Bowsite.com

Trump wants $5 billion for a wall, Dems refuse to give a nickel. Both sides dug in... Trump with his signature issue, the Dems determined to deny him a win at all costs.

The House and Senate need to get a bill together that 51 Senators and the President will sign, and I don't think Trump is taking much less than $5b now that he has made the oval office speech. That would mean the Dems have to budge. And I don't think there is much chance for 67 Senators with democrats in minority to agree on a bill with chimp change to override a presidential veto. If the GOP folds, this administraton and the party are done. Any thoughts for what happens next?

Trump really might have to go with declaring a national emergency. What else will break the stalemate?

The WORST thing that can happen would be for Trump to get his $5 billion which funds just a fraction of a wall, and the Dems get what they want with Dreamer amnesty. In which case we still have illegals pouring across the border, and still have uncontrolled chain migration. A lose-lose for America.

The only true win-win would be if Trump get his 4 pillars for major immigration reform with $25b for a complete wall, and is able to give more in exchange. But Dems likely want the issue to exploit, and want the future illegal voters too much to allow any real progress.

We shall see.

That said, he didn’t because I think he didn’t want to look like he didn’t deliver on his campaign promise and because he wants that feather in his cap. Because of that, the Dems dug in and it really has nothing to do with caring about border security from either party and everything to do with notching a political win.

To that end, no clue how this one’s gonna end.

That will give the "dreamers"/illegals an incentive to become legal without just giving it to them and it would make it easier for ICE to do their jobs and rid our Country of illegals.

Of course, this only comes after the full funding for the "wall" and border security has been approved and implemented!!

But then Trunp has the video where he said he would gladly shut down the government which puts a lot if heat on him when paychecks stop.

I think he gets no less that 3.5 billion for a wall; but that make a such a little difference along the e tire border rhat no one will notice.

He ought to put the entire value in ONE section of wall and monitor results. No one gets over, they all pour into the next town over... and then THEY can join the chorus for wanting more wall !

Where was this urgency when he had the house and the senate?

From a political standpoint, is it stupid that he is demanding it now when he lost the house?

If he thinks Pelosi is giving in, he’s mistaken.

This will not end well for trump.

EO: Not one dime of taxpayer monies will go to any ILLEGAL nor will they qualify for any kind of social benefit (education, SNAP, housing, medical, etc.). However, for humanity's sake, there will be a check off on your tax form allowing the social Democrats to create a separate fund created for that specific use. Make the pro-crime/open border supporters put their money where their mouths are.

Nancy...tear down YOUR wall!

Last I checked 4 Republicans were vocal about the potus re-opening the govt.

Trump is losing support in public and among his party. That much is clear.

I’m not sure you’re in the position to demand anything from the American people and hold federal workers hostage.

Actually Not a reminder at all. he had 2 years. Instead we saw Total incompetence and now he blames the Dems?

He’s a fool.

Corrected

The last 'super majority' was held by the democrats during the first two years of the Obama administration. What did they accomplish for immigration under their complete Democratic control and vision, Putz? Nothing. Bunch of friggin' phonies.

So yeah, the Dems can dig in on this and try to stymie Trump on the wall. Maybe they will even succeed. But where does that get them? What spending legislation do THEY want? What promises and priorities do THEY think they can deliver to their left-wing backers? Because none of that shit will pass either without republicans votes. And Trump can use the veto and force more cooperation than Dems cam ever deliver. Total gridlock for the forseeable future. Dems stop and wall and gain what? Nothing.

They dont realize yet that Trump is a different animal, and they just took the "progress" completely out of "progressive". And would call that a win. Funny!

That number (as dubious as it may be) is only the cost side if the cost/BENEFIT analysis. You guys that keep making an economic argument for the wall either don’t understand this or are completely ignoring it.

And why wasn’t funding it funded the first two years of DJT’s term? Because it would have been defeated then and the loss would have been with control of both the House and the Senate. Now, he can at least blame the Dems for blocking things. Politics.

Asked and answered two posts up. The filibuster rule and 60 votes, where a couple of Dems would have needed to vote yes.

When we have sanctuary cities and healthcare for all (illegal or not) it is just a big invitation to come here.

I wonder how many illegals claim exempt on there W4?

They can’t even use the “Asian” moniker for this Muslim nightmare. via Muslim refugee charged with raping 10-year-old girl

A 34-year-old Muslim immigrant has been arrested and charged with brutally raping a 10-year-old girl in Minnesota and the local media in Minneapolis has refused to identify the man as a refugee from Somalia.

KSTP 5, an ABC affiliate in Minneapolis, referred to the suspect, Ahmed Hersi Abdi as “A Minneapolis man.” CBS affiliate WCCO 4 used the same description, giving no mention of the man’s background or how he arrived in the U.S.

The attack occurred Sunday evening in an apartment complex in the city’s Cedar Riverside neighborhood, also known as “Little Mogadishu” for its high concentration of Somali refugees imported from United Nations refugee camps in Africa.

Abdi allegedly followed the girl out of an elevator. He asked for her name and offered his hand to her. She shook his hand and Abdi refused to let go. Police said he proceeded to rape the girl in the hallway of the apartment building.

Authorities used video surveillance footage to help track down the suspect, who was arrested about 24 hours later on Monday in St. Paul.

The U.S. government has resettled more than 110,000 Somali refugees since the early 1990s and shipped in another 8,858 during the most recent fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, according to U.S. State Department data.

Witnesses said they heard screaming in the hall and saw a young girl crying, so they flagged down an off-duty police officer.

The girl was sent to Hennepin County Medical Center for treatment.

The Minneapolis Police Department’s John Elder said the officers knew who the suspect was after seeing the video because they’d had frequent encounters with him.

Abdi has a long rap sheet. According to court records, he was convicted of trespassing in 2003, disorderly conduct in 2003 and public urination in 2012.

Several other previous charges against Abdi have been dismissed. In 2011, he was charged with two counts of fifth-degree assault and one count of disorderly conduct, which were all dismissed after he was found incompetent to stand trial, according to court records.

The court dismissed another fifth-degree assault charge in 2010 citing “mental deficiency.”

In 2002, a fifth-degree assault charge against Abdi was dismissed. And, last year, a lurking charge against him was also tossed out of court.

Refugee resettlement watchdog Ann Corcoran, who has followed the refugee program closely since 2007, said in a case like this it is “pretty easy to figure out” that Abdi is an immigrant and yet no one in Minnesota is asking how he has managed to evade deportation with such a lengthy criminal record.

“Ahmed Hersi Abdi has a long criminal record. So, why wasn’t he deported?” she asks in her latest blog.

CNN’s Jim Acosta mocked for accidentally proving that border walls work

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi might want to confiscate someone’s selfie stick.

CNN’s Jim Acosta was mocked across social media on Thursday for posting a video that was meant to downplay President Trump's claims of a border crisis -- but ended up supporting his argument that border barriers improve security.

“Here are some of the steel slats that the president’s been talking about,” Acosta said while reporting from the southern border. “But as we’re walking along here, we’re not seeing any kind of imminent danger.”

The CNN reporter added, “There are no migrants trying to rush toward this fence.”

Acosta then declared there was “no sign of the national emergency that the president has been talking about” and it was “tranquil” near him. He captioned the video, “I found some steel slats down on the border. But I don’t see anything resembling a national emergency situation.. at least not in the McAllen TX area of the border where Trump will be today.”

CNN’s chief White House correspondent – who seemingly uploaded the video from a local Burger King – is in Texas awaiting Trump’s border visit. While Acosta often clashes with the president and his aides, pundits suggested he did the president a favor this time.

Media watchdogs were quick to point out that the CNN reporter’s video helps prove Trump’s point that a wall or barrier along the Southern border could help prevent illegal border crossings.

“Jim Acosta just posted one of the biggest self owns ever,” social media strategist Caleb Hull responded. ‘He's walking along the border where there's a wall in place talking about how there's nothing that ‘resembles a national emergency situation’ and ‘there's no migrants trying to rush.’ That's because there's a wall, Jim.”

continued...

Nancy...tear down YOUR wall!

You do understand that illegal immigrants due contribute economically to this country, right? Every study I've seen that has conducted a cost/BENEFIT analysis has shown illegal immigrants to be anything but a net drain on the economy.

JTV, can you at least acknowledge that (1) cheap labor benefits US citizens and (2) the numbers you quote entirely ignore that benefit?

Build the wall and open the gates.

I bet it proves to be effective, and they have no choice but to go around. Thus demonstrating the need for more wall. Mile by mile, we need to gain control of our borders. If pregnant women can get it, what would stop MS-13?

In the cost/benefit analysis - they are not counting the millions of illegals who jump the fence, have babies, who then are on the US dole legally and forever. And their kids. And kids of kids. And then as citizens they get to bring in relatives as sponsors via chain migration laws. And they have kids.

The problem is enormous in scale. And no one has the balls to deal with it once and for all. Except for Trump. But man... the swamp is dirty and it's creepy vines/tentacles touch everything. Even his own party (that loves to exploit cheap labor) is against him.

See attached - Ohio 16ft concrete sound walls are averaging only 1.8 million per mile.

"We believe CNN declined a report from KUSI because we informed them that most Border Patrol Agents we have spoken to told us the barrier does in fact work.

We have continuously been told by Border Patrol Agents that the barrier along the Southern border helps prevent illegal entries, drugs, and weapons from entering the United States, and the numbers prove it."

The questions that need to be asked.... confronted..... WHY exactly do you want to continue the influx of illegal immigrants and the laundry list of compounding problems they bring? That is really the only unanswered question. And a question they should be forced to answer. With a camera in their faces..... on the record.

If it's just so Trump won't get credit for getting it done, working on doing what he promised..... then get them on record choosing to be vindictive and petty over American's security on video as well. But make them answer the questions. Stop the BS about how it will be "ineffective". That is a knowing lie. And used solely to deflect and avoid answering the real questions.

Not sure which they value more - power, or trump hate.

Migrants from Terrorist Nations Try to Enter U.S. Via Mexico at Record Rates—300% Hike in Bangladeshis in Texas Alone

Federal agents along the southern border routinely encounter individuals from terrorist nations and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) considers them one of the top threats to the United States, according to a congressional report made public this month. Titled “Stopping Terrorist Travel Through Illicit Pathways to the Homeland,” the document outlines the findings of a lengthy investigation involving Special Interest Aliens (SIA) by the House Homeland Security Committee.

SIA’s are individuals from countries outside the western hemisphere—mostly the Middle East, Asia and Africa—that pose a national security risk to the U.S. In Laredo, Texas alone there was an astounding 300% increase in immigrants from Bangladesh, a south Asian Islamic country well known as a recruiting ground for terrorist groups such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda Indian Subcontinent (AQIS).

Congressional investigators found that the number of SIAs flowing north via Latin America has increased tremendously in the last few years thanks to established Transitional Criminal Organizations (TCO) that facilitate travel along drug and migrant smuggling routes. “On a recent Committee staff delegation trip to Latin America, Panamanian officials communicated to Committee staff that tens of thousands of SIAs have entered Panama since 2014,” the report states. “Colombian officials communicated similar numbers to Committee staff, stating that hundreds of SIAs have entered Colombia each year for the past few years. In both countries, nearly all the SIA migrants were headed to the United States and originated from the Middle East, Asia, and Africa—including Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Bangladesh, India, Eritrea, and many others. Additionally, encounters with these special interest individuals resulted in the seizure of tens of thousands of fraudulent documents—including passports and visas—that facilitated travel from their countries of origin through the Americas.”

The report includes several disturbing cases of Islamic terrorists who made it to the U.S. via Mexico. Among them are Mohammad Aldairi, a Jordanian arrested last summer in New York for illegally smuggling SIAs from Yemen across the U.S.-Mexico border into Texas.

Others include Pakistani Sharafat Ali Khan, convicted for smuggling fellow Pakistanis with terrorism ties into the U.S.; Somalian Abdullah Omar Fidse, a member of the al-Shabaab terrorist group; Somalian Ahmed Muhammed Dhakane, a member al-Qaeda linked al-Barakat and Al-Ittihad Al-Islami and Lebanese Mahmoud Yousef Kourani, a fighter, recruiter and fundraiser for Hezbollah.

Kourani paid a Beirut consular officer $3,000 for a Mexican visa and an additional $4,000 to be smuggled across the U.S.- Mexico border, according to information included in the report. Some of the other SIAs also operated smuggling rings through south and central America.

“Latin America and the Caribbean are the major initial entry points to the Western Hemisphere for SIAs,” the House Homeland Security Committee report states. “Many countries in the region continue to face economic and governance challenges, as well as consistently high levels of violent crime. Additionally, many of the countries in the Americas have lenient visa and immigration policies in place, even for individuals from ‘special interest’ countries.

Lastly, the frequency of international flights from ‘special interest’ regions around the world into Latin America and the Caribbean continues to increase. These regional issues create an attractive environment for illicit travel of SIAs and other nefarious actors into the Western Hemisphere with the end goal of reaching the United States.”

Adding to the problem is that Hezbollah is “growing at an alarming rate in Latin America,” according to Committee investigators. “Designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the State Department, Hezbollah has been operating in Latin America since the early 1990s when it worked with Iran to carry out the 1994 bombing of a Jewish Community Center in Argentina,” according to the report.

The House investigation found that, as of September 2018, a record 630 Bangladeshi nationals have been arrested trying to enter the U.S. illegally in Laredo, Texas alone. That marks a 300% increase from the previous year. “The routes facilitating the illicit travel of these Bangladeshis are mostly controlled by TCOs and drug cartels, which charge tens of thousands of dollars to smuggle SIAs and other migrants across the U.S.,” the committee writes.

It also confirms what Judicial Watch reported months ago, that the recent migrant caravan has included several SIAs and suspected terrorists. Judicial Watch traveled to the Guatemala-Honduras border back in October and government sources in Guatemala confirmed that SIAs waiting to get smuggled into the U.S. through Central America integrated with poor Hondurans in the caravan. Among them were nationals of Bangladesh, which appears on the Treasury Office of Foreign Asset Control’s Counter Terrorism Designations list

Just because we don't want a wall doesnt mean we condone open borders. the two are not mutually exclusive.

you can have border security without a wall.

So with drones and sensors, you know they are coming across. But it does NOTHING for catching them. And more importantly, for returning them from wherever they came.

Right now the Dems have it set up where they all claim asylum, we hold them in camps as long as allowed. And then drop them off by the busload in the US and hope they show up for court. HOW exactly does the Dem phrase "increase border security" fix any of that??!?

Using the Asset Forfeiture Funds (money seized from cartels and drug runners...4 to 5 Billion $ per year), and bonding them for continued use. One and done!

Why didn't the House step up, and bust this through, while they still had a majority? Zero chance they'll get a compromise using this tact, at this point!

There's literally no valid argument against getting it done this way, and Mexican Cartels pay for the Wall. How is this not a win for their constituents???

IN the case of senate rules, it took at least 8 democrats to vote with the republicans to get anything passed in the last congress.

The only time in recent memory that there was a filibuster-proof majority was the democrats in the first two years of obama.

Where in the constitution does it address how the Senate does business? Until you find it and quote it to me, you are mistaken.

Is this being reported elsewhere, some place credible?

Frank, we discussed that another "wall" thread just a few days ago. I cited a NPR interview with a former USCG Commandant who claimed the same thing.

Matt

The executive branch has already shut down the federal government. It is currently threatening to extend this government shut down for however long it takes for the legislative branch to cave.

Let us break this down.

First of all, the framework of our government is based on checks and balances. Power is divided into three branches: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. The Legislative branch controls the purse strings of government and creates laws. The Executive branch carries out those laws. The Judicial branch tells us whether the laws are constitutional or not. Each branch was designed to be able to balance the other branches

In this case, the executive branch wants to: (1) take governmental and tax payer cash, (2) create its own law, (3) take away private property from American citizens (4) create its own federal works project.

At least three of these functions fall within the power/ responsibility of the legislative branch.

This is one of the most blatant power grabs by the executive branch in recent history.

Once that power is exercised, it is going to be difficult or impossible to regain any balance again. The executive branch was never meant to have that much power.

Is this constitutional? Very doubtful. Should all Americans be concerned? That is a question for you to answer yourself.

So, what is the problem here? If national emergencies can be declared by the executive branch for non-emergency purposes why would that branch ever let go of that power again?

the seizure of private property (known as “eminent domain”, a body of law which says the government cannot just take your home without due process).

The US/Mexican border is 1,933 miles long. It runs through 4 states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas). Only 33% of that land is actually owned or managed by the Federal Government.

A sizable percentage of that land is owned by the Indian nations. It is land preserved for those tribes by treaty and land given under treaty is not land owned by the United States. These tribes already have a lot of reasons to be angry at the Federal Government. This would be pouring additional gas on an open flame.

The other 64% of that land is privately owned.

How much land would have to be taken? The amount of land that the Federal Government would have to take would likely run 1,237 miles long to 12,371 miles deep (assuming a 1 to 10-mile DMZ from the border into the United States). Even if we could only take 100 to 500 ft of land in densely populated areas, that is a lot of private property that is going to be seized by the Federal government.

The land necessary for this project would also run through some highly populated areas in the US such as San Diego, Calexico, Nogales, El Paso, and Laredo. There will be a lot of Americans who are going to have their homes and businesses taken by the federal government. Which will also mean a lot of lawsuits.

In terms of the federal works project, these types of works include hospitals, bridges, highways, walls and dams. These projects may be funded by local, state, or federal appropriations. If they are federal, they are funded by the legislative branch of our government (the same branch that our executive branch is currently trying to take power from). Is the seizure of power constitutional? Not likely given the separation of powers discussed above.

Finally, these considerations do not take into account the sheer cost, human and monetary, that will be involved.

The Department of Homeland Security estimates the current cost at $21 billion for construction alone (not counting costs of maintenance or costs associated with increased military/federal patrolling).

Ask yourself a simple question. When was the last time that you saw a governmental project brought in under time and under budget?

Does anyone remember the “big dig” in Boston, Mass? The actual costs are likely to be much higher. This estimated cost also does not include compensating folks for taking their land or the associated impact upon their businesses.

The Federal budget deficit grew to $779 billion dollars in 2018 according to the Treasury Department. How are we, as a country, going to fund this project? How are we, as a country, going to deal with the additional debt? Unlike private businesses, our country cannot declare bankruptcy.

think about it.

I guess Obama didn't think about that, when he QUADRUPLED the National Debt back in 2009.

The Wall funding would cost each American about 17 dollars. "Medicare For All" on the other hand, would cost each American about $9,000 dollars.

Tell me again about our debt problem...when your Dem heroes are throwing out proposals that would bankrupt this Country in a matter of seconds!

I remember you posting that. Acosta was recognized by conservatives when they thought he agreed with Trump's position. Now CNN reports on what was said by trial witnesses and we have a different view of CNN.

I support the wall just because of the people coming over illegally, and I think that problem is only going to grow as the economies south of us deteriorate further.

I agree with you on the drugs, it is a secondary issue. IMHO different strategies/resources than a wall will be needed if we want to stop most of the drug problem coming from the south, but the wall is needed to prevent illegal human traffic.

Texas Ranchers dont want the wall in TX , it would block the access to the Rio Grande and water for livestock ( and, duh, you cant build it on the Mexico side of the river)

And everybody in Texas knows this, and that's why the Congressional reps from border towns don't support the wall scam - they know it will never be built. There are already dozens of eminent domain cases in court, and they will tie it up for years.

Agreed. Don't make 'the wall' about something it isn't.

Matt

Simple, if they can do it on a TV show, we can do it for real. Just like 'Yellowstone', re-direct the river;-)

Put people at the border to give every illegal border crosser an "assault rifle."

Dems will immediately demand background checks on every one of them.

Federal immigration officials seized enough fentanyl — one of the deadliest drugs in the world — last year to kill nearly twice the entire population of the United States.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) unit revealed in a year-end report that in total, about 2,737 pounds of fentanyl were seized in Fiscal Year 2018....