President Trump ordered the national guards to the southern border.

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (44 posts)
  1. jackclee lm profile image81
    jackclee lmposted 5 years ago

    Do you think this is a good idea?
    Is it legal under ourlaws?
    Is the border situation getting better or worse?
    How should the US deal with the convoy of migrants coming our way?
    Do you think building the wall is only long term solution?

    1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
      JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Well, there you go, by sending in the national guard, he solved his own forest fire of a political problem when he opened his pathologically dishonest, racist big mouth and said Mexico would pay for his delusional wall in his head. He blabbed this lie over and over and over again while literally almost blowing his orange top on several occasions.

      Don't forget, drugs and just about everything else can easily be transported right over a grand useless wall using drones.

      Since 1971, border crossings have declined steadily but that won't stop a mega-racist like Spanky Trump from creating a fake Mexican invasion.

      I actually think a wall like this built around Trump Castle in New York is a much wiser solution to protect humanity.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        "Since 1971, border crossings have declined steadily but that won't stop a mega-racist like Spanky Trump from creating a fake Mexican invasion." 

        Are you sure?

        "The number of "illegal" crossing attempts at the U.S. Southwest border triple in March compared with a year ago, the government says. " … r-ago.html

        "The number of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) caught crossing the border increased to 5,129 while family units apprehended rose to 5,616. These levels are the highest since the 2014 border surge when levels of combined UACs and family units apprehended at the border reached over 27,000 in the month of June 2014." … -year-high

        "Citing Homeland Security data, The Washington Times reported that Border Patrol and officers at the ports of entry nabbed 50,308 people in March — up from less than 37,000 in February, and three times the 16,588 people apprehended in March 2017.

        "Illegal Border Crossings up 200 Percent Since Last March | " … id/852650/

        Seems to me your "facts" leave a tad bit to be desired.  Actual research is a a better tool than "common sense".

      2. jackclee lm profile image81
        jackclee lmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Before you go on your anti- Trump diatribes, check your history. Both President Obama and Bush, did similar actions during their tenure...
        Also, the wall is something that works...
        Most other nations have them. Here is link to recent countries around the world building walls... … the-world/

        Israel has a wall and it works fine.
        Saudia Arabia is building a wall...
        The great wall of China lasted a thousand years...

  2. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
    JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

    Border crossings have declined since 1971 no matter how anyone slices it and furthermore, Mexicans are God's children even more so than the demonic Trump family who do nothing but rip human beings off. Anyone seen their papers lately? The big bad 'invasion' from the south renders hard working individuals who come here to do the jobs nobody else wants to do and that's a simple fact, if any of you lived near the border you'd understand this. FYI Americans with papers commit the vast majority of crimes in the United States, not Mexicans who come here to earn an honest living by washing your cars, cooking your meals, cleaning your hotel rooms and maintaining your golf course.

    Spanky Trump is in collapse mode and is absolutely on his way to prison or worse for many different reasons and he and his conservative republican accomplices are getting decimated in special elections for a million different reasons and the GOP will be neutered in November by the Dems so he's desperate to rile up his small group of haters by inciting racism and bigotry.

    I say, keep the national guard there, it's budget friendly and much more effective than a big pile of useless concrete. There won't be millions of eminent domain law suits filed against the Trump administration for private landowner confiscation either. Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California landowners are up in arms against Trump who is trying to take their property away for a dirt dumb purpose.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      What I read from those landowners is that they are far more likely to head a cheering crowd and donate their land than sue Trump for using eminent domain.  Anything to keep the illegals out.

      If they are "God's children" then God needs to take care of them, not shove the task off onto America.

      1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
        JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Only in Mr Trump's fantasyland of delusion are landowners gleeful at the thought of donating their valuable land for a gigantic pile of useless concrete and bricks. Here in the real world landowners are fired up and ready to clobber Spanky Trump with a whirlwind of law suits that will last for near eternity if he dares to try and take their private property for such a mindless cause.

        Just one example of the firestorm headed Donald's way, if of course he's still aimlessly wandering our oval office which is highly doubtful given the extraordinary legal, moral and ethical trouble he and his family have created for themselves:. … 64639.html

        God is taking care of his children by shepherding these hard working human beings to a better life, whether that life is in Mexico, the U.S. or another land which belongs to all God's creatures not a select few megalomaniacs -

        Aside from Mr. Trump and a tiny portion of his rabid racist followers, we are all God's vessels who will strive to take care of each other, we're not Adolf Hitlers flunkees.

        1. profile image0
          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Using God to defend your objection to the wall  can just as easily be reversed .

          God demands that we protect humans by stopping illegal immigration traffic to prevent  such human suffering like desert starvation and death , rape , drug trafficking  sex trade trafficking ,  major workplace exploitation ,  ......where do I stop?

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          You're right - they're fired up.  At perhaps seeing the end of losing cattle or other livestock to illegals, at the end of finding garbage dumps all over their ranches, at the end of break ins to their homes.  That parade of illegals crossing their land does nothing good for the landowner.  God is taking care of his children by using Trump to end the destruction of their ranches.

    2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image82
      Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      When you are incapable of saying anything useful or intelligent, just bust out the race card! YAY! So much wow!

    3. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Interesting that many  liberal people can only view the illegal immigrants as  those at the bottom of the work cycle . seems rather prejudiced to assume they'll ONLY be gardeners , dishwashers , chambermaids , car wash employees , cooks and caddies , you know , such untalented employees doing what THEY don't want to do , perhaps not all that bright , right  ?

      Yet accuse the right of being incredibly biased .

  3. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image82
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

    " Mexicans are God's children even more so than the demonic Trump family who do nothing but rip human beings off."

    LOL. Is it hyperbole? Is it comedy?

    1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
      JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Nope, certainly not hyperbole: Here's just a few examples of Mr. Trump's unholy past which bleeds right into the present: And you honestly believe this clown con man cares about you and your family? Really? … -you-think … ples-money

      1. profile image0
        Onusonusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        You believe the federal government is there to care for you? When has that ever been the case?

        1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
          JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Actually, it has always been the case since the inception of our country, but I understand the U.S. Constitution and oaths of office and other silly little things like that are now on hold until Spanky Trump and many accomplice republicans are escorted to prison hopefully soon for violating said document, but yes, to answer your callous remark, a president or in this case, phony embedded president has the obligation to CARE for ALL Americans and that's a simple fact.

          1. The provision of what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance, and protection of someone or something.

          Now, if Spanky Trump continues his little wall tizzy crying like a little girl as his apple red face explodes, he needs to make that big winning deal with the President of Mexico as he promised, otherwise he needs to shut up and cough up the money himself then go to war with private landowners in Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico to confiscate their property, and good luck to him with that.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            You might want to consider reading the constitution over again.  It provides for the protection of the country and, to a lesser extent, for the individual.  It provides for certain rights, like the right to bear arms, and it describes the power of the government (and more importantly, what power that government does NOT have).

            There is precious little about providing "what is necessary for the health, welfare, maintenance" of individual citizens - that is a latecomer from the liberals that have decided they know better how to use what others have built than the owners do.

            1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
              JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Actually, I'm a constitutional scholar and know it very well and if the country excludes the human beings which dwell within said country, then I guess you're correct by saying dirt and rocks and ants are much more important than human life, most individuals disagree with your interpretation, but I'm not sure how you could possibly have a thriving vibrant country without human beings.

              Furthermore, nowhere in the constitution does provide you nor I an individual right to own an assault weapon or even a gun for that matter which is one reason why the gargantuan young adult revolution will succeed in crushing the NRA by curbing these abuses and yes, the president's obligation is indeed to protect and care for the country and citizens within and this leader also hasa moral, ethical and at times, a legal obligation to protect humanity in general which is God's will.

              Mindlessly sabotaging our healthcare system, our water and air supply not ot mention our law enforcement agencies while greedily collecting monetary consideration from foreign adversaries through his properties which is a crime as Mr. Trump does almost every day, is nothing less than sinful, illegal and of course prison worthy behavior which will earn this disgraceful old man nothing but dark Karma and a one way ticket to hell in the future.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Show me.  Show me where a health care system is guaranteed by the constitution.  Show where the constitution guarantees potable water for every individual.  Show me where the constitution guarantees everyone a minimum income.  Show me where we have a constitutional guarantee of a retirement income whether we earned one or not.  You're the constitutional scholar - quote the passages that say these things.  Not your concept of what you think your god demands - what the constitution actually says.

                Yes, I know that you can twist the wording of "the right to bear arms shall not be infringed" to say something else, but that twist doesn't change what was actually written - only what you wish it said.

                1. JAKE Earthshine profile image68
                  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Why did you omit the most important and relevant portion of the 2nd Amendment which reads as follows in its entirety: You forgot the part that says "a well regulated militia" but don't worry, most conservatives forget it as well:

                  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

                  Anyway, if the national guard doesn't suit conservative's fancy, why not just booby trap the southern border with mines and lethal lazers and get it over with to stop the Mexican invasion?? Lord knows it's much cheaper and much much more effective I'd assume.

                  I'm sorry, I just can't talk about a 'Mexican Invasion' without tearing up with laughter, it's just hilarious.

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    You forgot to include the constitutional quotations.

                    Mines and lasers work for me - we can assign clean up duty to the liberals that have encouraged/caused it, although that task will dwindle rapidly.  Part of the problem is that we return to where they came from, whereupon the come right back across.

                    Mexican invasion?  Mexico is only a part of it, albeit a goodly percentage.  What else would you call it when 10 million people have entered without permission?  A church group walking to the park?

              2. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                If you are a constitutional scholar , I would have to ask you whos constitution are you a scholar of because it sure as heck isn't the US constitution .     What you are however IS one obviously who emotes your way through understanding the U.S. constitution  assuming it to be fluid in meaning  and extremely liquid in application to the issues that you hold dear.  Why do you suppose that in over two hundred years for instance ,the twenty seven words of the second amendment have been upheld by every supreme court in existence ?

                Every supreme court supporting determination by  your claim is deniable  . We DO have the right to have the weapons of choice in our possession barring Federal limitations . Fully auto weaponry for instance , silencers for another , weapons of mass destruction , nerve gases , biological chemicals etc.....

                Finally ,your ".....gargantuan young adult  revolution ....." is a non-entity . You do realize that as youth age they become less idealistically  liberal , as they enter occupational choices,  join the military , or police for instance they tend more towards conservatism ?   Good luck counting on the youth . Although some of your precious  youth never seem to mature at all and may continue to hold such opinions as those you've put forth. Your opinion reminds me that   I live next to the now defunct  sixties revolutionary "Franconia College "  , a place of sixties revolutionaries then turned "yuppies ". Now closed for business .

  4. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    As far as I know, no one is advocating that we sort illegal immigrants by skin color and let the paler ones in. What we are advocating is that NO ONE should be allowed to enter the country illegally, no matter what color they are--and that ALL who have entered the country illegally, regardless of skin color, be deported.

  5. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    Wesman Todd Shaw, I don't think anyone would deny are human beings like ourselves--"God's children," if you will.

    Nevertheless, we all have certain expectations about our fellow man and demand certain standards of conduct: They should not trespass on our property, come into our homes uninvited, raid our gardens, and so forth. Entering our country illegally is, for starters, criminal trespass.

    You need to reflect on who WANT these millions of illegal invaders here.

    Corporate agriculture and some other large corporations, like Tyson, wants them for slave labor. And--like Wal-Mart--they want an arrangement where the people of the US write most of the paycheck, in the form of social services.

    Without this huge slave-labor force, these corporations would have to hire US citizens at decent wages.

    In former generations, these bottom-rung jobs provided employment for US young people--summer jobs while they were in high school or college. Some jobs like these provided a kind of apprenticeship where a young person could learn to be an auto mechanic or a construction worker and eventually enjoy a well paid career in one of the trades. (With no student loans.)

    We have few if any illegal immigrants in my area. This allowed my daughter to do very well paid farm work during the summers. Some of my cousins did farm work during the summers, back in the 60s. An enterprising kid can mow lawns for extra money. In the 50s and 60s, there were vast neighborhoods where whole familes were supported (in nice homes, BTW) by the meat-packing industry.

    Now US young people are jobless, and have little opportunity to learn a trade.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "You need to reflect on who WANT these millions of illegal invaders here."

      Truth?  We all do, for we all demand the results of that slave labor.  We demand cheap fruits and vegetables, we demand cheap lawn care, we demand cheap houses to live in.  All of which are being provided by illegal aliens working illegally for very little return...just what we want.

      If Trump is successful in stopping, or even significantly slowing, the flood of illegals we're going to see our prices rise.  Want to bet how loud we'll scream when it happens?  Our greed, the greed of everyone of us, for the products of cheap labor condemns us.  We won't pay our neighbor a living wage to build us a new home, but we'll sure snap up the one built by illegal labor being paid peanuts, and it's going to bite us and bite us hard.

      There is no difference between farming out labor to foreign countries (which we also demand, and for the same reason) and bringing foreign labor into the country.  Except, of course, that the costs of that illegal alien can be hidden to a large degree.

  6. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    Th e Constitution doesn't say anything about the government being tasked with "caring" for the people.

    There seems to be a large cohort of people out there who believe that the government should provide all people with all their basic needs. A couple of examples would be health care and education. Others would be food and housing.

    These things are goods and services. Government does not "provide" these things. You will never see a government official doing a lick of work--as in growing food, building a house, teaching in a classroom, or ministering to someone who is sick.

    How can government provide these things? There are several ways in which it can pretend to do so. One of the more favored ways is to take money from one group of people in order to give it to another. And there is more than one way to do that. One way is taxation; another way is through money-printing, which debases the currency.

    In either case, government hasn't provided anything. It has merely stolen from one person to give to another. From a moral standpoint, such a mechanism is mere slavery. It is no different from having the government require someone to go out and build a house or grow crops for someone else, without compensation. It's mere forced labor.

    Where the mechanism is money printing and the consequent debasement of the currency, everyone's labor is stolen, in that they are compensated for their labor with mere toilet paper.

    I guess my point is that the government CANNOT provide you with goods and services without taking them from someone else. I think that one of the things the Left has difficulty understanding is that money (properly anyway) represents the labor productions of individual people. Money is not wealth.Wealth consists in the good things produced by labor. A house is built with labor. Food is grown and harvested with labor. If you want firewood, quite a bit of labor is involved: cutting down trees, cutting, splitting, and transporting the wood, and stacking it up in the shed. Leftists often seem to think that "money" is a magic wand that summons firewood, houses, and food out of nothing, effortlessly. When you take money from someone, you are taking their labor.

  7. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    Sometimes I think what we need here is a thread that delves into the underlying theory of government. What IS it, exactly? How did it originate? What is its function? A little discussion of money and fundamental economics would help out some people too.

    There seems to be such a lack of understanding of the underlying concepts that it almost makes discussion futile.

  8. Leland Johnson profile image80
    Leland Johnsonposted 5 years ago

    I think you make a great point.  We need to go back a long way if we really want the nitty gritty about government.  our Declaration states that mankind receives unalienable rights from a Creator and that governments are established in the earth to secure those rights "among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."  Those thoughts are not completely original.  Statesmen like Pericles had very similar ideas some 3500 years ago.  He is attributed with the line about government being "of the people, by the people, and for the people," a line quoted by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address.  We need to study the people and writings THEY studied if we want to know what they were thinking at the inception of our country and at its refounding, if you will, under Lincoln.  Great thread idea for sure blueheron.  It could last for years.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Do you think that studying those men (more than we already have) will give us understanding how they could write "...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." and then go home to their slaves and second class citizens called "women"?  Not to speak of writing a constitution governing the country that did not provide for any of those things?

      Maybe it was primarily poli-speak - fancy words with an emotional impact but without much meaning?

  9. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    I'll go with Albert Jay Nock's understanding of the State: "It is the positive testimony of history is that the State invariably had its origin in conquest and confiscation. No primitive State known to history originated in any other manner. It has been proved beyond peradventure that no primitive State could possibly have had any other origins.

    Moreover, the sole invariable characteristic of the State is the economic exploitation of one class by another. In this sense, every State known to history is a class-State.

    Oppenheimer defines the State, in respect of its origin, as an institution forced on a defeated group by a conquering group, with a view only to systematizing the domination of the conquered by the conquerors. This domination had no other final purpose than the economic exploitation of the conquered group by the victorious group.

    Everywhere we see a militant group of fierce men forcing the frontier of some more peaceable people, settling down upon them and establishing the State, with themselves as an aristocracy. Everywhere we find the political organization proceeding from the same origin, and presenting the same mark of intention, namely: the economic exploitation of a defeated group by a conquering group."

    So, essentially, what we dignify by calling "government" is really a State system, and a State system is indistinguishable from rule by Mexican drug cartels. Like all "governments," ours is mere a gang of very violent thugs who are able to batten on everyone else like so many vampire squids, and who remain in power only due to the overwhelming power of arms.

    Read Nock's "Our Enemy, the State." There are free downloads.

    1. jackclee lm profile image81
      jackclee lmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      We the people... are the State. We elected people to government. They rule based on our consent. When this does not work any more, a new revolution will ensue.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        And , without a US.central government as brilliantly planned by the founding fathers ;  There would have been 13 and now  50 different state governments making up the United States as a whole thus the chaos and  political anarchy .
        But U.S. haters don't get it ? ..............No . They just hate the U.S.

  10. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    Proposed Border Wall ;
    Could be composed of NEW military desert training facilities doing "double duty " as a virtual / physical border wall and a desert training center for the world's greatest existing threats ,----- The entire Middle Eastern World .
    Keep our military eternally vigilant .

  11. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    What you consistently see with Leftists is that they want bigger, more powerful government: more power to government; less power to people. They want the people to be deprived of ever more rights. Leftists are really Statists of a very deep dye.

    To advocate for the government to provide people with their basic needs, or to provide people with lots of government jobs, is pretty much the same as appealing to a Mexican drug cartel to provide for people in these ways. And a very powerful government/thug entity will willing do these things (especially if they have the power to print money).

    Tax revenues to provide social services are always primarily a revenue stream flowing to the government thugs (little makes it to the poor), and having a large number of people employed by government thugs gives them a large constituency of supporters. Both methods work to consolidate their power.

    Where government thugs control the money printing, it doesn't even cost them anything: They borrow/counterfeit the money, and the people get the bill for both the money borrowed and the interest. And the thugs siphon most of the borrowed money into their own pockets, and the people get the bill for that, too. But--in the minds of Leftists, at least--an illusion is created that government is "giving" them something.

  12. blueheron profile image93
    blueheronposted 5 years ago

    Quite true, Jack. The EPA isn't engaged in environmental protection. It's engaged in promoting corporate interests and undermining the property rights of ordinary citizens. Plus it has engaged in quite a lot of its own polluting. Generally, the names of these government entities are descriptive of the exact opposite of what they actually do.


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)