View Full Version : Senate deal on immigration, foreign aid
FromMyColdDeadHand
02-05-24, 10:13
Kind of interesting. Why would you come up with some compromise and not include the House GOP in on it? The ‘deal’ seems like the typical DC deal, but frankly, not as ‘bad’ as I would have thought. Maybe that is a sign that the Dems are scared of this topic for the election. I more think that there must be something in there is worse than the press is reporting. The biggest thing seems to be this ‘trigger’ for more action. Is that a ‘good’ level, seems like ‘0’ would be a good level. Could that trigger level info be manipulated? Seems like we have laws. Enforce the laws. I wish we had the same level disrespect for NFA laws…. How about we stop enforcing the NFA and 68 laws when crime hits a certian level…
ChattanoogaPhil
02-05-24, 10:21
Kind of interesting. Why would you come up with some compromise and not include the House GOP in on it? The ‘deal’ seems like the typical DC deal, but frankly, not as ‘bad’ as I would have thought. Maybe that is a sign that the Dems are scared of this topic for the election. I more think that there must be something in there is worse than the press is reporting. The biggest thing seems to be this ‘trigger’ for more action. Is that a ‘good’ level, seems like ‘0’ would be a good level. Could that trigger level info be manipulated? Seems like we have laws. Enforce the laws. I wish we had the same level disrespect for NFA laws…. How about we stop enforcing the NFA and 68 laws when crime hits a certian level…
Not bad?
Here are the key changes included in the bill:
— New emergency authority to restrict border crossings if daily average migrant encounters reach 4,000 over a one-week span. If that metric is reached, the Homeland Security secretary could decide to largely bar migrants from seeking asylum if they crossed the border unlawfully.
If migrant crossings increase above 5,000 on average per day on a given week, DHS is required to use the authority. If encounters reach 8,500 in one day, the department is required to trigger the authority. But the federal government is limited in how long it can use the authority.
In the first year, the government can use it for 270 days, then 225 calendar days in the second year, and 180 days in the third year. The authority sunsets after three years.
Not bad?
Here are the key changes included in the bill:
— New emergency authority to restrict border crossings if daily average migrant encounters reach 4,000 over a one-week span. If that metric is reached, the Homeland Security secretary could decide to largely bar migrants from seeking asylum if they crossed the border unlawfully.
If migrant crossings increase above 5,000 on average per day on a given week, DHS is required to use the authority. If encounters reach 8,500 in one day, the department is required to trigger the authority. But the federal government is limited in how long it can use the authority.
In the first year, the government can use it for 270 days, then 225 calendar days in the second year, and 180 days in the third year. The authority sunsets after three years.
That is the literal statutory equivalent of saying "stop, or I'll say stop again." What the everlovin' ****?
ChattanoogaPhil
02-05-24, 10:36
That is the literal statutory equivalent of saying "stop, or I'll say stop again." What the everlovin' ****?
And on 100 days during the first year it's a version of olly olly oxen free. By the third year Federal authority only applies to half the days of the year. I can't think of a more bizarre bill, ever. Total and complete farce that only serves to exacerbate the the border crisis even further.
It's a ****ing joke. Biden caused this border crisis using executive action. It doesn't nedd a bill from congress to be fixed. The bill also has hidden ukrane funding in it.
They cannot pass a bill, any bill, without the house. And the house GOP has to sign off just for numbers, and there are too many who think this bill is garbage (and it is, for so many reasons). The left will portray the GOP as 'playing politics' and all. I think they need to get ahead and start publicizing why the bill is crap and a non-starter.
Anyone supporting this "deal" is on the wrong side. As all of you know, no bill is required to close the border and this is yet another UNIParty screwing of the American Taxpayer.
The bill also has hidden ukrane funding in it.
Gotta kick up 10% for the Big Guy...
It's a ****ing joke. Biden caused this border crisis using executive action. It doesn't nedd a bill from congress to be fixed. The bill also has hidden ukrane funding in it.
Yeah, that's a pretty common "carrot" to get a bill considered.
titsonritz
02-05-24, 11:34
I would say this is the last straw if the last wasn’t broken thousands of straws ago. **** these slime, they have zero interest in what is good for this country.
60 Billion to israel & ukraine
20 billion for 'border security'
Trump wanted 10 billion for the wall & the swamp went ape shit...clown show. Good thing is it appears to be DOA.
Closing the asylum loophole would be a good start, as would funding more immigration courts and semi-permanent refugee camps to facilitate detention.
The thing I can't fathom though is why anyone pretends that 5,000 asylee declarations is some kind of good compromise. The number should be zero until the backlog has been cleared. Saying you'll take that many people does nothing but increase the incentive for people attempting to migrate here.
Also...the billions for NGOs that help facilitate these refugee/migrant/immigrant caravans throughout South America and up through Mex? Rewarding people who are helping the mass law breaking? WTF. That is so ridiculous on its face that I at first I figured I must be reading it wrong. Hard no.
Kind of interesting. Why would you come up with some compromise and not include the House GOP in on it? The ‘deal’ seems like the typical DC deal, but frankly, not as ‘bad’ as I would have thought. Maybe that is a sign that the Dems are scared of this topic for the election. I more think that there must be something in there is worse than the press is reporting. The biggest thing seems to be this ‘trigger’ for more action. Is that a ‘good’ level, seems like ‘0’ would be a good level. Could that trigger level info be manipulated? Seems like we have laws. Enforce the laws. I wish we had the same level disrespect for NFA laws…. How about we stop enforcing the NFA and 68 laws when crime hits a certian level…
Are you reading the actual bill? Or the synopsis of talking points they issued along with the bill?
I have been reading the actual Bill since Lankford sent the link. It’s 280 pages long and I’m currently on page 98. So far, what I’ve read leads me to believe that Lankford has redefined “immediate consequences for illegal crossing” to mean an asylum review for NON CUSTODIAL immigrants somewhere between 31 and 90 days after being released into the country.
Of course that 31-90 days is subject to a myriad of exemptions and exclusions. Even the 90 day limit has an out because it says “90 days, or as soon as practicable.”
I’ll try to pick up the remainder of the bill later today, but so far I’m very underwhelmed. :(
Diamondback
02-05-24, 12:55
What I'm reading so far... Lankford wants public statements, so I'll give him one.
*read this in Dwayne Johnson voice*
"Take your monster-size bill, roll it up real tight, turn that sumb--ch sideways and shove it right up your sellout ass!"
What I'm reading so far... Lankford wants public statements, so I'll give him one.
*read this in Dwayne Johnson voice*
"Take your monster-size bill, roll it up real tight, turn that sumb--ch sideways and shove it right up your sellout ass!"
I’m up to page 105 now. None of it even has to begin until a ton of people say has the infrastructure and personnel to implement it. They aren’t even required to report on whether it’s ready for implementation for 180 days. By that time it will either be irrelevant because Trump can do better on Day One, or Biden has won and he can continue the shenanigans to say they’re not ready yet. :rolleyes:
Edit: Page 106+ say the Comptroller General determines whether DHS is operationally ready to implement the requirements at 180 days, and if not, re-review every 180 days until the ready determination can be made. They can drag this out for years. :(
ChattanoogaPhil
02-05-24, 13:44
Reading reports... Even if the border was "shut down" (never gonna happen under Biden) after hitting 5,000, that doesn't apply to ports of entry, only in-between ports of entry. Border officials would still have to process a minimum of 1,400 asylum requests per day at ports of entry. So-called unaccompanied minors wouldn't be counted in any of the numbers. Age? I'm 17 so says the 22y/o man.
It wasn't that long ago that Obama's DHS secretary, Jeh Johnson, said 1,000 in a day was a crisis. Today, Marble Mouth Mconnell is pushing to codify a border crisis on steroids.
Along with the unaccompanied minor exclusion, Page 124 contains a particularly troubling exemption. It says “aliens described in (a)(2)(C) from noncontiguous countries shall not be included in calculating the sum of aliens encountered.”
That’s confusing but suggests that aliens encountered at the border from countries of origin that are not contiguous with the United States, wouldn’t count towards the 5,000/8,500 calculations. Why the hell not?
Reading reports... Even if the border was "shut down" (never gonna happen under Biden) after hitting 5,000, that doesn't apply to ports of entry, only in-between ports of entry. Border officials would still have to process a minimum of 1,400 asylum requests per day at ports of entry. So-called unaccompanied minors wouldn't be counted in any of the numbers. Age? I'm 17 so says the 22y/o man.
It wasn't that long ago that Obama's DHS secretary, Jeh Johnson, said 1,000 in a day was a crisis. Today, Marble Mouth Mconnell is pushing to codify a border crisis on steroids.
Page 124, lines 3-7, the inadmissible aliens encountered at the designated ports of entry do count. Unaccompanied minors don’t count.
Page 125 if the encounters (which don’t include unaccompanied minors or citizens of noncontiguous countries) drop below 3,750 for seven consecutive days, Mayorkas SHALL suspend the emergency authority again.
So as long as the NGO’s and cartels structure the number of encounters correctly, they can avoid triggering the authority in this Bill and if they inadvertently do, only have to reduce the flow by 1,250 a day for seven days.
This bill is a piece of shit. Lankford is lying to us by obfuscation. :mad:
The kiss of death is on Page 129. Even if all the conditions requiring the activation of the authority are met, POTUS can direct the DHS Secretary to suspend the authority for up to 45 days per year, if he/she deems it to be “in the national interest”.
I can see ten ways to Sunday to avoid triggering this Bill, and if triggered to suspend it.
Karl Rove is on FOX News right now, lying his ass off to Martha McCallum, right after Rep. Nancy Mace told the truth. What a shit show is the GOP. :(
ChattanoogaPhil
02-05-24, 15:23
The worst part of it all is the word "bipartisan". Other than McConnell, what other republican senators were in on this disgrace of a "deal"?
I’m super frustrated right now because everything being said about the Lankford negotiated $118B Senate “Border Bill”, is a complete lie, right down to the fact that it’s not even a Bill at all.
That’s right, the “Border Bill” is actually Senate Amendment 1371 to H.R.815, which already passed the House on March 7th, 2023, but was never taken up in the Senate.
H.R.815 is actually a Veterans Bill to fund veterans healthcare, called the RELIEVE Act.
Ostensibly it is supposed to help pay for veterans healthcare:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/815
“Removing Extraneous Loopholes Insuring Every Veteran Emergency Act or the RELIEVE Act
This bill expands eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reimbursement of emergency treatment for veterans who are treated in a non-VA facility. Specifically, the bill waives the requirement that a veteran must have received VA care within the 24-month period preceding the furnishing of emergency treatment if the veteran receives such emergency treatment within the 60-day period following their enrollment in the VA health care system.
Additionally, the bill extends through December 28, 2031, higher rates for certain loan fees under the VA home loan program.”
So here comes Senator Patty Murray, (D)WA with Senate Amendment 1371:
https://www.congress.gov/amendment/118th-congress/senate-amendment/1371/text?s=1&r=2&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22Hr815%22%7D
Senate Amendment 1371 is her Amendment and is cosponsored by Chuck Schumer, not Lankford. Lankford, Synema (I)AZ and Chris Murphy (D)CT negotiated the Amendment. It does NOT appreciably increase border security or reduce illegal immigration (I’ve read it). Here’s how the money flows:
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/MIGRATION-USA/CONGRESS/lbvgbbxdopq/chart.png
Notice that Gaza gets almost 50% of what the border gets. Not Israel, Gaza. If that weren’t enough, Ukraine gets three times as much as the Border. The border only gets 17% of the funding in this Amendment, yet they’re all pretending it’s a “Border Bill”. It’s not.
Worse yet, the border section is riddled with loopholes, exemptions, implementation deferrals and circumvention authorities that absolutely ensure that the border will never be “closed”, even of they had 100,000 migrant encounters in a week (not all of which would even count).
Seriously, read the damned Amendment and see for yourself! Lankford is lying his ass off by way of obfuscation. None of what he claims would actually happen, but it would really fatten a lot of people’s wallets at the expense of the taxpayers!
Call and write all your Senators and Representatives to let them know they need to oppose this Amendment to a House Bill they would never pass if it was actually about helping veterans. Don’t let them pretend you oppose veterans healthcare and border security because that’s not what this is about at all.
Not only no, but FVCK NO!!!
Screw these illegals, their illegal kids, and anyone else I'm forgetting.
Repubes continue to be dumbasses. They need to tell FJB no bill is needed, enforce the immigration laws that are already on the books like DJT did. You broke it, you fix it. Instead they see an opportunity to steal more of my money while taking some of the blame for the border disaster.
This is the list making the rounds of those not on record condemning this idiotic bill...haley is on record supporting & trump obviously hates it. You don't need any bill, enforce the damn laws & build the wall. The propaganda with the msm on this is nauseating.
Here's the list of Republican senators who have yet to disavow the border betrayal bill. If your senator is here, call them, and politely demand they go on the record against this sellout.
Murkowski (AK)
Sullivan (AK)
Boozman (AR)
Crapo (ID)
Young (IN)
Grassley (IA)
Ernst (IA)
Moran (KS)
McConnell (KY...okay, this one isn't happening)
Cassidy (LA)
Kennedy (LA)
Collins (ME)
Wicker (MS)
Hyde-Smith (MS)
Fischer (NE)
Ricketts (NE)
Tillis (NC)
Hoeven (ND)
Cramer (ND)
Mullin (OK)
Lankford (OK...start planning the primary now, not later)
Graham (SC)
Tim Scott (SC)
Thune (SD)
Rounds (SD)
Cornyn (TX)
Romney (UT)
Capito (WV)
Barrasso (WY)
Lummis (WY)
We need 41 votes to kill the Invasion Authorization Act.
Here's the list of Republican senators who have yet to disavow the border betrayal bill. If your senator is here, call them, and politely demand they go on the record against this sellout.
Murkowski (AK)
Sullivan (AK)
Boozman (AR)
Crapo (ID)
Young (IN)
Grassley (IA)
Ernst (IA)
Moran (KS)
McConnell (KY...okay, this one isn't happening)
Cassidy (LA)
Kennedy (LA)
Collins (ME)
Wicker (MS)
Hyde-Smith (MS)
Fischer (NE)
Ricketts (NE)
Tillis (NC)
Hoeven (ND)
Cramer (ND)
Mullin (OK)
Lankford (OK...start planning the primary now, not later)
Graham (SC)
Tim Scott (SC)
Thune (SD)
Rounds (SD)
Cornyn (TX)
Romney (UT)
Capito (WV)
Barrasso (WY)
Lummis (WY)
We need 41 votes to kill the Invasion Authorization Act.
Glad to see my two Senators aren't on that list (Blackburn and Hagerty).
This is the list making the rounds of those not on record condemning this idiotic bill...haley is on record supporting & trump obviously hates it. You don't need any bill, enforce the damn laws & build the wall. The propaganda with the msm on this is nauseating.
Here's the list of Republican senators who have yet to disavow the border betrayal bill. If your senator is here, call them, and politely demand they go on the record against this sellout.
Murkowski (AK)
Sullivan (AK)
Boozman (AR)
Crapo (ID)
Young (IN)
Grassley (IA)
Ernst (IA)
Moran (KS)
McConnell (KY...okay, this one isn't happening)
Cassidy (LA)
Kennedy (LA)
Collins (ME)
Wicker (MS)
Hyde-Smith (MS)
Fischer (NE)
Ricketts (NE)
Tillis (NC)
Hoeven (ND)
Cramer (ND)
Mullin (OK)
Lankford (OK...start planning the primary now, not later)
Graham (SC)
Tim Scott (SC)
Thune (SD)
Rounds (SD)
Cornyn (TX)
Romney (UT)
Capito (WV)
Barrasso (WY)
Lummis (WY)
We need 41 votes to kill the Invasion Authorization Act.
Mullin (OK) will have a telephone town hall tomorrow night. I’ve already posted all of this and I will be on that call tomorrow night. If I get the chance I will definitely be speaking with exactly what I’ve read that contradicts Lankford!
I don't too excited about this particular flavor of treason, anymore.
The USA was doomed the day Hart-Celler became law.
Have to end NAFTA if you even dream of border security.
That was the motive to moving all of our electronics and vehicle assembly to Mexico, to make sure the border couldn't be regulated without destroying access to goods.
FromMyColdDeadHand
02-05-24, 19:22
Are you reading the actual bill? Or the synopsis of talking points they issued along with the bill?
I have been reading the actual Bill since Lankford sent the link. It’s 280 pages long and I’m currently on page 98. So far, what I’ve read leads me to believe that Lankford has redefined “immediate consequences for illegal crossing” to mean an asylum review for NON CUSTODIAL immigrants somewhere between 31 and 90 days after being released into the country.
Of course that 31-90 days is subject to a myriad of exemptions and exclusions. Even the 90 day limit has an out because it says “90 days, or as soon as practicable.”
I’ll try to pick up the remainder of the bill later today, but so far I’m very underwhelmed. :(
I was going mainly on the morning shows on the big three and how they were reporting it- which is how most people are going to perceive it if the truth doesn’t get out. That is the political battle that we are going to have to face and fight.
Have to end NAFTA if you even dream of border security.
That was the motive to moving all of our electronics and vehicle assembly to Mexico, to make sure the border couldn't be regulated without destroying access to goods.
NAFTA would help you get drugs and other contraband, maybe a WMD into the country, but it doesn’t move people that well. Better Mexico than China, Korea, Vietnam or Indonesia. Money into Mexico, if we could keep our people off of illegal drugs and enable the cartels, would prop that place up. That would help to stem the transfer of people from and through there.
I still think that if we let people into the country because of poor conditions in their home country, we need to have an active plan to overthrow the current govt and replace it- and do it with people who come here from these sh!t hole countries
Have to end NAFTA if you even dream of border security.
That was the motive to moving all of our electronics and vehicle assembly to Mexico, to make sure the border couldn't be regulated without destroying access to goods.
NAFTA is gone man. Trump ditched NAFTA and renegotiated the USMCA.
NAFTA would help you get drugs and other contraband, maybe a WMD into the country, but it doesn’t move people that well. Better Mexico than China, Korea, Vietnam or Indonesia. Money into Mexico, if we could keep our people off of illegal drugs and enable the cartels, would prop that place up. That would help to stem the transfer of people from and through there.
If we aren't inspecting 90% of the shipping containers coming into the country because we don't want to create product shortages, we don't really know what is in those containers. I realize most illegals are simply wading across the river and walking in at the hundreds of locations where enforcement isn't even happening, but NAFTA seriously contributes to the lack of any real border security.
The drugs and other contraband also contribute to the illegals who cross the border to help facilitate the operations associated with the drugs coming in with NAFTA shipments. Furthermore NAFTA was sold to the public as a means of ending illegal immigration by moving production to Mexico and providing employment opportunities there. But due to corruption at all levels, those jobs are sold and do nothing to curb illegal immigration. It's time to just stop doing it and bring most of that production home.
Making cars isn't the same as sweatshops for Nike, those were actually good jobs that allowed people to raise families. When we stopped making cars, producing steel and most other things...all that was left was service industry jobs which evaporated with the housing market crash and never really came back. Now people try and provide for their families by working at fast food locations because we have exported nearly all of our domestic production.
Back in the 1980s nearly everything at Walmart had a sign that said "Proudly made in the USA", now almost nothing is. And people wonder why they don't have the same "cost of living to income ratio" that their parents had.
NAFTA is gone man. Trump ditched NAFTA and renegotiated the USMCA.
I hope that is sarcasm. Aside from greater access to Canadian dairy production nothing really changed.
I hope that is sarcasm. Aside from greater access to Canadian dairy production nothing really changed.
Sure it did.
Anything was an improvement over NAFTA and including Canada was smart as well. The content changes makes it harder for Auto Companies to outsource to Mexico. In addition, the US content increase resulted in more parts being sourced from the US, which is good for the Auto supply base.
https://www.trade.gov/usmca-vsnafta
Sure it did.
Anything was an improvement over NAFTA and including Canada was smart as well. The content changes makes it harder for Auto Companies to outsource to Mexico. In addition, the US content increase resulted in more parts being sourced from the US, which is good for the Auto supply base.
https://www.trade.gov/usmca-vsnafta
Did all those auto factory jobs come back to the US?
Auto companies were already fully outsourced.
Averageman
02-06-24, 04:36
Making cars isn't the same as sweatshops for Nike, those were actually good jobs that allowed people to raise families. When we stopped making cars, producing steel and most other things...all that was left was service industry jobs which evaporated with the housing market crash and never really came back. Now people try and provide for their families by working at fast food locations because we have exported nearly all of our domestic production.
Back in the 1980s nearly everything at Walmart had a sign that said "Proudly made in the USA", now almost nothing is. And people wonder why they don't have the same "cost of living to income ratio" that their parents had.
A total sell-out of the United States Middle Class. We need those jobs back.
titsonritz
02-06-24, 06:31
Back in the 1980s nearly everything at Walmart had a sign that said "Proudly made in the USA", now almost nothing is.
My sister worked for them back than, I remember that being their big claim to fame
This is the list making the rounds of those not on record condemning this idiotic bill...haley is on record supporting & trump obviously hates it. You don't need any bill, enforce the damn laws & build the wall. The propaganda with the msm on this is nauseating.
Here's the list of Republican senators who have yet to disavow the border betrayal bill. If your senator is here, call them, and politely demand they go on the record against this sellout.
Murkowski (AK)
Sullivan (AK)
Boozman (AR)
Crapo (ID)
Young (IN)
Grassley (IA)
Ernst (IA)
Moran (KS)
McConnell (KY...okay, this one isn't happening)
Cassidy (LA)
Kennedy (LA)
Collins (ME)
Wicker (MS)
Hyde-Smith (MS)
Fischer (NE)
Ricketts (NE)
Tillis (NC)
Hoeven (ND)
Cramer (ND)
Mullin (OK)
Lankford (OK...start planning the primary now, not later)
Graham (SC)
Tim Scott (SC)
Thune (SD)
Rounds (SD)
Cornyn (TX)
Romney (UT)
Capito (WV)
Barrasso (WY)
Lummis (WY)
We need 41 votes to kill the Invasion Authorization Act.
I emailed Moran. Probably won't do any good, but I guess we're expected to play this whole "representative government" game for a while longer.
The turtle from Kentucky seems to be back paddling on the bill already.
ChattanoogaPhil
02-06-24, 15:06
Republican senators are publicly saying what Trump has been advocating for years... Mitch needs to go.
----
GOP senators call for McConnell to step down, declare border bill 'unadulterated bulls---'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-senators-mcconnell-step-down-border-bill-unadulterated-bull
Averageman
02-06-24, 16:46
Well, then lets shut everything down and get a new Mitch the Bitch.
FromMyColdDeadHand
02-06-24, 18:28
Funny how Mitch has to go and the House is a train wreck, and the reason is…. Trump lost not just one, but two Georgia Senate seats and then left us with an unworkable (from numbers and idiots) majority in the House. But sure, Mitch having to work from the minority is the problem. I’m not saying that this is a good deal. Does anyone think that there is a ‘good’ deal to be had? The key now is to make the deal look horrible, but Trump would always just rather have people looking at him.
Funny how Mitch has to go and the House is a train wreck, and the reason is…. Trump lost not just one, but two Georgia Senate seats and then left us with an unworkable (from numbers and idiots) majority in the House. But sure, Mitch having to work from the minority is the problem. I’m not saying that this is a good deal. Does anyone think that there is a ‘good’ deal to be had? The key now is to make the deal look horrible, but Trump would always just rather have people looking at him.
This wasn’t just not a good deal. It was a complete capitulation by Lankford to Schumer and Biden, all so they could say they “did something” when in fact they would’ve codified Biden’s violation of our national sovereignty into law.
Every last talking point being used against the GOP on the border is a complete and total lie. Don’t support liars and con artists just to spite Trump. :(
My intention was to read the bill carefully then email my senators and reps, but then gaffed it off because they are so full of shit. Just the way it is argued on TV gives it away as a canard. Bills purporting to be something are almost always really something else, and the current administration is already breaking the law regarding asylum claims and parole. In fact, by allowing the aliens to schedule their illegal entry through the CBPOne app, we are breaking the law for them. Todd Bensmann, whose book Overrun is a great piece of work, has been doing stellar reporting on the rolling disaster that is Biden Immigration Policy.
Anyway, thanks for reading it for us Glocktogo. I suspect you are already well-informed on immigration law. The walking piles of treason that wrote this bill are not worth the paper they wrote it on.
I hope the sponsors get it good and hard, but they probably won't in this life.
Diamondback
02-06-24, 19:00
I'm gonna put things as charitably as I know how... To drop this much bullshit, you'd have to haul one of the four surviving B-36s out of their museums and make it fly again.
The Dumb Gun Collector
02-06-24, 20:39
Funny how Mitch has to go and the House is a train wreck, and the reason is…. Trump lost not just one, but two Georgia Senate seats and then left us with an unworkable (from numbers and idiots) majority in the House. But sure, Mitch having to work from the minority is the problem. I’m not saying that this is a good deal. Does anyone think that there is a ‘good’ deal to be had? The key now is to make the deal look horrible, but Trump would always just rather have people looking at him.
Don’t waste your time making sense.
Don’t waste your time making sense.
Don’t worry, he didn’t! :jester:
So Trump lost 2 GA Senate seats and Mitch and the Republican party had nothing to do with it? Come on man, that makes no sense unless you're a never Trumper like so many others here. Anyone with a brain knows Mitch the Bitch wasn't funding anyone's campaign who was a Trump man / woman. It happened all over the Country.
The GA election was rigged, its plain as day to see and Mitch doesn't get a free pass. He sent that Lankford tool on a mission, he came back with a Turd and Mitch tosses him under the bus when we all get that it is a shit deal, as usual.
There are very few who get that we are at war and are willing to fight as dirty as the other side. Until they all get it, you can resign yourself to losing. Mitch is the poster child of this mentality. I'm just surprised he didn't hold onto that border legislation longer than he actually did.
So for those of you advocating for Mitch, what exactly does this "Deal" do that is good? It was a setup from the beginning so the Commies can now claim, falsely (I think) the Republican's don't want the border closed. It is themed for the low information crowd who still relies on the MSM to be told what to think. All the while it was the commies who tore down every protection Trump put in on day one of their illegal reign.
The morons elected to the Senate fell for it, hook line and sinker, if they weren't in on it from the beginning.
Yes, shut it down hard and until everyone drawing a .GOV check squeals. It is the only lever worth using at this point. If you're on here and you're drawing a .gov check and believe otherwise, at least come clean about your income stream.
.MIL doesn't count, it isn't like they aren't going to pay you during a shutdown.
So Trump lost 2 GA Senate seats and Mitch and the Republican party had nothing to do with it? Come on man, that makes no sense unless you're a never Trumper like so many others here.
The GA election was rigged, its plain as day to see and Mitch doesn't get a free pass. He sent that Lankford tool on a mission, he came back with a Turd and Mitch tosses him under the bus when we all get that it is a shit deal, as usual.
There are very few who get that we are at war and are willing to fight as dirty as the other side. Until they all get it, you can resign yourself to losing. Mitch is the poster child of this mentality. I'm just surprised he didn't hold onto that border legislation longer than he actually did.
McConnell did Lankford as dirty as Schumer did Manchin. Lankford deserved to get bent over and I hope it kills his political career beyond his current term! People in Oklahoma are all over his Facebook page saying they’ll never vote for him again! :D
FromMyColdDeadHand
02-06-24, 23:12
Didn’t Lankford take a dookie in the pool recently on something else too?
I don’t know if anyone is ‘pro’ McConnell, but as a politician in the world’s most political body, you have to admire some of the things that he gets done and what he avoids. Barrett on SCOTUS and Garland off was a pretty slick trick. A Machiavellian High-five.
And the GA seats are ALL Trump as he thrashed around like a narcissistic whirling dervish. You can admire the guy and realize he is a walking Greek Tragedy play who sounds like one of the three stooges warming up to sing by only being able to say “Me-mee,mee-me,me”.
Didn’t Lankford take a dookie in the pool recently on something else too?
I don’t know if anyone is ‘pro’ McConnell, but as a politician in the world’s most political body, you have to admire some of the things that he gets done and what he avoids. Barrett on SCOTUS and Garland off was a pretty slick trick. A Machiavellian High-five.
And the GA seats are ALL Trump as he thrashed around like a narcissistic whirling dervish. You can admire the guy and realize he is a walking Greek Tragedy play who sounds like one of the three stooges warming up to sing by only being able to say “Me-mee,mee-me,me”.
He apologized to black voters for questioning the election results. :rolleyes:
https://nypost.com/2021/01/15/lankford-apologizes-to-black-voters-for-questioning-election-results/
FromMyColdDeadHand
02-07-24, 11:23
He apologized to black voters for questioning the election results. :rolleyes:
https://nypost.com/2021/01/15/lankford-apologizes-to-black-voters-for-questioning-election-results/
That wasn’t it. I’ve seen him in some videos, and he seems OK. I guess you can never tell.
ChattanoogaPhil
02-08-24, 04:48
Good explanation from Ted Cruz.
Just press play.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-inside-story-of-how-we-defeated-the-failed/id1495601614?i=1000644462446
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.