set this country back generations by promoting a homogenous, white society."

Republican leaders were largely silent, though House Speaker Paul Ryan said the vulgar language was "very unfortunate, unhelpful."

Trump's insults — along with his rejection of the bipartisan immigration deal that six senators had drafted — also threatened to further complicate efforts to extend protections for hundreds of thousands of young immigrants, many of whom were brought to this country as children and now are here illegally.

Trump last year ended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which provided protection from deportation along with the ability to work legally in the U.S. He gave Congress until March to come up with a legislative fix.

The three Democratic and three GOP senators who'd struck their proposed deal had been working for months on how to balance those protections with Trump's demands for border security, an end to a visa lottery aimed at increasing immigrant diversity, and limits to immigrants' ability to sponsor family members to join them in America.

On Saturday, Trump sought to blame "all talk and no action" Democrats for lack of an immigration deal.

"I don't believe the Democrats really want to see a deal on DACA. They are all talk and no action. This is the time but, day by day, they are blowing the one great opportunity they have. Too bad!" Trump tweeted from Florida as he arrived at his private golf club in West Palm Beach.

It's unclear now how a deal might emerge, and failure could lead to a government shutdown.

"The rhetoric just makes it more difficult, and that's unfortunate," said Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, a senior House lawmaker. "I don't think it makes it impossible, but I suspect the Democrats are sitting there going, 'Why would we want to compromise with him on anything?'"

There were also questions about which lawmakers were in position to conduct meaningful talks. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 GOP senator, and other Republicans have derided the group of six senators as having little clout. Initial bargaining has also occurred among a separate group of four leaders — the second-ranking Republican and Democrat from both the House and Senate, a group to which both Cornyn and Durbin belong.

At a forum Friday at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Ryan, R-Wis., said, "We just have to get it done."

Durbin said, "We have seven days and the clock is ticking. Our bipartisan group continues to build support for the only deal in town." He said he wants to call the bill to the floor of the Senate early next week.

Lawmakers have until Jan. 19 to approve a government-wide stopgap spending bill, and Republicans will need Democratic votes to push the measure through. But some Democrats have threatened to withhold support unless an immigration pact is forged.

Trump's comments came as Durbin was presenting details of the compromise plan that included providing $1.6 billion for a first installment of the president's long-sought border wall.

Trump took particular issue with the idea that people who'd fled to the U.S. after disasters hit their homes in places such as El Salvador, Guatemala and Haiti would be allowed to stay as part of the deal, according to the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to publicly describe the discussion.

When it came to talk of extending protections for Haitians, Durbin said Trump replied: "We don't need more Haitians.'"

"He said, 'Put me down for wanting more Europeans to come to this country. Why don't we get more people from Norway?'" Durbin told reporters in Chicago.

The administration announced last year that it would end a temporary residency permit program that allowed nearly 60,000 Haitians to live and work in the U.S. in the wake of a devastating 2010 earthquake.

Trump insisted Friday that he "never said anything derogatory about Haitians other than Haiti is, obviously, a very poor and troubled country. Never said 'take them out.' Made up by Dems." Trump wrote, "I have a wonderful relationship with Haitians. Probably should record future meetings — unfortunately, no trust!" Trump did not respond to shouted questions about his comments as he signed a proclamation Friday honoring Martin Luther King Jr. Day, which is Monday.

Sens. David Perdue, R-Ga., and Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who both attended the Thursday meeting, said in a statement that they "do not recall the president saying these comments specifically." What Trump did do, they said, was "call out the imbalance in our current immigration system, which does not protect American workers and our national interest."

But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said by Durbin to have voiced objection to Trump's comments during the meeting, issued a statement that did not dispute the remarks.

"Following comments by the president, I said my piece directly to him yesterday. The president and all those attending the meeting know what I said and how I feel," Graham said, adding: "I've always believed that America is an idea, not defined by its people but by its ideals."

Associated Press writers Sara Burnett in Chicago and Jonathan Lemire, Andrew Taylor and Matthew Daly in Washington contributed to this report.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...y-denies-them/ar-AAuCqFJ?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

mtnman

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
3,846
Likes
6,192
Location
East Tennessee
Sometimes the truth ain't pretty and some may get their feeling hurt but it's still the truth. Africa, Haiti and most of South America are shithole countries.
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,364
Likes
1,869
Sometimes the truth ain't pretty and some may get their feeling hurt but it's still the truth. Africa, Haiti and most of South America are shithole countries.
With all due respect, that doesn't qualify as the truth because it is an undefined opinion. The term used doesn't even have a clear definition.

If he had said: "these places lack sanitary norms as compared to more developed countries," then it would be able to qualify as a statement where it can be determined to be either true or false.

The term used and the manner and context leave it simply as a personal attack on them. Of course, we probably know more or less what he meant.
 

the_shootist

Molon Labe!
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
21,932
Likes
24,800
...and while we argue over how to define shithole countries....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/13/trump-reportedly-asks-whos-pretty-korean-lady.html

The uproar over the “s---hole countries” remark attributed to President Donald Trump this week prompted some media outlets to follow up with a story about an incident that reportedly occurred in December.

Multiple reports Friday said Trump commented about a “pretty Korean lady” who attended an Oval Office briefing.


This is the kind of shit that passes for breaking news now! How did we fall so far???
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
'Racism must be in his DNA': Rep John Lewis says he will not attend Trump's State of the Union address after the President's reported comments calling Haiti, El Salvador and African nations 's***hole countries'
  • Democratic Rep. John Lewis of Georgia said he will not attend the State of the Union address by President Donald Trump, in an interview on Friday
  • Lewis also said that 'racism must be in Trump's DNA'
  • Lewis' comments follow Trump reportedly calling Haiti, El Salvador and African nations 's***hole countries'
  • Trump reportedly made the comments during a bi-partisan meeting regarding immigration in the Oval Office on Thursday
  • Trump tweeted that the words reported were 'not the language used'
  • A Senator who was at the meeting said on Friday that Trump did say those words


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5266467/Rep-John-Lewis-says-racism-Trumps-DNA.html#ixzz546IGE9Jv
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Diplomatic fallout: Trump hit with barrage of criticism over ‘s***hole countries’ remark
RT


Published on Jan 13, 2018
The fallout over highly disparaging remarks Donald Trump reportedly made about Haiti, El Salvador and African countries is continuing to grow. During a rant in the Oval Office, the president allegedly branded them second-rate countries. READ MORE: https://on.rt.com/8wql
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Trump says deal protecting the Dreamers is 'probably dead because the Democrats don't really want it' after claim that he railed against immigrants from 's***hole countries'
  • President Trump rejected a bipartisan deal over DACA Thursday at a White House meeting
  • Said the compromise did not include enough money for his border wall and did not make aggressive enough changes to the visa system
  • A group of six senators had pushed plan as a done deal on social media as the White House declared there was no deal
  • After the White House meeting, the Washington Post reported that President Trump had referred to a number of countries as 's***hole' nations
  • Trump says he used 'tough' language but didn't say what was reported
  • Dick Durbin, who was present, says Trump did make the remark, though
  • President has blasted Democrats in tweets on immigration several times since
  • Says: 'DACA is probably dead because the Democrats don’t really want it, they just want to talk and take desperately needed money away from our Military'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5268113/Trump-says-deal-protecting-Dreamers-probably-dead.html#ixzz54B7XjRZk
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Pope: It’s a sin if fear makes us hostile to migrants

By FRANCES D’EMILIO
Today

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has defined hostility and rejection of refugees and migrants as sin, encouraging people to overcome their “fully comprehensible” fears that these new arrivals might “disturb the established order” of local communities.

At his invitation, several thousand migrants, refugees and immigrants from 49 countries joined Francis at Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on Sunday, a day the Catholic Church dedicated to the issues and contributions of those who leave homelands in hope of a better life.

New arrivals must “know and respect the laws, the culture and the traditions of the countries that take them in,” he said. Local communities must “open themselves without prejudices to their rich diversity, to understand the hopes and potential of the newly arrived as well as their fears and vulnerabilities.”

“It is not easy to enter into another culture, to put oneself in the shoes of people so different from us, to understand their thoughts and their experiences,” Francis said.

“As a result, we often refuse to encounter the other and raise barriers to defend ourselves. Local communities are sometimes afraid that the newly arrived with disturb the established order, will ‘steal’ something they have long labored to build up.”

Similarly, he said, newcomers also are afraid: “of confrontation, judgment, discrimination, failure.”

“These fears are legitimate, based on doubts that are fully comprehensible from a human point of view,” Francis continued in his homily.

“Having doubts and fears is not a sin,” the pope said. “The sin is to allow these fears to determine our responses, to limit our choices, to compromise respect and generosity, to feed hostility and rejection.”

Francis elaborated: “The sin is to refuse to encounter the other, the different, the neighbor,” instead of seeing it as a “privileged opportunity” to encounter God.

In his almost five-year-old papacy, Francis has stressed the Catholic church’s mission to welcome vulnerable and marginalized people. His focus comes as wealthier countries, including several European Union nations and the U.S., are intent on increasing physical or legal barriers to migrants.

Later, greeting about 25,000 people in St. Peter’s Square, Francis advocated responding to the migrations that “today are a sign of our times” in four ways: “welcome, protect, promote and integrate” migrants.

https://apnews.com/ab9e287a72d744dd921bd1b68928f04e
 

mtnman

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
3,846
Likes
6,192
Location
East Tennessee
Pope: It’s a sin if fear makes us hostile to migrants

By FRANCES D’EMILIO
Today

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has defined hostility and rejection of refugees and migrants as sin, encouraging people to overcome their “fully comprehensible” fears that these new arrivals might “disturb the established order” of local communities.

At his invitation, several thousand migrants, refugees and immigrants from 49 countries joined Francis at Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on Sunday, a day the Catholic Church dedicated to the issues and contributions of those who leave homelands in hope of a better life.

New arrivals must “know and respect the laws, the culture and the traditions of the countries that take them in,” he said. Local communities must “open themselves without prejudices to their rich diversity, to understand the hopes and potential of the newly arrived as well as their fears and vulnerabilities.”

“It is not easy to enter into another culture, to put oneself in the shoes of people so different from us, to understand their thoughts and their experiences,” Francis said.

“As a result, we often refuse to encounter the other and raise barriers to defend ourselves. Local communities are sometimes afraid that the newly arrived with disturb the established order, will ‘steal’ something they have long labored to build up.”

Similarly, he said, newcomers also are afraid: “of confrontation, judgment, discrimination, failure.”

“These fears are legitimate, based on doubts that are fully comprehensible from a human point of view,” Francis continued in his homily.

“Having doubts and fears is not a sin,” the pope said. “The sin is to allow these fears to determine our responses, to limit our choices, to compromise respect and generosity, to feed hostility and rejection.”

Francis elaborated: “The sin is to refuse to encounter the other, the different, the neighbor,” instead of seeing it as a “privileged opportunity” to encounter God.

In his almost five-year-old papacy, Francis has stressed the Catholic church’s mission to welcome vulnerable and marginalized people. His focus comes as wealthier countries, including several European Union nations and the U.S., are intent on increasing physical or legal barriers to migrants.

Later, greeting about 25,000 people in St. Peter’s Square, Francis advocated responding to the migrations that “today are a sign of our times” in four ways: “welcome, protect, promote and integrate” migrants.

https://apnews.com/ab9e287a72d744dd921bd1b68928f04e
Fuck Francis, he's not the Pope. Benedict XVI is the Pope, ya don't "Quit" being Pope and he's not dead.
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
As Shutdown Talk Rises, Trump’s Immigration Words Pose Risks for Both Parties

The New York Times
By JONATHAN MARTIN, MICHAEL D. SHEAR and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
7 hrs ago




WASHINGTON — President Trump’s incendiary words about immigration have dampened the prospects that a broad spending and immigration deal can be reached by the end of the week, raising the possibility of a government shutdown with unknown political consequences for lawmakers in both parties.

Democrats facing re-election in states that Mr. Trump carried in 2016 fear that a government funding crisis, precipitated by an immigration showdown, could imperil their campaigns. And they are growing increasingly uneasy that liberal colleagues eyeing White House bids are demanding that any spending bill beyond a stopgap measure that expires on Jan. 19 include protections for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children.

“Welcome to our world,” said Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, who is running for re-election in a state that Mr. Trump carried by 19 percentage points.

“We’ve got people running for president all trying to find their base, and then you’ve got people from Trump states that are trying to continue to legislate the way we always have — by negotiation,” Ms. McCaskill said. “And never the twain shall meet.”


But Republicans face their own uncertainties. With their party controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress, they could receive most of the blame for a shutdown, even if Senate Democrats effectively block a spending plan that does not extend the immigrant protections of an Obama-era program known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

“To believe that you can successfully blame Democrats for a shutdown over the DACA debate is naïve,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina.

The angry recriminations continued from allegations that Mr. Trump called African nations “shithole countries” during a White House meeting last week with lawmakers.

The president on Monday attacked Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat who is leading the immigration talks for his party and attended the White House meeting, as having “totally misrepresented” Mr. Trump’s comments in his public recounting of them. And two Senate Republicans, Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia, have raised questions over whether the term was even used, with Mr. Perdue flatly denying it had.

Mr. Graham, who admonished Mr. Trump in the meeting, has called Mr. Durbin’s account basically accurate. He took an unmistakable swipe on Monday at Mr. Perdue and Mr. Cotton.

“Since the meeting I don’t remember things differently,” Mr. Graham said. “I know what I heard, and I know what I said to the president.”

Ten Democratic senators are on the ballot this November in states that are heavily white, have little sympathy for undocumented immigrants and that Mr. Trump won. Many of these lawmakers have no desire to force a government shutdown over an immigration issue. Some of the party’s most at-risk seats are in Missouri, Indiana, West Virginia and North Dakota.

If they side with Senate Republicans, Congress could pass yet another short-term spending bill by Friday that would end the shutdown threat for now as negotiations continue.

But some Democrats considering presidential runs, such as Senators Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, are pressing Democrats to oppose any government-funding bill — no matter how short-term — that does not also protect the approximately 800,000 young immigrants brought to the United States as children, known as Dreamers. Mr. Trump rescinded the program in September and gave Congress six months to enshrine its protections into law.

Mr. Cotton, an immigration hard-liner, suggested that these Democrats will pay a price if their brinkmanship goes too far and they are seen as shutting down the government if they cannot offer amnesty for illegal immigrants.

What most alarms congressional negotiators is that political imperatives appear to have overtaken the immigration policy deliberations in the still-unfolding debate over Mr. Trump’s vulgar description in last Thursday’s meeting of some nations.

Two of the Republicans involved in the discussions complained on Monday that the days-long controversy over Mr. Trump’s comment had imperiled hopes for an agreement.

Mr. Graham said he spoke with the president on the telephone on Saturday and urged him to show the sort of leadership and restraint that many Republicans were pleasantly surprised to see during an earlier, televised immigration discussion in the White House last Tuesday.

“I told him that the President Trump that showed up Tuesday is the one that can lead the country on multiple levels,” Mr. Graham said. “I think the president realizes that it takes a bipartisan solution. But you’re not going to get a deal by tweeting, you’re going to get one by talking.”

Representative Mario Diaz-Balart, Republican of Florida, suggested that the leaks about Mr. Trump’s comments had been as detrimental as the words themselves to the cause of reaching an accord on immigration.

“You have to be able to sit down and have real tough, serious conversations,” said Mr. Diaz-Balart. “And those conversations have to be kept within the folks who are negotiating.”

Mr. Trump seemed to underscore Mr. Diaz-Balart’s remark when he took to Twitter on Monday to mock Mr. Durbin as “Dicky Durbin.”

The president also pressed a talking point that Republicans are sure to use as the government nears its funding deadline: That the issue of the week is not as much about immigration as the continued funding of the military.

Both Mr. Graham and Mr. Diaz-Balart were present when Mr. Trump made the disparaging remarks about African nations, which the president now denies. But the two lawmakers were reluctant to discuss the matter, not wanting to further complicate hopes for reaching an agreement.

White House officials said they remain hopeful that an immigration deal can be reached with Democrats despite what Marc Short, the president’s legislative director, called “all the noise.”

“We feel like there’s still a deal to be made there,” Mr. Short said on Monday. “Things we are asking for are common sense.”

Mr. Short said that the proposal offered by Mr. Graham and Mr. Durbin, which was summarily rejected by Mr. Trump during the contentious Oval Office meeting last week, remains the most likely basis for compromise as lawmakers and the White House attempt to find common ground.

“It is on the table as a starting point for the congressional conversations,” Mr. Short said. He said those negotiations will begin again in earnest on Tuesday, hosted by Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the House majority leader, who dined with the president at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach on Sunday night.

The negotiators include Mr. Durbin, who told local reporters in Illinois on Monday that he stood by his account of Thursday’s meeting with the president.

“I know what happened. I stand behind every word I said,” he said, adding that he is focused on the immigration legislation “full time.”

A White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity suggested on Monday that Mr. Trump had said “shithouse countries,” not “shithole countries.” Mr. Durbin expressed disbelief that anyone would see a substantive difference between the terms.

“I stick with my original interpretation. I am stunned that this is their defense,” he said.

Two Republican officials independently said on Monday that Mr. Trump had said the original phrase.

Mr. Short said the current proposal devised by Mr. Graham and Mr. Durbin did not do enough to satisfy the president’s demands for enhanced border security. And, he said, it failed to broadly end what Republicans call “chain migration,” a process by which American citizens can eventually bring their extended families into the United States over a period of many years.

Mr. Short argued that the current proposal would actually increase the ability of DACA recipients to bring some family members into the country since, under their current legal status, they are barred from sponsoring entry for anyone else.

“Their proposal only expands chain migration for that group,” he said.

Under pressure from immigrant rights activists, Democrats are likely to resist broader efforts to limit immigrants from sponsoring their family members, an idea that Democrats view favorably as “family reunification” — a part of American immigration law for decades.

Mr. Short also urged Democrats to put off efforts to address immigrants from Haiti, Honduras, El Salvador and other countries who have been in the United States under a program called Temporary Protected Status. The Graham-Durbin plan called for issuing new visas for those immigrants after the Trump administration said they would end T.P.S. status for people from those countries.

“I don’t think we envision it as part of this deal,” Mr. Short said of the T.P.S. program. “That expands it into comprehensive immigration reform.”

For Democratic lawmakers, the pressure from their left flank to demand relief for the Dreamers is only rising.

“We are going to be telling Democrats the following: If you vote for a spending bill that does not include relief for Dreamers, you are voting for funds that will be used to deport Dreamers,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, an immigrants rights group.

But the wisdom of eventually forcing a shutdown to shield the migrants is dividing the party.

Some Democratic strategists, such as former Representative Steve Israel of New York, said Democrats should seize their leverage now that Republicans already have enough political headaches, namely the president’s historic unpopularity.

“They absolutely have the upper hand as a matter of policy and as also as a matter of politics,” said Mr. Israel. “Republicans cannot afford to shut down the government in one of the roughest midterm environments they’ve ever had. Democrats have the upper hand and they should play the upper hand.”

Yet to other Democrats, forcing a government shutdown in the same fashion that congressional Republicans did in President Barack Obama’s second term would be to take a considerable political risk, the legislative equivalent of the nuclear option.

“It looks like a big Washington mess to people,” said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s former top strategist. “Dealing with Trump is obviously a very, very difficult issue not just for Democrats but for Republicans because he is so mercurial and unreliable. The question is: Have you reached that point now where you want to employ what is the most explosive tool in your toolbox?”

Or as Ms. McCaskill put it: “I am not interested in drawing a line in sand as negotiations continue because I think that’s how negotiations get blown up.”

Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the Morning Briefing newsletter.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-both-parties/ar-AAuKnu3?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
5,055
Likes
6,954
This Town Is Proof That Trump's Wall Can Work

by Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/15/2018 - 22:00


Authored by Paul Sperry, op-ed via The New York Post,

When charges of “racism” and “xenophobia” fail, Democrats’ fallback argument against President Trump’s proposed border wall is that it simply “won’t work,” so why waste billions building it? Tell that to the residents of El Paso, Texas.





Federal data show a far-less imposing wall than the one Trump envisions - a two-story corrugated metal fence first erected under the Bush administration - already has dramatically curtailed both illegal border crossings and crime in Texas’ sixth-largest city, which borders the high-crime Mexican city of Juarez.

In fact, the number of deportable illegal immigrants located by the US Border Patrol plummeted by more than 89 percent over the five-year period during which the controversial new fence was built, according to Homeland Security data reviewed by me. When the project first started in 2006, illegal crossings totaled 122,261, but by 2010, when the 131-mile fence was completed from one end of El Paso out into the New Mexico desert, immigrant crossings shrank to just 12,251.

They hit a low of 9,678 in 2012, before slowly ticking back up to a total of 25,193 last year. But they’re still well below pre-fence levels, and the Border Patrol credits the fortified barrier dividing El Paso from Mexico for the reduction in illegal flows.

And crime abated with the reduced human traffic from Juarez, considered one of the most dangerous places in the world due to drug-cartel violence, helping El Paso become one of the safest large cities in America.

Before 2010, federal data show the border city was mired in violent crime and drug smuggling, thanks in large part to illicit activities spilling over from the Mexican side. Once the fence went up, however, things changed almost overnight. El Paso since then has consistently topped rankings for cities of 500,000 residents or more with low crime rates, based on FBI-collected statistics. The turnaround even caught the attention of former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and other Obama administration officials, who touted it as one of the nation’s safest cities while citing the beefed-up border security there.

Federal data illustrates just how remarkable the turnaround in crime has been since the fence was built. According to FBI tables, property crimes in El Paso have plunged more than 37 percent to 12,357 from their pre-fence peak of 19,702 a year, while violent crimes have dropped more than 6 percent to 2,682 from a peak of 2,861 a year.

The overall crime rate in El Paso continued to fall last year, prompting city leaders to trumpet the good news in a press release that noted,“Because El Paso is a border town, its low crime rate may surprise you.”

El Paso City Manager Tommy Gonzalez boasted that the city will “continue to lead our country in public safety.”

Another core promise made by Trump to justify constructing a massive wall spanning from Texas to California is that it will slow the flow of drugs coming across the border from Mexico.

“We need the wall for security. We need the wall for safety,” Trump said last week while answering questions about the sweeping new GOP immigration bill. “We need the wall for stopping the drugs from pouring in.”

On that score, El Paso already has exceeded expectations.

Drug smuggling along that border entry point has also fallen dramatically. In fact, since the fence was completed, the volume of marijuana and cocaine coming through El Paso and seized by Border Patrol agents has been cut in half.

The year before the wall was fully built in 2010, the volume of illegal drugs confiscated by the feds along the El Paso border hit 87,725 pounds. The year after, the amount of drug seizures plummeted to 43,783 pounds. Last year, they dropped even further to a total of 34,329, according to Border Patrol reports obtained by The Post.

All told, a legion of empirical evidence supports the idea a southern border wall could, in fact, work. There is also anecdotal evidence. In local press accounts, El Paso residents and business owners alike have praised the fence, citing it as an effective deterrent to both illegal crossings and crime.

Now Trump plans to build a possibly bigger deterrent.

The existing fence along the El Paso sector, which is made of a combination of corrugated steel and metal meshing, towers 21-feet high at some points and is already hard to climb. But the Trump wall, which will begin construction in El Paso, will be even taller and have multiple layers of security.

Still, Democratic leaders are adamantly opposed to it. They argue the $18 billion wall won’t work to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs, and will only be a massive waste of tax dollars.

“We think, frankly, the building of the wall, its cost is not justified either by its efficiency or effectiveness,” House Minority Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Thursday.

Even local Democrats are arguing with success.

“That wall in itself is a racist reaction to a racist myth that does not reflect the reality of this country at all,” said Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-El Paso).

source: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-15/town-proof-trumps-wall-can-work
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Why Trump voters need the immigrants they want to turn away

CNN

Analysis by Ronald Brownstein, CNN
1 hr ago


The irony in President Donald Trump's hostility to immigration, expressed again in reports of his vulgar comments about Africa and Haiti last week, is that in appealing to the racial and cultural resentments of his political base he is directly threatening their economic interests.

The equation is unmistakable: as America ages, the older and blue-collar whites at the core of Trump's electoral coalition in 2016 need more working-age immigrants to pay the taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare.

Without robust immigration, each American worker will need to support substantially more retirees in the future than workers do today. And that will greatly increase the pressure for either unsustainable tax increases or biting benefit reductions in the federal retirement programs that the older and blue-collar whites central to Trump's support rely upon so heavily.

Trump's hostility to immigration ignores one of the central dynamics of 21st century American life: an increasingly non-white workforce will pay the taxes that support Social Security and Medicare for a rapidly growing and preponderantly white senior population.

"As every baby boomer retires over the next 15 years, we are going to need many more of these (diverse) young people to take their place," says William Frey, a demographer at the center-left Brookings Institution.

Because the US largely shut off immigration between 1924 and 1965, today's senior population is preponderantly white. Frey has calculated that three-fourths of all Americans 55 and older are white. Those older whites were the cornerstone of Trump's coalition in the 2016 election: whites over 45 gave Trump over three-fifths of their votes, and provided a majority of all the votes he received, according to exit polls.

Frey and other demographers project the white share of the senior population will decline very slowly over the coming decades-even as the total number of seniors explodes. The Social Security Trustees have forecast that the number of seniors receiving Social Security and Medicare will grow from about 48 million today to 86 million by 2050. That's an increase of nearly 40 million.

Though many Americans incorrectly think of the programs as a kind of massive 401(k) where their earlier taxes pay for their own later benefits, Social Security and Medicare are funded by what amounts to a generational compact. Each generation of workers, through their payroll taxes, funds the benefits for retirees at the same time. As the number of seniors increases, that means the US needs to increase the number of workers if it is to keep a sustainable balance between those receiving benefits from the programs and those paying the taxes that support them.

Because of the underlying child bearing and aging trends among native-born Americans, that won't be possible without immigration.

Frey has calculated that from 2000 through 2016 the absolute number of whites younger than 15 -- and not just the share -- declined in 45 of the 50 states. (The only states that increased their population of whites under 15 over that period were Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Carolina and Idaho.) Over those years, the total number of whites younger than 15 fell by nearly 6 million, Frey found, while the number of Hispanic, Asian and mixed race kids increased by about seven million. (The number of young African-Americans slightly declined too.)

Like other demographers, Frey projects that the 2020 Census will find that non-white kids represent a majority of all Americans younger than 18; kids of color are already a majority of all K-12 public school students.

What these numbers make clear is that, whatever Trump does to restrict immigration, there is no cavalry of white kids coming to fill the jobs that the mostly white baby boom is vacating.

Non-white young people-reinforced by future immigrants-will drive almost all of the workforce's future growth, according to widely respected projections by the non-partisan Pew Research Center.

In a detailed forecast last year, Pew examined the trajectory of the prime working-age population -- that is, ages 25 to 64 -- over the next two decades. Strikingly, it found that over that period the number of prime working-age adults whose parents were both born in the US will actually decline by over eight million. But Pew projects that loss will be offset by increases in the number of both prime-working age adults who are either the children of immigrants (13.5 million), or future immigrants themselves (17.6 million).

Looking further ahead, Pew has calculated that under current levels of immigration, the workforce will increase by about 30 million people through 2065-virtually equal to the increase in the senior population over coming decades. Almost all of that workforce growth will come from immigrants and their children, which Pew projects to account for fully 88% of the nation's total population increase over that period.

A growing workforce would ease the fiscal pressure that the expanding senior population will impose on Social Security and Medicare. But Trump's efforts to reduce legal immigration would consign the U.S. to virtually no growth in the workforce, Pew projects. Trump has endorsed legislation from Republican Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia, two attendees at last Thursday's explosive White House meeting, that would cut the total level of legal immigration in half. Pew projects that under that level of future legal immigration, the size of the workforce will remain virtually stagnant over the next half century.

If the workforce remains essentially unchanged while the senior population grows by 40 million, each worker will be required to fund 80% more seniors than they do now. That demographic imbalance represents a political tourniquet that will inexorably increase pressure for cuts in Social Security and Medicare -- a prospect that polls show are anathema to the older and working-class whites Trump relies on.

"We shouldn't be shutting the door on this (immigration)," Frey says. "Trump ... is really putting us in a very difficult situation demographically and also economically in the future."

Yet Trump, like many congressional Republicans and conservative commentators, almost always portrays immigrants as economic, cultural and security threats. From the outset, Trump's coalition has been centered on the voters -- primarily older, blue-collar, evangelical and rural whites -- most uneasy about the growing number of immigrants and demographic change more broadly.

Voters who supported deporting all undocumented immigrants represented a minority in almost all the Republican primaries in 2016 -- yet provided a majority of Trump's votes in almost all of those contests.

Pew Research polls last year found that the strongest predictors of warm feelings toward Trump were agreement with the ideas that the growing number of immigrants "threatens traditional American customs and values," that Islam is inherently more violent than other religions and that growing diversity overall was bad for the country.

In the general election against Hillary Clinton, Trump won 26 of the 30 states with the smallest share of foreign-born residents and lost 16 of the 20 with the most. And in a national NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last September, Trump voters from 2016 were nearly five times as likely as Clinton voters to say immigration weakens, rather than strengthens, the nation.

Trump portrays his drive to slash legal immigration as standing up for the economic interests of the American-born working-class. But the National Academy of Sciences, in an exhaustive study, found "little evidence" that immigration had affected employment levels for native-born workers, and a "very small" impact on the wages of lower-skilled Americans that was confined largely to native-born adults who had not finished high school and recent immigrants themselves, two relatively small groups.

Even Trump's call for prioritizing economically based immigration over family reunification obscures the central implication of his proposal -- which is to severely reduce the total number of legal immigrants. By contrast, the comprehensive immigration reform bill that stalled in the House after if passed the Senate with bipartisan support in 2013 tilted the overall balance more toward high-skills immigrants and limited some forms of family reunification without cutting total legal immigration, as Trump, Cotton and Perdue are demanding.

In his repeated appeals to nativist sentiments, and his multiplying efforts to reduce immigration and remove immigrants (such as those from El Salvador), Trump may indeed be reflecting the racial and cultural anxieties of many of his voters. But the principal economic impact of slashing immigration as deeply as Trump is seeking would be to destabilize the federal retirement programs that are indispensable to those same voters. With his systematic offensive against immigration, Trump is feeding the prejudices of some of his supporters -- while threatening their ability to keep food on the table when they retire.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-to-turn-away/ar-AAuL8NJ?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
 

searcher

Mother Lode Found
Mother Lode
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
161,923
Likes
41,782
Mr. President: please, no Norwegians!!!



By By Signe Wilkinson
Tuesday
Posted at 6:00 AM


The summer before last, my family spent two weeks investigating Norway and I can say with some certainty that we do not want more Norwegians coming to the United States.

For starters, they are just too darned good-looking. The middle-aged hostesses on our Norwegian airlines were more beautiful than Scarlett Johansson. No one there has any detectable body fat, so they look good in whatever they wear. Even the Norwegians who appear to have come from what President Donald Trump recently referred to as “s---hole countries” look great, and the biracial young people we saw working in museums, stores and cafes were stunning. I mean, even more beautiful than anyone on the Philadelphia City Council.

Letting in too many gorgeous people will damage our already-rocky self-esteem and we’ll have to listen to more Oprahs and Dr. Phils telling us how to deal with it. Norwegians, by the way, deal with it by vacationing in Greece.

Secondly, they apparently know how to run a country. Not only do they have universal health care, six-week vacations and an excellent school system, their public transportation is superb. Their cities and towns are amazingly clean, though it’s true that, as tourists, we didn’t hang out a lot on the gritty side of the tracks. I was secretly glad to see, however, that the walls along the tracks we traveled were lined with subpar graffiti. Made me feel at home.

I know, I know. It’s a small country (only 5.26 million beautiful people) and if they let French people in, as Philadelphia used to do, or others from more southerly countries, the place would probably go to heck. There are other downsides. They didn’t seem to have much by way of an Americans With Disabilities Act. There’s a step up from the platform to their modern train cars, and there are no ramps. Instead, when an elderly lady couldn’t manage it, random Norwegians on the platform stepped in and gently picked her up by her elbows and helped her get situated in the car with her baggage. While that method warmed my inner libertarian, I’m not sure it would work on Philadelphia’s mass-transit system.

Another downside was that Norway is brimming with Teslas. We were told that their purchase was subsidized. There were electric charging stations all over the place. Really, it doesn’t speak well of a country to be assisting Elon Musk in any possible way. Still that’s the kind of thing they do to keep their carbon footprint down.

One other reason President Trump might reconsider his sudden Norwegian enthusiasm is that immigrants from Norway, and nearby countries like it, have come here and produced female editorial cartoonists! I’m one-quarter Norwegian blood. Ann Telnaes, the most brilliant and most caustic Trump caricaturist, is of Swedish stock and Jen Sorensen, whose drawing pen is a Viking spear, descends from Denmarkians.

Still, in an effort to get on the president’s team, I invited my tall, svelte, handsome Norwegian cartooning colleague, Roar Hagan and his tall, svelte, beautiful wife, to move to America. His response was, “I love America and Americans. But life here is, except the climate, quite good.”

So, Mr. President, if you really want more Norskies, all you have to do is guarantee free universal health care, decent vacations, environmentally friendly transportation and great schools that teach everyone how to speak, write and read English better than we do. That would, indeed, improve our country.

Signe Wilkinson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist whose work is syndicated by The Washington Post Writers Group.

http://www.buckscountycouriertimes.com/opinion/20180116/mr-president-please-no-norwegians