The Bigliest shut down ever

Written By: mickysavage - Date published: 10:34 am, January 9th, 2019 - 95 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, Donald Trump, International, Politics, us politics - Tags:

Donald Trump does not do things by halves.

He is now into week 2 of the US Government shut down and if it lasts until the weekend will be the bigliest US Goverment shutdown ever.

The reasons for the shut down are pretty strange. Donald Trump wants Congress, the newly elected Democratic Congress to pay for the Mexican wall, the one Trump always said was going to be paid by the Mexicans.

Of course the new Democratic Congress disagreed. It seems that everyone had done a deal to keep the Government open while the vexed issue of the wall was discussed.

The Republican controlled Senate passed a funding continuation bill unanimously. This would have allowed the Federal Government to continue to operate until the matter was resolved.

But the orange one then had a temper tantrum. It appears that he may have been hurt by criticism of his friends at Fox News. Diddums.

He then floundered about trying to blame the Democrats for the fiasco even though he had previously said on National TV that he would have been proud to shut down the Government just so he could get his wall built.

But the American Public were having nothing of it. And the Democrats boxed him in by being willing to discuss anything. Except for funding of the wall. The one the Mexicans were meant to fund.

And the Orange one then threatened to use emergency powers to build his wall. Using powers such as eminent domain to seize the land and other emergency powers to fund the construction.

But he had a couple of problems, there was no emergency and the justifications relied on were shown to be factually faulty.

That faulty that the person who pointed out that the vast majority of Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ 4,000 terrorists claim came to the US via airports and not as she implied through the Mexican Border was a Fox News host.

The Independent has the detail:

Even Fox News is fact checking the Trump administration when it claims that a border wall is necessary because terrorists are coming into the US through a porous southern border.
Fox host Chris Wallace did as much on Sunday during an interview with White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who falsely implied that thousands of terrorists had been apprehended as they attempted to cross into the US from Mexico.
In reality, the data set Ms Sanders appeared to be citing showed that no terrorists were arrested at the southwest US border.
“We know that roughly, nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally. And we know that our most vulnerable point of entry is at our southern border, Chris,” Ms Sanders said.
Ms Sanders, here, appears to be citing 2017 data, the last year for which data is available, which does show that 4,000 people were stopped by the US Department of Homeland Security that year on suspicion of being terrorists. Most of those stops occurred in airports.
“Wait. Wait. Wait. I know the statistic, I didn’t know if you were going to use it, but I studied up on this. Do you know where those 4,000 people … where they’re captured? Airports,” Wallace said.
“Not always,” Ms Sanders interjected.
Wallace continued: “The State Department says there hasn’t been any terrorist that they’ve found coming across the border from Mexico”.
Ms Sanders doubled down, however, insisting: “It’s by air, it’s by land, and it’s by sea. It’s all of the above”.

When hosts on Fox News say there is no imminent border crisis there is no imminent border crisis.

Since then Trump has decided to go on fake media run National TV to explain himself and to do a little fundraising on the side.

There are numerous examples of presidential addresses made to calm a frightened public. This will be the first to frighten a calm public.
— Stuart Stevens (@stuartpstevens) January 8, 2019

But I think that the best analysis of the reason for his behaviour is in this simple tweet.

https://twitter.com/ezraklein/status/1082684182034141184

Interesting times …

95 comments on “The Bigliest shut down ever ”

Comments are now closed

Andre 1

9 January 2019 at 11:08 am

Just a reminder. The only reason for talking about the wall right from the beginning was so Dementia Don would remember to bash immigrants at his rallies.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/trump-campaign-advisers-invented-border-wall-idea/ar-BBRQFrC
Anne 2

9 January 2019 at 11:19 am

So, the US of A is now at crisis point over 1500 refugees whose lives were endangered in Honduras and they are seeking legitimate refuge in America. Right?

For some reason Monty Python comes to mind.
- DJ Ward 2.1
  
  9 January 2019 at 12:35 pm
  
  When they get to Mexico they enter a nation that can give them refugee status. They pass through the legal refugee destination to the US boarder. So no they are not seeking legitimate refuge in the US.
  
  They are economic refugees.
  - Kevin 2.1.1
    
    9 January 2019 at 1:00 pm
    
    The USA is based on economic refugees for the entirety of its modern history.
    - DJ Ward 2.1.1.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 1:26 pm
      
      Yes. But it was all based on the rules of the day.
      Trump supports legal immigration, so he is not anti immigration.
  - Anne 2.1.2
    
    9 January 2019 at 1:01 pm
    
    They’re still in practical terms refugees even if ‘local officialdom’ chooses to call them something else. 🙄
    - DJ Ward 2.1.2.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 1:30 pm
      
      No they ceased to be refugees once the entered Mexico. If they didn’t apply for refugee status when the crossed the Mexico boarder how can you then call them refugees. They have chosen not to take the legal status of refugee.
      
      They are economic migrants.
      They are only refugees of poverty in there own nation. Fix there own nation.
      - Anne 2.1.2.1.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 2:47 pm
        
        I repeat:
        
        They’re still in practical terms refugees…
        
        I don’t give a damm about petty fogging regional definitions. They were forced to flee their country of origin and they are legitimately seeking to re-settle in America presumably thinking they will be safe there. They failed to apprise themselves of the fact the US is now in the early grip of nationalistic fascism as defined by the prehistoric caveman (even looks like one dressed in a suit) called Donald Trump.
  - Sabine 2.1.3
    
    9 January 2019 at 8:14 pm
    
    How dare they want to come to he United States to pick fruit, clean houses and Trumps Golf Course Hotels, be line cooks and such. How dang diddely do dare they.
Brutus Iscariot 3

9 January 2019 at 1:30 pm

New Zealanders simply can’t grasp the challenges that the US faces around immigration, so have little right to throw stones.

Our “wall” is thousands of kilometres of ocean in every direction.
- ken 3.1
  
  9 January 2019 at 4:28 pm
  
  “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”
  - Andre 3.1.1
    
    9 January 2019 at 4:45 pm
    
    Not while the White House is infested with a muddled asshole yearning to scream free.
    - North 3.1.1.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 8:37 pm
      
      Ladies and Gentlemen I give you carnival barker Donald J. Ward……
      - Sacha 3.1.1.1.1
        
        10 January 2019 at 7:57 am
        
        woof!
DJ Ward 4

9 January 2019 at 2:34 pm

Anybody would think reading the post that there are no illegal immigrants.
That they don’t intercept gang members trying to enter the US.
That they don’t intercept people with criminal convictions.
That the don’t intercept human trafficking, including children for sex.
That the don’t intercept dangerous drugs.
That the numbers don’t represent an emergency situation.

Anybody would think Schumer and Pelosi have never advocated for a boarder wall.

Hate Trump obstructionists are 100% responsible for the present situation.
- Macro 4.1
  
  9 January 2019 at 3:25 pm
  
  What a load of bullshit.
  So many false assertions it’s just not worth a full reply. I refer you to UNHCR for some reseach on just what constitutes an asylum seeker, and their rights and the responsibilities of govts which are signatories. The rest of your abject diatribe shows you to be little more than a signed up follower of the orange neanderthal currently running a nation into oblivion. He is holding the country to ransom over a stupid and needless vanity project.
  - DJ Ward 4.1.1
    
    9 January 2019 at 4:50 pm
    
    Your comment is TDS.
    
    An asylum seeker is required to register at the First Nation. Eg Mexico.
    Trump is not ignoring his responsibility for asylum seekers. If they present themselves at the boarder there case is heard in a court to decide the legitimacy of the application. It’s the fake asylum seekers who pass trough other signatory nations that don’t obey the laws on asylum seekers.
    
    Based on your comment nobody illegally crosses the boarder. Which is proof you don’t have a clue what your saying. Your just regurgitating Pelosi and Schumer lies.
    
    Guess what. The Republicans are going to reintroduce the same laws they voted for in the past to get the wall. Let’s see the obstructionists lie and be hypocritical some more.
    - Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1
      
      10 January 2019 at 1:49 am
      
      [citation needed]
      
      but considering all the shit that you’ve been talking I doubt if you can back up your assertions.
- mickysavage 4.2
  
  9 January 2019 at 3:27 pm
  
  Pretty well all the scary ones came through airports. And the point of the wall is?
  - te reo putake 4.2.1
    
    9 January 2019 at 3:33 pm
    
    Exactly, ms. No wall would have stopped 9/11, an atrocity which, coincidentally, started at an airport.
    - Macro 4.2.1.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 3:56 pm
      
      Yep. And the statistics of threats by terrorism compared to the threat of death by firearms in the US show that US citizens are far more likely to be killed by a local than any imagined terrorist.
      - DJ Ward 4.2.1.1.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:12 pm
        
        More likely to be killed by an illegal with a gun than a Terrorist.
        
        Macro 4.2.1.1.1.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:23 pm
        
        Yeah. Now prove it.
        
        Andre …
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:36 pm
        
        DJ Ward should be able to do that fairly easily. Because for all the bedwetting about about terrorism, the actual numbers involved are very very low. So even with the rate of violent crime committed by illegals being much lower than the crime rate committed by citizens, with there actually being 10 million-ish illegals the absolute number will almost certainly be higher than for terrorism.
        
        Macro …
        
        9 January 2019 at 6:30 pm
        
        It’s about 1 in 450 chance for an illegal alien killing compared to 1 in 12 of a native born US citizen. See WP for chart. US citizens are far more likely to commit a felony than illegal aliens. Again see WP. Sorry can’t link at the moment.
        
        Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.1.1.2
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:50 pm
        
        [citation needed]
    - Anne 4.2.1.2
      
      9 January 2019 at 4:07 pm
      
      Excellent point trp.
      
      The Dems should use 9/11 as a counter argument at every opportunity. Nothing like a personal experience of that magnitude to demonstrate an important fact.
      - DJ Ward 4.2.1.2.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:05 pm
        
        It’s a Personel experience when an illegal immigrant is released from prison in a sanctuary city, then harms a family member. Instead of being handed to ICE and deported.
        
        The Dems have no counter argument because they are hypocrites.
      - gsays 4.2.1.2.2
        
        9 January 2019 at 8:21 pm
        
        My hunch is in the states that 9/11 is out of bounds, regardless of the pay-off.
        
        Anne 4.2.1.2.2.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 9:21 pm
        
        Never thought of that. I think your hunch is correct. Feel a bit bad about suggesting it now.
    - DJ Ward 4.2.1.3
      
      9 January 2019 at 5:02 pm
      
      Illegal immigrants kill about 2000 US citizens a year. That’s not counting heroine deaths etc from drugs, drug murders and violence that comes across the boarder. That’s 10s of thousands of deaths. So worse than 9/11.
      
      You have to go to 2001 for some irrational argument. Trump talks about terrorists and nobody knows if any real ones have snuck into the US. That however is only one of a long list of reasons Trump gives for the wall. Have you got irrational counter arguments for them too.
      - Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.3.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 5:58 pm
        
        Yeah, you seem to be talking out your arse again.
        
        https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/have-undocumented-killed-63000-us-9-11/
        
        Although the president has attempted to cast immigrants as criminals since he first announced his candidacy in June 2015, various analyses have already undermined the notion that people in the United States without documentation were more likely to commit crimes in general than those born in the country. One of those studies, published in February 2018 by the libertarian group Cato Institute, examined data on criminal convictions in Texas for 2015 and found that:
        
        There were 951 total homicide convictions in Texas in 2015. Of those, native-born Americans were convicted of 885 homicides, illegal immigrants were convicted of 51 homicides, and legal immigrants were convicted of 15 homicides. The homicide conviction rate for native-born Americans was 3.88 per 100,000, 2.9 per 100,000 for illegal immigrants, and 0.51 per 100,000 for legal immigrants (Figure 2). In 2015, homicide conviction rates for illegal and legal immigrants were 25 percent and 87 percent below those of natives, respectively.
        
        Illegal immigrants made up about 6.4 percent of the Texas population in 2015 but only accounted for 5.4 percent of all homicide convictions. Legal immigrants made up 10.4 percent of the Texas population but accounted for only 1.6 percent of homicide convictions. native-born Americans made up 83 percent of the Texas population but accounted for 93 percent of all homicide convictions.
        
        Although the Trump administration has called immigration at the southern U.S. border a “crisis” that has a deleterious effect on public safety, unauthorized border crossings are currently the lowest they have been in decades and studies have consistently disproved links between immigration and crime. Further most of the families who crossed during enforcement of Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy were charged with misdemeanors.
        
        Still more likely to be killed by a native born USian in the US than by an illegal immigrant.
        
        DJ Ward 4.2.1.3.1.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 10:57 pm
        
        Its an irrational argument.
        What are you suggesting because they are slightly better at not committing crime that’s a justification for the crime of illegally entering a country. Or all US born citizens should be deported first. Heh that group commits less murders so let’s let them stay illegally in the country.
        What about everything else? The rapes, the violence, the gang crime, the human trafficking, the drug syndicates. The not paying income taxes. Where are all those figures? Are the murder figures the only crime catagory the illegals are better at than US born citizens. Fake news wouldn’t cherry pick would they. What, only figures from Texas? Was there something wrong with the other 49 States.
        
        Trump likes legal immigrants. They are vetted as being good people. Illegal immigrants are not in the nation legally, and should be deported.
        
        The fact is they do commit crime. ICE deports those who get caught and aren’t protected by sanctuary city’s.
        
        Draco T Bastard …
        
        10 January 2019 at 1:31 am
        
        Its an irrational argument.
        
        No it’s not – it’s simply the facts.
        
        You seem unable to back up your assertion and thus you’re still talking out your arse.
        
        Do you ever get sick of talking shit?
      - Macro 4.2.1.3.2
        
        9 January 2019 at 9:12 pm
        
        A former top counterterrorism official under Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump just torched the current administration’s plans to build a wall mainly to keep terrorists out of the United States.
        
        In an article that appeared Tuesday on Just Security, a website about national security and the law, Nicholas Rasmussen decimated Trump’s argument for a border wall — and made it known he thought the president and others in the administration are lying about the extent of a crisis.
        
        “There is no wave of terrorist operatives waiting to cross overland into the United States. It simply isn’t true,” he wrote. “Anyone in authority using this argument to bolster support for building the wall or any other physical barrier along the southern border is most likely guilty of fear mongering and willfully misleading the American people.”
        
        ….
        
        Individuals affiliated with terrorist groups like al-Qaeda or ISIS know that it’s harder to enter the US by coming over the border since 9/11, he says. So terrorist groups have a different game plan: compel people already in the United States to launch terrorist attacks. That, unfortunately, is what led to a 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California, that killed 14 people and a 2016 assault on a nightclub in Orlando, Florida, that left 49 people dead.
        
        “For every dollar spent on a $5 billion southern border wall, American public safety could benefit exponentially more from spending it on counterterrorism elsewhere,” Rasmussen writes.
        
        But he also points to another revealing factor: The administration has yet to show the public data that proves its case. If what the Trump administration is saying were true, “there would certainly be current intelligence assessments laying out the details of this threat, even citing specific cases of imprisoned terrorists that had made their way through the criminal justice system,” he wrote. None of that exists right now — at least not yet.
        
        https://www.vox.com/2019/1/8/18174294/trump-border-wall-terrorism-shutdown-speech
        
        Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.3.2.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 10:06 pm
        
        But he also points to another revealing factor: The administration has yet to show the public data that proves its case. If what the Trump administration is saying were true, “there would certainly be current intelligence assessments laying out the details of this threat, even citing specific cases of imprisoned terrorists that had made their way through the criminal justice system,” he wrote. None of that exists right now — at least not yet.
        
        As I say: The Right-wing have to lie because reality never conforms to their beliefs.
        
        DJ Ward 4.2.1.3.2.2
        
        9 January 2019 at 11:41 pm
        
        In the beginning Trump never used the word Terrorism.
        
        “Thank you. It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.
        
        But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.
        
        It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”
        
        It’s the left focusing on singular things. Because in regards to the full issue Trump is correct. Dems like old Obama dead wood on one issue is irrelevant to that original speech. It ignores every single other issue. It falsely puts the wall arguments validity on the financial returns on a small issue. If intentialy ignores the vast costs of everything else.
        
        Can’t you see Fake News. Tell the truth but bullshit at the same time.
        
        Draco T Bastard …
        
        10 January 2019 at 1:33 am
        
        In the beginning Trump never used the word Terrorism.
        
        And he was still lying.
        
        He put in ‘terrorism’ as another lie.
        
        But I speak to border guards
        
        Don’t care what the border guards say as its only anecdote. The important thing is the measured stats which the border guards don’t know.
        
        This isn’t a take down of the border guards. Just stating that what they see is not the whole picture.
        
        Can’t you see Fake News.
        
        Yes I can – you’re spreading the shit all over the place.
        
        Jenny - How to get there? …
        
        10 January 2019 at 7:10 am
        
        None so blind, as those who will not see.
        
        https://thestandard.org.nz/dance-mf-dance/#comment-1568760
        
        Jenny – How to get there? 7.1.1.1
        6 January 2019 at 6:00 pm
        
        ……The 14 Characteristics of Fascism
        Lawrence Britt, Spring 2003
        
        Tick them off.
        
        DJ Ward 7.1.1.1.1
        7 January 2019 at 11:07 am
        I tried. Didn’t tick one.
        
        Really?
        
        Maybe we need to go through some of them with you.
        
        1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism…..
        
        DJ, you must be the only one in the world who wouldn’t tick this one. Including of course, the President himself.
        
        ‘I am a nationalist’: Trump’s embrace of controversial label sparks uproar…….
        
        Continued……
        
        DJ Ward …
        
        10 January 2019 at 8:45 pm
        
        Having pride in and wanting ones nation to do well, be safe etc, IE Nationalism is not fascism. It’s an ism all of its own.
        
        As soon as you went down the, Jenny has no argument so will resort to calling the person a Nazi, You lost your argument.
        
        Notth …
        
        10 January 2019 at 10:40 pm
        
        All the evidence in this thread points to Donald J. Ward being a bitter old drunk…..
        
        Draco T Bastard …
        
        18 January 2019 at 9:55 pm
        
        Having pride in and wanting ones nation to do well, be safe etc, IE Nationalism is not fascism.
        
        True.
        
        The problem is that no country is made up of a single nation. The people of a country are a make up of multiple nations.
        
        My parents were English.
        My neighbours are Indian
        
        There’s also some Micronesian, Melanesian, Russian, American, Somali and the list goes on.
        
        These are all NZers and great people.
        
        But, but but, you say, these people need to conform to NZ which is true but we must accept that NZ values are going to change in response to having people from multiple nations here.
        
        A culture isn’t a fixed ‘thing’. It is constantly evolving and we all, personally, need to take action to help it evolve in the best way.
        
        And, no, that’s not deciding that British Culture is the best and we should simply stick with that but picking and choosing from the multiple cultures that we have available and even inventing new cultures.
        
        Culture evolves or it dies.
        
        Just like every bloody thing else.
    - Dennis Frank 4.2.1.4
      
      9 January 2019 at 5:30 pm
      
      I agree. However! Whereas most of us decided that a wall to keep folks out is a Bad Idea (in respect of Berlin), Trump seems to have gotten the notion from usage by Israel (to keep Palestinians out apparently). How do I know? Several weeks ago there was a news report in which he cited it as validation. He said it works.
      
      Conspiracy theorists have yet to identify this as evidence of a jewish plot, but it can’t be too far away. I’m still hoping the wall will be made out of leggo. Using recycled plastic, preferably. Then it can be taken apart & recycled again when the Hondurans elect a government that gives them good reason to stay home.
  - DJ Ward 4.2.2
    
    9 January 2019 at 4:54 pm
    
    Rubbish. The rapists, violent, gang members, traffickers that can’t get into the US via ports of entry cross the boarder to get in.
    
    The point if the wall is the same as when Pelosi and Schumer voted for it. Wherever a wall exists the number of illegal crossings significantly reduces.
    - Andre 4.2.2.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 5:14 pm
      
      You got any idea what actually happens at the border right now? The only bits that aren’t already fenced or vehicle barriered and sensored up the wazoo are either the Rio Grande (where a structure impeding floodwaters is prohibited by a treaty dating to the 70s), or extremely rugged terrain mostly in parks.
      
      20 years ago I was out poking around along a 4wd track east of Tecate and it made a bend close to the border barrier (no obstacle to walking, but you wouldn’t get a vehicle through). I saw some little critters doing something interesting closer to the barrier so I stopped and got out for a closer look. Within minutes there were three CBP pickups coming towards me from three different directions, so I went back to my truck and waited near it. They asked me what I was doing, then they went to have a good look around where I’d walked to and a good look around my truck. Then they let me go on my way with a polite “Y’all be careful now”.
      
      These days I fully expect I would have been cavity searched while being made to eat gravel.
    - gsays 4.2.2.2
      
      9 January 2019 at 8:27 pm
      
      “Wherever a wall exists the number of illegal crossings significantly reduces.”
      
      Malcolm Gladwell has a great podcast series Revisionist History.
      One if the episodes deals wwith the US Mexican border.
      The upshot is 25 years ago, when the border was far more ‘porous’ than it is now, there were far less illegals and aliens in the US as folk would return home.
      
      Kind of counter intuitive and unfortunately I don’t recall the name of the episode.
  - Andre 4.2.3
    
    9 January 2019 at 4:56 pm
    
    Then there’s the Canadian border. Terrorists have actually come down from the north.
    
    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/08/us/us-canada-border-terror/index.html
    
    Canada might even pay for that wall. Hell, the way things are going, they might just put it up themselves.
    - DJ Ward 4.2.3.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 5:09 pm
      
      Correct. The refugees travel to Canada via the US because Trump needs to invest in boarder security. They go to Canada because when there application is finally heard in the US it will be rejected as a fraud. Canada is now complaining about the loosers they are ending up with, bludging on there benifit and health system.
      - Draco T Bastard 4.2.3.1.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 6:05 pm
        
        [citation needed]
      - mickysavage 4.2.3.1.2
        
        9 January 2019 at 6:11 pm
        
        You do understand the wall won’t fix this?
        
        DJ Ward 4.2.3.1.2.1
        
        9 January 2019 at 11:49 pm
        
        Do you understand what would happen if they have no boarder security at all.
        
        Customs, and immigration NZ has given up screening, checking passengers. It’s to hard, and is too nationalistic or fascist.
        Heh world free entry to NZ. Benifits on arrival. Free healthcare on arrival. Free education on arrival.
        
        Draco T Bastard …
        
        10 January 2019 at 1:44 am
        
        Do you understand what would happen if they have no boarder security at all.
        
        There’s a difference between having border security and having a wall.
        
        Customs, and immigration NZ has given up screening, checking passengers.
        
        [citation needed]
        
        It’s to hard, and is too nationalistic or fascist.
        
        Or perhaps it an expression of trust in the other country’s processes.
        
        Heh world free entry to NZ. Benifits on arrival. Free healthcare on arrival. Free education on arrival.
        
        All of which is a lie.
        
        But I have no problem with people coming in, getting citizenship, and getting all of those benefits,
        
        Why would we refrain from extending those benefits to those who want to be NZ citizens?
  - Sabine 4.2.4
    
    9 January 2019 at 8:15 pm
    
    5 billions to grift of?
    
    And that is just the beginning as some estimates go up to a 100 billion and i am not sure this includes the lawsuits in regards to confiscation of private property.
    - Draco T Bastard 4.2.4.1
      
      10 January 2019 at 1:46 am
      
      I’m pretty sure that Trump will find a way to profit at least 10% of the overall price of building the wall and probably much higher. The final price will. of course, be much higher that the original contract called for.
  - Macro 4.2.5
    
    9 January 2019 at 9:41 pm
    
    U.S. Customs and Border Protection encountered only six immigrants at ports of entry on the U.S-Mexico border in the first half of fiscal year 2018 whose names were on a federal government list of known or suspected terrorists, according to CBP data provided to Congress in May 2018 and obtained by NBC News.
    
    The low number contradicts statements by Trump administration officials, including White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, who said Friday that CBP stopped nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists from crossing the southern border in fiscal year 2018.
    
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/only-six-immigrants-terrorism-database-stopped-cbp-southern-border-first-n955861
    - DJ Ward 4.2.5.1
      
      9 January 2019 at 11:51 pm
      
      How many MS13 members did they stop?
      - Draco T Bastard 4.2.5.1.1
        
        10 January 2019 at 1:39 am
        
        6
        
        It’s mentioned right there.
        
        So, I take it that you’re going to continue talking shit?
        
        DJ Ward 4.2.5.1.1.1
        
        10 January 2019 at 9:55 pm
        
        I think you made a mistake Draco. I asked a question, meaning I didn’t know the answer, or did but knew I wouldnt get a response because the answer doesn’t suit the anti wall narrative. I’m struggling with how a question results in talking shit.
        
        However you providing a response by saying its 6 is an example. Based on your general quality of response I thing you may have just rushed that one without thinking.
        
        https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/texas/articles/2018-04-27/ap-fact-check-ms-13-gang-arrests-at-border-are-up-this-year
        
        So they predict just short of 437 identifiable MS13 members just in the Rio Grand sector. That’s not counting all the other gangs.
        
        Draco T Bastard …
        
        10 January 2019 at 11:18 pm
        
        Yeah, don’t think I’m going to trust a RWNJ fake news site.
        
        I hate to do this but here’s Cato:
        
        But according to statistics from Border Patrol, the government made arrests of just 275 MS-13 gang members at the border so far in 2018—that’s just 0.11 percent of the 252,187 apprehensions in this year. That’s hardly any different from prior years.
        
        So, it’s just the normal amount across the whole border.
        
        MS-13 Is Far From the ‘Infestation’ Trump Describes
        
        MS-13’s numbers are stagnant, too. While precise size estimates are hard to come by, authorities have used the same figure of about 10,000 members for over a decade. (The F.B.I. estimates the gang has between 30,000 and 50,000 members around the world.)
        
        Far from menacing cities across the country, as Mr. Trump has suggested, the gang’s presence is concentrated in Long Island, Los Angeles and the region outside Washington.
        
        In addition, most MS-13 recruits are not migrants but teenagers who live in the United States and are alienated from their communities, said José Miguel Cruz, the research director at Florida International University’s Latin American and Caribbean Center. In those areas, the gang may be the only group that provides a sense of identity, he added.
        
        I was wrong on the six but you’re still talking shit.
        
        DJ Ward …
        
        11 January 2019 at 7:53 am
        
        2014 Obama gave a speech, calling what’s happening a Humanitarian crisis. That they needed to take action. Like build a wall. Pelosi, Schummer, who supported there God Obama, said nothing negative. Trump says the same thing and they go all TDS, and lie, lie, then lie some more. Manufactured lefty bullshit.
        
        Democrates talk hypocritical shit.
        Don’t join in Draco.
        
        te reo putake …
        
        11 January 2019 at 8:26 am
        
        Got a cite for your claim about Obama? Sounds totally bogus to me, DJ.
        
        Macro …
        
        11 January 2019 at 9:03 am
        
        It is. No previous living POTUS has called for the building of a wall.
        
        Former President Carter on Monday became the latest former president to deny telling President Trump that he regrets not building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump last week claimed former presidents have discussed the subject with him.
        
        “I have not discussed the border wall with President Trump, and do not support him on the issue,” Carter, who served as president from 1977 to 1981, said in a statement issued through the nonprofit Carter Center.
        His comments come after spokespeople for former President Clinton and former President George W. Bush denied that either man had discussed the prospect of a border wall with Trump.
        
        Clinton spokesman Angel Ureña told Politico last week that the former president had not talked about the subject with Trump.
        
        “In fact, they’ve not talked since the inauguration,” Ureña added.
        
        Bush spokesman Freddy Ford also told the news outlet that the two had not talked about his wishes for a border wall.
        
        Former President Obama has not weighed in on the subject, and a spokesperson declined to comment for Politico’s report on the matter last week.
        
        But Obama has never endorsed Trump’s proposal for a border wall, and has criticized the idea behind it.
        
        “Suggesting that we can build an endless wall along our borders, and blame our challenges on immigrants — that doesn’t just run counter to our history as the world’s melting pot, it contradicts the evidence that our growth and our innovation and our dynamism has always been spurred by our ability to attract strivers from every corner of the globe,” he said in 2016, according to Politico.
        
        https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/424205-jimmy-carter-denies-telling-trump-he-regrets-not-building-a-border
        
        Macro …
        
        11 January 2019 at 9:16 am
        
        Further to the above – in 2006 the democrats voted for The Secure Fence Act and Pres Bush approved the construction of 700 miles of border fencing and enhanced surveillance technology, such as unmanned drones, ground-based sensors, satellites, radar coverage and cameras.
        DJW is making misleading claims here.
        https://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/democrats-support-border-wall/
        
        DJ Ward …
        
        11 January 2019 at 10:27 am
        
        Yep.
        Video at end of article.
        
        https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/media-had-no-problem-calling-it-a-border-crisis-in-2014-under-obama
        
        Pelosi, Schumer. No crisis blah blah.
        Hypocrites.
        
        te reo putake …
        
        11 January 2019 at 10:31 am
        
        “Video at end of article.”
        
        What article? Can you provide a link?
        
        Having done a quick search, there is no evidence i can find of Obama wanting to build a wall. None.
        
        Edit: The comment above was written before DJ edited his own comment to add the link. Thanks for doing so, DJ, however all it confirms is that in 2014 Obama thought there was a humanitarian crisis involving children being trafficked over the border. I imagine he still thinks that. Who doesn’t? Nothing about Obama wanting to build a wall in the article or video.
        
        Dennis Frank …
        
        11 January 2019 at 10:48 am
        
        DJW seems to be confusing walls & fences. History proves Democrats voted for a fence instead of a wall (HC & Obama did). Apparently one is moral and the other immoral:
        https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/01/08/mcconnell_silly_to_call_walls_immoral_clinton_and_obama_voted_for_border_barrier_in_2006.html
        
        Funny to discover that the Democrats having been giving their leftist voters the fingers for so long, eh? You know, the borderless world thing. Idealism vs practicality…
        
        Andre …
        
        11 January 2019 at 9:36 am
        
        It wouldn’t have surprised if your claim was true, so I had a quick look and came up empty.
        
        Throughout my entire experience of the US-Mexico border starting in the 70s there have been problems at the border and bipartisan efforts to improve security.
        
        The border situation in 2004 was very different to now. The numbers of people attempting to cross were much higher, and many of them were attempting to cross in dry desert areas where they ended up dying.
        
        Hence efforts to improve border security through measures such as additional fencing, vehicle bollards, sensors, additional patrols. Focused on problem areas. By now the only parts of the border that don’t have some kind of physical barrier are in extremely rugged terrain or along the Rio Grande, where a 1970s treaty prohibits construction of anything that might impede floodwaters.
        
        Border safety and security now is the best it’s ever been. The people actually living along the border don’t want a wall. Although they’d mostly welcome measures such as increased patrols and surveillance, as much so fewer of the people attempting to cross end up dead as for increased deterrence and apprehensions.
        
        If you want to check what’s really happening instead of just repeating bizarrities from god knows where you get them, try googling something what’s actually happening at the border. You’ll get loads of results like this one:
        
        https://www.vox.com/2019/1/8/18173721/trump-border-facts-truth-speech-lying
Dennis Frank 5

9 January 2019 at 6:02 pm

There’s a short history of US govt shutdowns here: https://www.businessinsider.com/a-history-of-us-government-shutdowns-2013-9/?r=AU&IR=T

“Carter, a Democratic president forever stymied by his own party in Congress, ordered the whole government to be ready to shut down when the budget year ended on Oct. 1, 1980, in case lawmakers missed their deadline for appropriations bills. A report by what’s now the Government Accountability Office captured federal officials’ dismay: “That the federal government would shut its doors was, they said, incomprehensible, inconceivable, unthinkable.””

“Carter asked his attorney general to look into the Anti-Deficiency Act. In April 1980, Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued a startling opinion. “The legal authority for continued operations either exists or it does not,” he wrote.”

Ah. A serious conundrum. If that happened here, Labour would have to form a committee.

“Reagan moved into the White House in January 1981 with a promise to cut taxes and shrink government, setting up a showdown with Democrats who ran the House. High noon came early on Monday, Nov. 23, 1981. The government had technically been without money all weekend, but Congress approved emergency spending to keep it running. That morning, Reagan wielded his first veto. He was making a stand against “budget-busting policies,” the president declared, sending confused federal workers streaming out of offices in Washington and across the nation. It was the first government shutdown. But it lasted only hours.”

Clinton achieved “two shutdowns, for six days and 21 days”. Trump will have to get seriously tough if he wants to break this record set by the slippery one. Quite a high bar. To get over it, he needs the Democrats to keep helping him.
joe90 6

9 January 2019 at 7:58 pm

Thread.

https://twitter.com/HC_Richardson/status/1082705020154372096

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1082705020154372096.html
Macro 7

9 January 2019 at 8:03 pm

0MG even Faux News has taken to fact checking the assertions of the liar in chief. This is not good. Trumpkins will be upset. Where will they get their alternative “truths”?
Macro 8

9 January 2019 at 8:36 pm

The Borowitz Report

Pelosi Says She Will Skip Trump and Negotiate Directly with Putin

By Andy Borowitz

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a bold gambit to end the government shutdown, the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said on Saturday that she would bypass Donald J. Trump and negotiate directly with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin.

“I owe it to the American people to bring this shutdown to the swiftest possible conclusion, and so I’m avoiding the middleman,” she said.

Pelosi, who is scheduled to board a plane to Moscow Saturday night, said that she had not informed Trump of her plans to deal directly with Putin. “Whatever,” she said.

In an official statement, Putin said that he welcomed Pelosi’s overture and shared her desire to end the shutdown. “At some point, I’d like to visit Yellowstone,” he said.

https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/pelosi-says-she-will-skip-trump-and-negotiate-directly-with-putin-shutdown
- Dennis Frank 8.1
  
  9 January 2019 at 8:48 pm
  
  Cool! Never expected her to be that clever! She’s figured out how to triangulate the Chinese – after watching him do it for a couple of years. Clearly, such a fast learner that the Democrat contenders for president will be in a collective funk, figuring out how to catch up with her… 😎
- Anne 8.2
  
  9 January 2019 at 9:28 pm
  
  Geez…. nah not saying any more. 😈
- McFlock 8.3
  
  11 January 2019 at 7:25 pm
  
  lol
Sabine 9

9 January 2019 at 9:05 pm

oh well,

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/florida-government-shutdown-marianna.html

last paragraph of this article sums the Trump voter up for me

““I voted for him, and he’s the one who’s doing this,” she said of Mr. Trump. “I thought he was going to do good things. He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.”

Trump has stiffed workers and company all his life, why would he make a difference between us or them? We are all them to him and his ilk. Dumb is the politest term i can find for this person.
- Andre 9.1
  
  9 January 2019 at 9:21 pm
  
  “Trump has stiffed workers and company all his life”
  
  That’s why he can relate to all the government workers that won’t be able to pay their bills.
A 10

9 January 2019 at 10:09 pm

I would say the *biggest shutdown ever* will be when the USD goes to zero.

They are so broke even war won’t save them.
Macro 11

11 January 2019 at 7:23 pm

Crisis averted!

Kavanaugh Offers to Pay for Wall by Recycling His Empties

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a bid to end the government shutdown, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh said on Thursday that he would recycle his empties to pay for a wall with Mexico.

Speaking to reporters from his office at the Court, Kavanaugh said that the inspiration came to him while he was building a beer-can pyramid in his basement rec room on Wednesday night.

“I was in my man cave, building this rad beer pyramid, and I was, like, I bet if I recycled all the beer cans down here plus the ones out in the garage, I’d have enough to pay for that freaking wall,” the Supreme Court Justice said.

He added that he started calling a number of his friends from Georgetown Prep to see if they would contribute their empties to the effort, and found that they were “totally stoked” about the idea.

“P.J., Tobin, and Squee are all in,” he said. “This wall is gonna freaking rule.”
Andre 12

12 January 2019 at 7:30 pm

It’s now official. Bigliest shutdown ever, Now into the twenty-second day, previous bigliest was twentyone days. Tired of winning yet?
- Macro 12.1
  
  12 January 2019 at 7:39 pm
  
  Yeah 🙁 and no end in sight.
  I feel for all those who are being forced to work for no pay such as ATC, firefighters, etc and who are carrying the costs, and the effect it is having on families just for one man’s vanity. Disgusting man.
  - Anne 12.1.1
    
    12 January 2019 at 7:52 pm
    
    Well, some of those who have been seriously affected would have voted for the oink so I can’t fell any sympathy for them. Let it be a lesson to them.
    - Macro 12.1.1.1
      
      12 January 2019 at 8:28 pm
      
      Yes some may have – but the polls suggest that he is loosing bigly on this matter.
      https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/08/politics/polls-trump-shutdown-wall/index.html
      Many who did vote for him are turning away as they see now that there is little substance in his ranting. For instance – car plants being shut down because of the tariffs on steel. The majority of voters don’t want his stupid wall. They know that there is adequate border protection already, and 700 miles of security fencing where it is needed.
      I’ve no sympathy for the trumpkins (about 30% of the population) – but there are others who would have had biased information pushed at them from offshore – its now known where that critical push data came from.( I suspect that similar tactics were used to sway some targeted voters in the UK on Brexit. )
      Ok you might say more fool them – but if the info they are being pushed is essentially bullshit, and that is predominantly what they will base their decision upon, they have been hoodwinked. In fact the collegial vote for Trump overemphasises the very small majorities in those critical states which he won. only around 70,000 votes had to go the other way in 3 states, and he would not be where he is. The same in the UK – targeting the right individuals to vote for Brexit means that the UK is now in chaos. Putin must be hugging himself.
      - Anne 12.1.1.1.1
        
        12 January 2019 at 8:47 pm
        
        I concede they were bombarded with misinformation and lies from a variety of sources. But what annoys me is a significant portion of any population – be they Americans, British, Kiwis or whatever – are willful about keeping themselves reasonably politically informed. It does not take a genius to see through the Trumps/Putins/Hitlers and Stalins of this world and a bit more attention and sober reflection should have opened their eyes long ago to the reality of The Trump and his bogeymen and women.
      - Dennis Frank 12.1.1.1.2
        
        12 January 2019 at 8:52 pm
        
        “According to the FiveThirtyEight aggregate of polls, Trump’s approval rating stands at just 41%. That’s the lowest it’s been since September by a point. His disapproval rating, meanwhile, stands at 54%, which is the highest by a point it has been since September.”
        
        “Polls before the shutdown started indicated that Americans would blame Republicans for a shutdown by about a 15 to 20 point margin, which is about where the polls are now.” https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/08/politics/polls-trump-shutdown-wall/index.html
        
        Personally, I think his political advisors are misreading the situation. Using the public service as a lever is dumb: it is not shifting the Democrats into doing a deal. It’s like Air NZ engineers’ striking before xmas to piss travellers off, in the hope that it will work as leverage with management.
        
        Maybe that worked, but the Democrats seem adamant that doing a deal is worse than closing down the govt. It’s like they want to force a constitutional crisis to prove that his electoral mandate can’t be allowed to take effect. Subverting democracy may not be the brilliant scheme they think it is. Voters may interpret it as contempt for them.
        
        Macro 12.1.1.1.2.1
        
        12 January 2019 at 9:23 pm
        
        Before Christmas the House approved funding to keep the Govt going that was approved by the Senate. Trump was about to sign it when a couple of stupid alt right commentators said he was never going to build his wall. So TRUMP, no one else, shut down the govt. The House has voted in the past week, for a number of bills to open up the various departments and to fund federal workers. McConnell won’t allow these bills into the Senate because he says Trump won’t sign them. There is only one person who is causing this shut down. It’s not the Democrats.
        
        Dennis Frank …
        
        12 January 2019 at 9:35 pm
        
        Right, but what portion of the US citizenry will see it that clearly? Small, even for the centrists, I reckon. Let’s put Trump’s lack of political finesse aside. I agree the shutdown seems ineffective as a tactic, but the impression in the public mind is primarily the lack of deal-making, which is what Congress is for.
        
        I suspect public opinion will increasingly shift against the Democrats as long as they keep refusing to bargain. If he didn’t have his electoral mandate to build the wall, I wouldn’t predict that shift. I suspect it will prove decisive eventually. I’m puzzled that he doesn’t keep hammering the point home. Clueless, perhaps, but he sometimes seems shrewder than that.
        
        Macro …
        
        12 January 2019 at 9:56 pm
        
        I beg to differ. The polls show that 39% of Americans favour building a wall, while 59.1% oppose it. Among Republicans, 74.1% favour a wall, while 85.4% of Democrats oppose it. (Washington Post)
        As for a mandate Trump actually has none, if you take the general population as the basis for providing a mandate, rather than the antiquated and absurd collegial vote system by which he is now ensconced as President.
        The Democrats won bigly in the mid terms and one of the major factors in their win was very much the reaction to Trump. Not only has he energised women, but he has also energised youth, and they by and large are voting for humanitarian solutions to problems rather than right wing reactionary. The Democrats know this, and they are playing to their base as much as Trump is playing to his. Were they to concede funding for a wall the reaction would be the same as if Jacinda decided to re-introduce fire at will employment legislation.
        
        Dennis Frank …
        
        13 January 2019 at 7:05 am
        
        You’ve made a strong case. I agree the Dems have good reason to think they have the upper hand. I doubt that things will play out their way though.
        
        If they force a constitutional crisis in defiance of his mandate, I can’t see them winning the public debate. The notion of fair play is too deeply ingrained. People think democracy is a game to be played according to convention. The mandate is a convention that operates like a rule in the public mind. For the Dems to be breaking the rules is rash. It can be so easily interpreted as subversion.
        
        Macro …
        
        18 January 2019 at 10:48 pm
        
        Latest Polls now say only 30% would vote for Trump. His disapproval rating is now almost 60%. The majority think he is doing a poor job. Trump is loosing Bigly on this matter. Just the Wallnuts remain in support, and they appear to be lessening in number by the day as the actual truth of the matter comes out. Even Faux News is asking questions of Trump and critiquing his answers! He has dug himself into a ditch, and despite all his bluster about what a great deal maker he is, there is no way out for him.
        McConnell is the other problem. He has cast his lot in with Trump, and has to be as pig headed and two faced to boot.
        Until the Republican Senators can wrest themselves away from their intransigence on this matter the US will remain in shutdown. The Senate could end the shutdown with a super majority – overriding Trumps veto. That would require 17 – 18 Republican Senators to vote with the Democrats on any number of bills that have been put up to end the shutdown but have been refused to be considered by McConnell – because Trump. They had 11 cross the floor just today to hopefully continue the Sanctions against Russia that the WH wants to end, but lost by a handful of votes. So these sort of actions are conceivable. It just needs the gumption of a few.
  - Andre 12.1.2
    
    12 January 2019 at 8:05 pm
    
    Not to the mention the Secret Service agents guarding Hair Fuhrer who are also working without pay.
    - Macro 12.1.2.1
      
      18 January 2019 at 10:51 pm
      
      You know I thought the 13th Amendment in 1865 banned Slavery.
Dennis Frank 13

12 January 2019 at 8:07 pm

Here’s an editorial written by an academic marketing expert, explaining what Trump is doing right, and predicting an ongoing shutdown. “The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania is committed to sharing its intellectual capital through Knowledge@Wharton, the school’s online business analysis journal.” http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/about/

“Here’s fundamental Marketing 101: Segmentation, Targeting, Positioning and Messaging (STPM) + Branding and Identity Loyalty = A closed government that will stay closed. President Trump has been characterized in the media as being less of a savvy businessman and more of a business promoter. One thing is for sure, though. He understands STPM brilliantly.”

“Trump has a base (part of his target market) that is fiercely loyal. Dare I say, it is “Identity Loyal.” Identity loyalty is when a product, service, organization or person is internalized as part of the consumers’ sense of who they are.”

“Trump did an amazing job of branding this “wall.” He did this through consistently messaging around “them” — “those dangerous criminals” who are a “caravan” away from taking over “our country.” Moreover, this argument is nicely wrapped up in values associated with retreating from the rest of the world in order to protect your own in-group. For the target market (Trump supporters, Republicans, Fox News and other right-wing allies) this is an emotional argument that is completely intertwined with their identity.”

“The “brand” of the wall is part of the target market’s identity now, which means they will defend it at all costs. The non-target market (Democrats, progressives, liberals) will reject it at all costs because the wall “brand” is exactly opposite of their identity.”

The way out of this stalemate is for other factors in the situation to overcome this polarity-locking effect. Potentially, Trump’s deal-making ability can do this. So far, his reliance on this has proven a flawed strategy: his opponents are refusing to make a deal. The proof: no headlines featuring a counter-offer from the Democrats demonstrating their intent to honour his mandate. He assumed they would act in good faith to respect the election result. Instead, they seem intent on provoking a constitutional crisis.

“If the government shutdown lasts for another two weeks, its cost the economy will have exceeded the $5.7 billion Trump wants for his border wall.” http://fortune.com/2019/01/11/in-two-weeks-the-costs-of-the-shutdown-will-surpass-the-cost-of-trumps-wall/

As soon as the Democrats cost American taxpayers that much by subverting the democratic process – when that money could have been spent building the wall – the Sword of Damocles that they apparently don’t realise is suspended over them will fall. The headlines will cause centrists to abandon them in disgust. I wonder if the next two weeks will actually pass without them figuring this out. Or will they compromise and do a deal with him to avert the disaster?
RedLogix 14

13 January 2019 at 8:13 am

Last week I had several long discussions with a colleague originally from Mexico. His life has been a really interesting and intense narrative; but it’s not my place to reveal it all here.

The level of kidnapping and violence in Mexico is insane; ordinary people and especially anyone running even a modestly successful business are targets. Constantly. My friend has paid two ransoms for his business partners, only to have them murdered anyway. Here in safe little NZ we really have no fucking clue.

But one fascinating assertion he made is that there are many people in Mexico who would love Trump to build his wall … on the southern border of Mexico. In other words for the country to become another state of the USA. This sentiment is especially strong in the four Mexican states adjacent to the US border. Ordinary people yearn for normal lives free from the daily dysfunction around them and they look to the USA as a relative haven of sanity.

Of course none of this is going to happen. The USA, as with every other nation, has the right to determine how it’s going to implement an effective border policy.

Imagine you are passing through LAX Immigration. Standing in the interminable lines you see an open door with a sign that says “Free entry, no visa or passport check needed”. Such a thing would be absurd, yet in what way is this different to the situation on the Mexican border?
- Draco T Bastard 14.1
  
  18 January 2019 at 9:30 pm
  
  My friend has paid two ransoms for his business partners, only to have them murdered anyway. Here in safe little NZ we really have no fucking clue.
  
  Really?
  
  The obvious in that case is not to pay the ransom in the first place. One person may die but nobody else will.
  
  You’re working on the delusional idea that we should do everything to prevent one person’s death. But this is false. That one person is replaceable but the resources aren’t. And if the first ransom is not paid then no more abductions will occur.
  
  Paying one ransom encourages more abductions where they demand payment but kill them anyway.
  
  I’m sorry your your friend was caused pain but he could have helped by not paying the first ransom.
  
  All indications are that it is you who have no fucken clue.
  
  But one fascinating assertion he made is that there are many people in Mexico who would love Trump to build his wall … on the southern border of Mexico. In other words for the country to become another state of the USA. This sentiment is especially strong in the four Mexican states adjacent to the US border. Ordinary people yearn for normal lives free from the daily dysfunction around them and they look to the USA as a relative haven of sanity.
  
  But are failing to bring that about themselves. Why should the USA bring stability to their region when they should be doing it themselves? They need to get a decent local militia going that investigates the perpetrators and simply kills them.
  
  And, after they’ve done that, they need to secede from Mexico as Mexico isn’t doing that for them as a good state government should be.
  
  They have the right of self-governance. It’s enshrined in the UDHR.
  
  Such a thing would be absurd, yet in what way is this different to the situation on the Mexican border?
  
  Such a situation doesn’t exist. This has been made clear even without a wall.
  
  Really, we should be asking why these people are too lazy to govern themselves.
North 15

18 January 2019 at 9:04 pm

“……yet in what way is this different to the situation on the Mexican border?”

No such sign. No open door. That’s the difference. Your strawman having any balls at all depends entirely on your failure to see that. Your resort to the strawman is the absurdity here.