jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (40 posts)

Trump: One way or another Mexico will pay for the wall? Yeah right..

  1. Credence2 profile image85
    Credence2posted 4 months ago

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-threat … 40039.html

    Mexico tells the Trump administration to 'take a hike'.
    Now the GOP is going to pay for it? How?

    Do we declare war on Mexico?

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-leaders- … 42941.html

    I say that this whole thing was a 'crock' from the very beginning.

    1. MayorGalvan profile image59
      MayorGalvanposted 4 months ago in reply to this

      Deleted

      1. MayorGalvan profile image59
        MayorGalvanposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        Deleted

        1. MayorGalvan profile image59
          MayorGalvanposted 4 months ago in reply to this

          Deleted

          1. MayorGalvan profile image59
            MayorGalvanposted 4 months ago in reply to this

            Deleted

            1. MayorGalvan profile image59
              MayorGalvanposted 4 months ago in reply to this

              Deleted

    2. ahorseback profile image45
      ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

      By changing the process of giving Mexico fifty  million U.S. dollars  a year almost every single year in foreign aid to help a nation that sends it's undesirables  and unemployable to us . ,   Let's pay for it ourselves now and do exactly as Trump says "--  Use  foreign aid payments  of the next  20 years to "pay for the wall ".   Simply put , If Mexico , which has an extremely restrictive immigration policy of it's own ,  doesn't use foreign aid to better their own people ---lets do it for them .

      1. Credence2 profile image85
        Credence2posted 4 months ago in reply to this

        I follow your point, but 50 million is a paltry sum relative to cost of such a project.

      2. colorfulone profile image88
        colorfuloneposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        Defunding sanctuary cities would save billions, maybe billions.

        http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13379644.jpg

        Maybe once the general brainwashed public realizes all the crimes done by illegal immigrants they will have a change of mind and heart about them coming here illegally.  Maybe some that aren't too far gone can 'get it'.  I'm happy steps are being made to design and construct the wall. 

        Maybe Bill Gates will chip in a few billion!  I'll call him and ask kindly.

    3. colorfulone profile image88
      colorfuloneposted 4 months ago

      Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements

      EXECUTIVE ORDER

      BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

      By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) (INA), the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109 367) (Secure Fence Act), and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Public Law 104 208 Div. C) (IIRIRA), and in order to ensure the safety and territorial integrity of the United States as well as to ensure that the Nation's immigration laws are faithfully executed, I hereby order as follows: ...
      https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of … provements

      DONALD J. TRUMP

      THE WHITE HOUSE,
          January 25, 2017

      1. Jean Bakula profile image94
        Jean Bakulaposted 4 months ago in reply to this

        Executive orders are just window dressing and aren't really passed by Congress yet, They don't mean anything until other branches of the legislature approve them.

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

          I think you will find that you are mistaken - the President has far more power than we think.  Consider that Obama's executive order to stop detaining illegals held up find until challenged in court.  Similarly, his orders as to what and when to shut down various sectors of government were followed.

          1. Jean Bakula profile image94
            Jean Bakulaposted 4 months ago in reply to this

            A lot of them have been walked back, especially ones where he needs to find money to pay for them. They have to be approved by the House and Congress.

            And alternative truth? Really. And colorfulone, trying to get the press out of the White House is a breach of the first amendment. Also, the "wall" will end up being paid for with OUR taxpayer money. Get real.

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 4 months ago in reply to this

              "trying to get the press out of the White House is a breach of the first amendment."

              Don't be ridiculous, there is absolutely nothing in that amendment that gives anyone, press or not, access to wherever they might wish to go.  "Freedom of the press" is not a blanket authorization to do as they wish or go where they wish.  If it were you would find paparazzi at the foot of every movie star's bed 24-7.

              1. Credence2 profile image85
                Credence2posted 3 months ago in reply to this

                But, I expect, and more than that, insist that the Trump administration operate in a transparent way rather than taking the tyrants road of surreptitious government. All this talk from his people about 'managing' the press gives me the impression that he has something to hide at the outset.  Rest assured, we will have to turn up the heat In regards to this as well.

              2. Jean Bakula profile image94
                Jean Bakulaposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                He isn't supposed to kick the press out of the White House like he wanted to. What next, no news and only The Trump Channel?

                It won't help Trump to make enemies out of the media. He is so infringing on Freedom of the Press.

                He seems to have taken it down a notch though.

                And Obama was vilified for Executive Orders, when he did very few compared to George W. Bush. I guess it depends on what "bubble" you live in, now that a divided country is being farther divided by a new President who is trying to keep his word on his campaign promises, (admirable), but maybe would be better off thinking more about how what he wants to accomplish will be executed.

                The R's all look nervous, and I think it would have been better for them to take a little more time to get to know each other and get used to each other before making all these changes. They should have been doing that after the Election, but Trump didn't want to be bothered with briefings. Hopefully he will get the hang of things now. He doesn't seem to understand it's not just HIS relationships with world leaders that matter, but that he's representing the whole country. I do think it's good he's talking with world leaders, nothing can be helped without communication, but it's a different kind of tact and diplomacy than used in real estate.

                Now he has JFK airport all jammed up for today's crisis. He has to think more about consequences and maybe discuss these matters more with his staff before he jumps. It's a learning curve, but he won't help by alienating us from the rest of the world either. I hope he settles in.

                1. colorfulone profile image88
                  colorfuloneposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  National Archives
                  Executive Order Disposition Table Index

                  Barack Obama (2009-Present)
                  EOs 13489 - 13738 

                  George W. Bush (2001-2009)
                  EOs 13198-13488
                  https://www.archives.gov/federal-regist … ition.html

                2. wilderness profile image94
                  wildernessposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  "He isn't supposed to kick the press out of the White House like he wanted to."

                  In your personal opinion (and I'm sure theirs big_smile ).  But the amendment you mentioned has nothing to say on the matter.

                  "He is so infringing on Freedom of the Press. "

                  See above answer. 

                  "And Obama was vilified for Executive Orders, when he did very few compared to George W. Bush."

                  No, he was vilified for signing illegal Executive Orders - ones that violated the law.  Like refusing to allow local law enforcement to do the job he was supposed to do but refused.  And he signed about the same number as preceding presidents.

                  1. Jean Bakula profile image94
                    Jean Bakulaposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                    I've tried to think of a few conciliatory remarks about a President who is making a complete ass out of himself, hoping the rest of his term won't be the train wreck this week was. All anyone has to do is compliment Trump to win him over. His bromance with Putin is frightening, he has such thin skin.

                    The press does have to question a POTUS, Obama had the class to say that "they gave him a hard time but kept him honest." If we don't allow the press to question Trump, how can the people know what's happening and whether he's acting in our best interests? It would have severely made their jobs harder if the press had to move across the street, he doesn't want to answer to anyone. And for Bannon to tell the New York Times to "shut up" is just another disgrace. Fox News is all opinion shows and no real news anymore, and everyone is jumping ship. Even Greta Van Susteren has moved to MSNBC. CNN had been bland and doesn't ask hard questions.

                    You won't budge an inch Dan, or say one good word about any Democrat. I thought Trump's press conference with Theresa May was a disgrace. He should have told the press to save their questions until the end, and let her speak, and then they should have had some discourse between the two. She was adamant that Britain was not going to stop sanctions on Russia. He admitted it depended on his relationship with Putin, a poor decision.  Of course, she's a lowly woman.

                    He keeps acting like a fool, but you'll defend him until the end and never have a nice word for a Democrat. At least Obama tried to give everyone health care. The people in Kentucky are unsophisticated and don't realize their care is Obamacare. R's will just let people die, what do they care? They had 7 years to come up with a replacement plan and can't do it. He kept us out of a depression, and saved the auto industry. He passed laws to give the LGBTQ community the Civil Rights they deserve. The dreamer program was designed for young people who only knew America, and are educated. If they get kicked out (though he says he won't do that) it will cause a big brain drain in the U.S.

                    In trying to keep people safe from terrorists, maybe Trump should have added Saudi Arabia to his list. And it's we, the taxpayers, who will end up paying for that wall. I doubt the House will give him the money to front it, and his supporters won't like it, if they understand what he's doing. Congress will fight him tooth and nail. The no fly and terrorist watch lists should have been the starting point, not shutting down one of the busiest airports in the world. Trump is making the U.S. the laughing stock of the world.

                    I'm not coming on these political forums anymore, it's a waste of time trying to talk to people who won't entertain anything that their narrow minds can't take, or give credit where credit is due to people from the Democratic side when their ideas are good. I thought the "me" times in the 1980s were over, but apparently not. I just had to pay $190.00 for my pain medication from severe scoliosis and I'm a widow on Medicare. And R's want to cut benefits from Medicaid and Medicare. I guess you can all sit home and count your money.

                    1. ahorseback profile image45
                      ahorsebackposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                      - One ,You're paying more for your Obama Care because of Obamas failed system , not Trumps
                      - Putin and all Russian leaders  that feared -and respected American leaders - are better for us .
                      -If 90 % of the news media is reporting fake news it isn't good for EITHER  ideology
                      -If you  "don't come on political forums anymore " it will be your loss in becoming more enlightened .
                      - I don't care for  Steve Bannon  , but him telling the leftist media to "shut up "is much needed .
                      -The "narrow mind "is the one that is enlightened by false truths.

        2. colorfulone profile image88
          colorfuloneposted 4 months ago in reply to this

          Members of Congress will be happy to not be irreverent like they were under the Obama Adm's 'window dressing' EO's which didn't mean much.   Trump will use Congress, the Constitution and laws that already exist and he will be able to Institutionalize his EO's and policies.

        3. jackclee lm profile image73
          jackclee lmposted 4 months ago in reply to this

          That is not necessarily true. Executive orders can affect various federal agencies as far as policies and regulations. These do not require any Congressional legislation. Only funding issues can stop an order if the Congress hold up funds to implement it.

          1. Credence2 profile image85
            Credence2posted 3 months ago in reply to this

            It is funny though, when Obama used Executive Orders he was accused of circumventing Congress, not so with Trump?

            1. wilderness profile image94
              wildernessposted 3 months ago in reply to this

              Should Trump descend into signing illegal orders I'm positive he will be reeled in, and quicker than Obama was.  We've learned (I hope) that even Presidents don't always follow the law.

              1. Credence2 profile image85
                Credence2posted 3 months ago in reply to this

                I guess what is legal or not depends on your ideological bent, because I have yet to hear an objective prospective to explain the difference.

                1. wilderness profile image94
                  wildernessposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  Which is also why there is such opposition to a liberal SCOTUS justice.  They never seem able to distinguish between the law and the ideological bent.

                  1. Credence2 profile image85
                    Credence2posted 3 months ago in reply to this

                    That opposition comes from one side and that reduces its validity considerably.

                2. jackclee lm profile image73
                  jackclee lmposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  No, it depends on the executive order or action. President Obama issued executive actions that actually changed the existing law which is unConstitutional and the courts ruled against him on numerous ocasions. If Trump tried to do the same, the courts will intervene as well. That is the beauty of our system of check and balances.

                  1. Credence2 profile image85
                    Credence2posted 3 months ago in reply to this

                    Is that much like the pasting that the Trump administration recently received from a New York court in regards to his Immigration Decree?

                    1. jackclee lm profile image73
                      jackclee lmposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                      Yes, so what's your point. My statement stands. If any president over step his authority, the courts are there to act. You are letting your political bias affect your thinking. You can be critical of Trump and it is your right. If he is within his authority and implement policies that you disagree with, that is OK too. Elections have consequences as noted by Obama...

                    2. wilderness profile image94
                      wildernessposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                      You mean where a stay was ordered, halting the deportation of people that were in transit when the order went out, but having nothing to say about the order itself or any future entrance to the country?  That "pasting"?

                3. Jean Bakula profile image94
                  Jean Bakulaposted 3 months ago in reply to this

                  Thank you. At least you can keep an open mind and read this seeing it's fine if it's an R POTUS, but not a D one. Trump is just dividing a highly divided country and further dividing it. And a lot of his actions are going to lead to wars.

     
    working