What did you guys think?
I tuned in to Fox, looking for sports, and caught most of his address. It was as expected and I had to laugh when he said that the opponents refuse to compromise.
The only surprises I found was in the comments by Shepard and Wallace afterward. The MSM couldn't have done a better job of fact-checking.
I doubt if there are any "undecided" at this point who might have been influenced by either the address or the rebuttal. Both bases were just reinforced.
so both sides have their minds made up? Wow, just wow how the left like to yap, yap, and yap. Just a few short years ago the left Schummer and Pelosi were wanting spend billions on the boarder but now they leave town and go to Hawaii just to have an excuse for their total flip flopping all over hell and back. If Trump were to drop the security argument those two would suddenly be for it again.
What's worse were the several other libs who ran to cnn yesterday and promised if Trump would only drop this they would magically come back to work and debate. What a bunch of 2 face liars. They tried they same crap with RR, 41 and 43 who all gave them a chance and got screwed with 22 million illegals for their efforts
mc, if you are through yap, yap, yapping, is there anything in my post that you would like to address ?
It was nothing more than a campaign fundraising publicity stunt.
mcfarm - they just are not in favor of an asinine waste of money that a thirty foot wall will be.
I have asked before but here goes - name any law enforcement operation that thinks having a wall that you can't see through is their preferred means of containment?
even modern prisons holding the most dangers of offenders understand the need to see the other side of their boundary structures.
It is just another case of trumps simple campaign slogan that got his simplistic supporters riled up meets up with reality, and reality has a way of proving simplistic ideas to be foolish.
which is a good thing because if it didn't work that way we all would be raking the forest
why yes carl, thought I was quite clear. "refuse to compromise" you say...how in the hell would you "compromise" with an outfit that just a few short years ago wanted what you want......now they claim you are a crazy person wanting that very same thing....but now they do not want it....in other words the left trying to screw us all again,,,,just as I said RR, 41 and 43 all were led down this blind alley, we ain't going there again.
frey I have seen pictures of what they are building and you can clearly see thru...do not know what the hell you are talking about. Waste of money to a lib? sure we all believe they know the definition of a waste of money.
"mcfarm - they just are not in favor of an asinine waste of money that a thirty foot wall will be.
I have asked before but here goes - name any law enforcement operation that thinks having a wall that you can't see through is their preferred means of containment?"
And I have posted your answer, now 3 times previously in the past 2 months. Here it is again for the 4th time from a recent post:
To me, using commence sense, it seems like a wall would help..........but since I have no clue regarding the actual dynamics of southern border security, I decided to base my actual opinion on legit facts from the experts in border security down there.
They are pretty emphatic about a wall helping a great deal(with other elements needed to go along with it).
What is it that you know(other than anything that comes from Trump is bad) that border security does not understand?
"Most certainly, it already assists my men and women," Provost told Hill.TV's Buck Sexton on Wednesday.
"We already have many miles, over 600 miles of barrier along the border. I have been in locations where there was no barrier, and then I was there when we put it up. It certainly helps. It's not a be all end all. It's a part of a system. We need the technology, we need that infrastructure," she added in the interview that aired Thursday."
"INSKEEP: In a few seconds, how different do you think the country could be in three or four years if these proposals are carried out?
JUDD: Well, I think the country is going to be a lot safer.
INSKEEP: A lot safer.
JUDD: I really do, yes, absolutely. I mean, I was there with what they call the angel families, families that had children that were killed by persons that were in the United States illegally. If these laws are carried out properly - and he's not talking about new laws. By the way, he's not saying that he's going to give us new laws. He's talking about enforcing the laws that are currently on the books."
Mike, as I recall, there was a rebuttal to your previous post, pointing out that you were quoting men who sat behind desks and didn't actually have the day-to-day border experience.
I would like to see the rebuttal.
One of my sources is more than just a guy in his office. He represents all those guys and gals working at the border.............which is why I used him for a source:
"The U.S. Border Patrol agents' union backed Donald Trump's candidacy. Steve Inskeep talks with union leader Brandon Judd about the president's executive action on a border wall and sanctuary cities.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
When President Trump spoke to people at the Department of Homeland Security yesterday, Brandon Judd was in the audience. He's president of the union that represents U.S. Border Patrol agents, the National Border Patrol Council, which endorsed Trump during the campaign."
"One of my sources is more than just a guy in his office. He represents all those guys and gals working at the border .........… which is why I used him for a source.
"The U.S. Border Patrol agents' union backed Donald Trump's candidacy. Steve Inskeep talks with union leader Brandon Judd about the president's executive action on a border wall and sanctuary cities."
The union guy also represents those guys and gals working at the border. That doesn't mean that they don't sit behind desks and actually have the day-to-day border experience.
I admit to not knowing any more (first hand) than others in a position similar to mine, on whether a border wall for 5 billion dollars makes sense.
My personal opinion would be that it does but I needed to defer to THE experts, border patrol.
But this discussion is not really about that. It has been twisted into another "stop/block Trump" "discredit Trump" ......... us against him fiasco.
The Trump haters are totally buying into it and this time, we have the government shut down and millions of people being hurt to blame on Trump.............and its working, which is making alot of republicans nervous too.
If it was based on the authentic, relevant facts(not the ones we can pick out which Trump misstates) then the expert opinions of border security would be getting tremendous weighting instead of zero weighting...........and the dems would be doing the right thing for America.
I don't understand carl.
I agreed with you that he is a guy in his office and you copied my stating this again but then repeated your opinion that he doesn't have day to day experience.
Maybe you are missing the point. He IS a guy in his office that represents ALL of those that work on the border with the day to day experience.
He was elected and paid to do this.
I would guess that if you interviewed every border patrol agent/worker, you could get many different opinions, some probably would be against a wall.
And the border patrol won't be taking a vote on whether they want the wall or not................but they did vote in the guy to represent them, Brandon Judd, president of their union.
I can't think of a better person to speak for border patrol. That's why he was sought out for this interview and is my source.
I am all eyes and ears for other expert sources that others have to share with us.
Mike, as the Moderator, you represent the Forum and all of its posters. If you were asked if you were for or against funding for the wall, your answer would be your opinion only.
To belabor the point, Trump was elected President and represents the United States, but he certainly doesn't speak for us all.
Since I have posted this numerous times in the last few weeks but several here are either not reading it or not understanding it or don't want to acknowledge it, I will say it a different way to assist everybody...........and am very happy to repeat it again.
The men and women that work border patrol understand the dynamics of what will work and what will not work best with regards to the current immigration problems.
1. The border patrol union, elected a leader to represent them. His name is Brandon Judd. I have included the interview with him in this thread above. The border patrol union and Mr. Judd support the wall and believe it will help.
2. Carla Provost is the chief of the US border patrol. She believes this:
The political hoopla going on right now is absurd and is intended to vilify Trump for shutting down the government for "his" wall.
No, it's not Trump's wall.............its "America's" wall that Trump is for and has been for the past 2 years.
Read the comments of the border security experts/authorities if you want to know whether the wall is good for America or not. Since they CLEARLY are for the wall and think that it would be good for southern border security(along with other things) why wouldn't politicians (and citizens) that want whats best for border security, our country and even those taken advantage of while sneaking into our country be for the wall?
Answer: Because Trump wants the wall.
Pretty sad but that's the real reason. Every time Trump wants to do something to Make America Great" the opposition to him is incredible.
It's uncanny how almost every decision he's made the past 2 years has been the wrong one according to one side and been fiercely opposed..............but it almost always turns out to be a good choice.
The wall is just another good choice.
The dems have just one uniting message. Stop/Block/Hate Trump.
"Mike, as the Moderator, you represent the Forum and all of its posters. If you were asked if you were for or against funding for the wall, your answer would be your opinion only.
To belabor the point, Trump was elected President and represents the United States, but he certainly doesn't speak for us all."
Fair points carl,
I am not sure if you are trying to make a connection with the union leader on this or not but if you are, then you are trying to rationalize something completely different to justify not acknowledging what is clearly the view of what, at the very least is the majority of border patrol workers and for sure their leadership.......that speak for them.
This is a public, open forum that invites views from every walk of life about every topic there is.
Border patrol security does just one thing. Their leaders speak for them and would not be misrepresenting their views.
I don't know how else to present it. It seems hard to believe based on all the crapola floating around..........from both sides but these are the "go to" sources for authentic information.
You have been an incredibly open minded guy but I understand that you might not share my belief that these sources are the best.
I welcome you or anybody else to provide better ones(politicians are the worst and so are media much of the time, unless they are using an authentic source).
I can also understand that you might not want a wall............even if border security wants the wall. My point is that they do want the wall but the discussion is leaving this out and dwelling on petty things completely unrelated to whether the wall would be good or not for America and completely focusing on Trump........which always unites the Democrats......always.