ADVERTISEMENT

Trump Looking to Divert $6.1 Billion From Military to Build Wall

Lost the argument? LOL. You didn’t have the winning argument from the word go.

Then you're delusional.

I presented you with actual facts, which I get are an allergy-inducing phenomenon to Trump supporters, and you continued to come up with spurious reasons that are nonsensical as to why the military should babysit the border.

In short, I'm arguing with someone who has a severe case of rectal cranial inversion. I guess that's on me. Good day, old chap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IACub
Actually, I've seen it reported that there are greater concerns with terrorists entering the country through the U.S./Canada border, it's just people are so consumed with this fake emergency and controversy.

Blaming Mexicans has a greater appeal than blaming the Canadians.

Fewer than 800 people have illegally crossed from Canada into the U.S. annually over the past five years, compared to hundreds of thousands apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border in that same time period. It a quatitative, not qualitative thing,
 
Fewer than 800 people have illegally crossed from Canada into the U.S. annually over the past five years, compared to hundreds of thousands apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border in that same time period. It a quatitative, not qualitative thing,

What was my point?

Who is the greater existential threat? Terrorists or brown people coming in to work in Trump's hotels and casinos?

And the people you refer to are the ones they've caught. The northern border is barely patrolled, so it's easy entrance for terrorists to come through. Why isn't the northern border not an emergency?

Again, this is all about Trump's vanity project and trying to look like a winner to the dimwits who voted for him on the basis of the wall (that Mexico was going to write us a check for).
 
Then you're delusional.

I presented you with actual facts, which I get are an allergy-inducing phenomenon to Trump supporters, and you continued to come up with spurious reasons that are nonsensical as to why the military should babysit the border.

In short, I'm arguing with someone who has a severe case of rectal cranial inversion. I guess that's on me. Good day, old chap.

Who said anything about the military babysitting the border? You’re just making stuff up now.
 
Lol. I think you know where the cuts and sacrifices will be made.

I just can't believe we are in the year 2019 and a POTUS's reelection hinges on whether a fuggin' medieval wall is built. Seriously, that's what we're ultimately talking about here, Trump's reelection bid. That's what this whole fuggin' hubbub is about. It's ridiculous.
Yes, the election and MAGAs cheering him at some "rally." IMO Trump does not really believe most of the stuff he touts, he just thinks that will keep his base at his feet.
 
Unbelievable. It's like some of these crazy dodo birds have an insatiable need to reinforce every negative sterotype of Trumptwits.
I would try arguing with this instead of northern as you will get a better response and dialogue
brick.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackNGoldBleeder
He’s saying you JUST referred to it as a military issue and got owned. Are you experiencing dementia symptoms? Hey, @BlackNGoldBleeder, we found HROT’s Dori! LOL!

He clearly and unambiguously said the military and border security "go hand in hand." I proved to him he was wrong with facts and he chose to look more uninformed and ridiculous by insisting he was right. That is on him. I'm not going to engage someone who not only has the cognitive dexterity of a fruit fly but is disingenuous about the things he has said (or in this case written).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes
The potential precedent should make this move unpopular for everyone. There is no reason whatsoever to think that we have an emergency on the immigration front. There is obviously room for reform, but the answer is definitely not for the POTUS to rule by fiat. We aren't supposed to have a King in this country.
But he's owning the libs! Amirite?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerome Silberman
If the law allows a declaration of a national emergency and if it’s upheld by the courts (it will be) then there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

MAGA!

JFC. I can't wait until a Democrat gets to use the "pick and choose" which parts of the Constitution to follow. If the Supreme Court backs this bullshit then our Constitution is effectively null and void. I hope you like dictatorships.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackNGoldBleeder

Link to him taking away money from “military families in need of housing”? As a side note, it’s hilarious watching liberals freak out about the military losing some of its budget. Funny watching Trump get you guys to change your stances.

Disaster victims should have insurance.

Opioid addicts? We need to build more prisons.
 
What was my point?

Who is the greater existential threat? Terrorists or brown people coming in to work in Trump's hotels and casinos?

And the people you refer to are the ones they've caught. The northern border is barely patrolled, so it's easy entrance for terrorists to come through. Why isn't the northern border not an emergency?

Again, this is all about Trump's vanity project and trying to look like a winner to the dimwits who voted for him on the basis of the wall (that Mexico was going to write us a check for).

I assumed you had no point and that were you just parroting a headline, but to your "point", the reason for a wall along the Canadian border.

Drugs and terrorists coming from the southern border are much more an concern than Canadians or terrorists coming across from the northern border. That said the wall which costs 0.12% of the national budget or 1% of the military budget is just supposed to lessen the flow of people walking across our southern border unaccounted for. If it lessens the transportation of drugs or terrorist that would just be considered a welcome bonus.

Some actual numbers:

Distribution of Border Patrol seizures ALL substance
Southern Border: 1,555,552 lbs (99%)
Eastern and Western Coastal Borders: 8,054 lbs (.5%)
Northern Border: 905 lbs (.05%)
Nationwide Total: 1,564,511 lbs.

fzhpkq.jpg

I'm guessing neither terrorists coming from Canada or brown people coming across to work for Trump are an existential threat, but I would chose terrorist in your red herring of a question.

Covered previously, but fewer than 800 people have illegally crossed from Canada into the U.S. annually over the past five years, compared to hundreds of thousands apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border. If a terrorist wanted to be successful you would go with the 500k people walking across the southern border last year. And the border patrol says many crossers are from countries other than South America. So the concern that terrorists might attempt a crossing at the southern border is more than a scene in Sicario, which was great movie.
LINKY

I think the wall was one of a number of reasons people voted for him and I don't think they care who pays for it, but you are welcome to that opinion.


The Canadian invasion is real, lots of grape smugglers and banana hammocks.

f171411m.jpg


Border Patrol swarm:
http://video-monitoring.com/beachcams/lakeworthinlet/pics/v18/feb1719a/f171404a.mp4

I have yet to hear one person point out that Trump asked for $800M in humanitarian aid at the southern border in his compromise... and Capitol Hill responded (with the deal that was just approved) by cutting that humanitarian aid by 50%.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 86Hawkeye
I assumed you had no point and that were you just parroting a headline, but to your "point", the reason for a wall along the Canadian border.

Drugs and terrorists coming from the southern border are much more an concern than Canadians or terrorists coming across from the northern border. That said the wall which costs 0.12% of the national budget or 1% of the military budget is just supposed to lessen the flow of people walking across our southern border unaccounted for. If it lessens the transportation of drugs or terrorist that would just be considered a welcome bonus.

Some actual numbers:

Distribution of Border Patrol seizures ALL substance
Southern Border: 1,555,552 lbs (99%)
Eastern and Western Coastal Borders: 8,054 lbs (.5%)
Northern Border: 905 lbs (.05%)
Nationwide Total: 1,564,511 lbs.

fzhpkq.jpg

I'm guessing neither terrorists coming from Canada or brown people coming across to work for Trump are an existential threat, but I would chose terrorist in your red herring of a question.

Covered previously, but fewer than 800 people have illegally crossed from Canada into the U.S. annually over the past five years, compared to hundreds of thousands apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border. If a terrorist wanted to be successful you would go with the 500k people walking across the southern border last year. And the border patrol says many crossers are from countries other than South America. So the concern that terrorists might attempt a crossing at the southern border is more than a scene in Sicario, which was great movie.
LINKY

I think the wall was one of a number of reasons people voted for him and I don't think they care who pays for it, but you are welcome to that opinion.


The Canadian invasion is real, lots of grape smugglers and banana hammocks.

f171411m.jpg


Border Patrol swarm:
http://video-monitoring.com/beachcams/lakeworthinlet/pics/v18/feb1719a/f171404a.mp4

I have yet to hear one person point out that Trump asked for $800M in humanitarian aid at the southern border in his compromise... and Capitol Hill responded (with the deal that was just approved) by cutting that humanitarian aid by 50%.

You had too many typos and grammar issues for me to get past the first couple paragraphs.

Most of my questions were facetious and rhetorical. I couldn't care less if the wall is built or not.

This is still a vanity endeavor and like firing a bb gun at a battleship. It will do next to nothing to put a serious dent in the illegal immigration problem.

And if something of substance was actually ever done about the evil brown people crossing the border, there will be a lot of rich people cleaning their own pools. I will experience pangs of heartfelt sorrow should that day ever occur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu1jreed
If the law allows a declaration of a national emergency and if it’s upheld by the courts (it will be) then there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

MAGA!
You are correct. Other than it being disingenuous and based on falsehoods but then consider the source and you have your answer. Northern, if you had a child who lied as often as our President, I bet you would place him in some sort of treatment. This guy lies, lies and lies all the time. You can never believe him about anything. This may be the way to becoming a success in the business world but it is no way to run a nation.
 
Alaska....Congress gave my President the money he needed for his wall a couple of years ago but he refused it. What the military does is their business..and in their budgets to get it done. We are fighting an avowed enemy of this nation in the ME. Not so in the American SW. Plus the President is taking resources away from the military to finance this fiasco.
How freakin’ stupid can you be to believe the lies mt President is feeding you daily? Obviously, your critical thinking skills are lacking.
 
Good. That’s what 5-4 is for.

So, in other words, when a Republican POTUS (or Trump) abuses the power of the executive branch, you're okay with that and think the Supreme Court should back him. But if a Democrat were to behave similarly, you'd have a problem with it and would want to rely on the Supreme Court to stop said Democrat.

And you wonder why people think Trump supporters are morons and hypocrites. Lol, nothing personal, but you really are a dumbass if you believe half the shit you've been saying on here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
The left has complained of our bloated military budget for as long as I have been alive. I'm sure they'll have no problem with the shift of resources...

How long have you been alive?

That is true for me because Ronald Reagan's first year in office was the year I was born.

And it really depends what gets cut that will either appease the left or have them up in arms (pun intended).
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamesvanderwulf
So, in other words, when a Republican POTUS (or Trump) abuses the power of the executive branch, you're okay with that and think the Supreme Court should back him. But if a Democrat were to behave similarly, you'd have a problem with it and would want to rely on the Supreme Court to stop said Democrat.

And you wonder why people think Trump supporters are morons and hypocrites. Lol, nothing personal, but you really are a dumbass if you believe half the shit you've been saying on here.

Those are your words, not mine.

Two completely different issues.

The president has a right to defend the country and its borders. The Supreme Court will uphold the declaration.

As for the liberals referencing a gun declaration, none of you have been specific on what that would look like.
 
Those are your words, not mine.

Two completely different issues.

The president has a right to defend the country and its borders. The Supreme Court will uphold the declaration.

As for the liberals referencing a gun declaration, none of you have been specific on what that would look like.

I'm connecting the dots here. It's the most logical connection based off your words. You clearly said the Supreme Court should back Trump on this, just like you said yesterday without ambiguity that the military and border security go hand-in-hand. So, let's not pretend I'm making shit up here. You basically said the Supreme Court should back Trump but rule against a Democrat 5-4.

Yes, when there is an actual emergency, a president will act and get the backing from Congress. Most of the sane Republicans are not with Donnie on this. There is no emergency here. Shit, Donnie himself said he didn't really need to do this. I mean, c'mon now, this is about Donnie's ego and pandering to people like you.

Last, I'm not a liberal. Ronald Reagan believed in sensible gun control and I do as well. Frankly, I don't see how more gun laws will prevent a lot of these shootings anymore than I see how more drug laws will prevent people from OD on opiates. If a Democratic POTUS were to declare a national emergency based on gun violence, I wouldn't support it. The national emergency is mental-health related and gang-related. In other words, we need to clean up the streets and treat drug addiction as a public health issue. And we need fewer people in prison for non-violent drug offenses and more people in prison for violent crimes and sexual exploitation of young children where the fuggin' key is thrown the fug away. But that's just me.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT