Democrats (and RINOs): what exactly did you not like about House of Representatives bill number two, do congressional immigration bill?

[Seymour Flops]

You keep saying that you like the Senate bill. What is in the house bill that made it a non-starter? Here is the bill itself:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2

It would be a better source than commentary about the bill. But if you prefer to find commentary from your own source please post your opinion, whatever it is based on.

Not trying to sharp shoot anyone. I’m just curious about what your objection was to that bill, now that you are so eager for the Senate bill to be passed?

 

[JoeB131]

You keep saying that you like the Senate bill. What is in the house bill that made it a non-starter? Here is the bill itself:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2

It would be a better source than commentary about the bill. But if you prefer to find commentary from your own source please post your opinion, whatever it is based on.

Not trying to sharp shoot anyone. I’m just curious about what your objection was to that bill, now that you are so eager for the Senate bill to be passed?

It's still all the same bad ideas you guys have had about walls being helpful, when what we need is the infrastructure so asylum seekers aren't waiting four years for a hearing.

 

[Mac-7]

It's still all the same bad ideas you guys have had about walls being helpful, when what we need is the infrastructure so asylum seekers aren't waiting four years for a hearing.

The fake asylum seekers deserve to wait more than 4 years

And they need to wait outside the US

 

[JoeB131]

The fake asylum seekers deserve to wait more than 4 years

And they need to wait outside the US

Except our law doesn't require them to.

Once they get in, they are in.

The real problem is that we don't have enough people processing these claims in an expeditious manner.

 

[Mac-7]

Except our law doesn't require them to.

That can be changed

And trump even managed to do so using EOs

 

[JoeB131]

That can be changed

And trump even managed to do so using EOs

Most of which were struck down by the courts.

All Trump did was kick the can down the road.

 

[Mac-7]

Most of which were struck down by the courts.

All Trump did was kick the can down the road.

Not all

And no matter what the unelected assholes in the federal courts say the nation has a right to protect itself from the alien invasion

 

[JoeB131]

Not all

And no matter what the unelected assholes in the federal courts say the nation has a right to protect itself from the alien invasion

It isn't an invasion if they are invited.

When other white people invite them to do shitty jobs, they aren't invading.

 

[Mac-7]

It isn't an invasion if they are invited.

Biden had no right to invite them

And he would probably deny inviting them

 

[Seymour Flops]

It's still all the same bad ideas you guys have had about walls being helpful, when what we need is the infrastructure so asylum seekers aren't waiting four years for a hearing.

So, other than you don't think walls work, and you don't like for the overwhelmingly fake assylum seekers to have to wait in line when the whole point of them illegally crossing the border was to jump the line ahead of legal immigrants, you're fine with the House bill?

 

[citygator]

You keep saying that you like the Senate bill. What is in the house bill that made it a non-starter? Here is the bill itself:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2

It would be a better source than commentary about the bill. But if you prefer to find commentary from your own source please post your opinion, whatever it is based on.

Not trying to sharp shoot anyone. I’m just curious about what your objection was to that bill, now that you are so eager for the Senate bill to be passed?

The bill doesn’t, in fact, offer funds for anything that might stop immigration. Instead, it demands that the Department of Homeland Security ensure border agents get adequate religious counseling. While it doesn’t require the Border Patrol to be staffed entirely with anti-vaxxers, it does require DHS to “make every effort to retain Department employees who are not vaccinated against COVID-19.”


The collection of peeves from the culture wars scattered through Republicans’ bill underscores just how crazy it is for anyone to believe the GOP would take an honest shot at solving the immigration issue. H.R. 2 — specifies that “no funds are authorized to be appropriated for electric vehicles.”

The bill is a joke of a bill without any serious attempt to secure the border. The fact that you would even bring it up would suggest you didn’t read it.

 

[JoeB131]

So, other than you don't think walls work, and you don't like for the overwhelmingly fake assylum seekers to have to wait in line when the whole point of them illegally crossing the border was to jump the line ahead of legal immigrants, you're fine with the House bill?

Well, yes, but those two things are in it, which makes it a non-starter with me.

If you guys really want to end the "fake" asylum seekers, then staff the asylum courts with enough judges and investigators to determine who is entitled to asylum. The problem is, most Venezuelans would qualify, because we've dinged them for Human Rights abuses. So would most Chinese. So would most Central Americans.

So, yeah, you'd weed out the "fake" claims, but you'd still end up keeping about half the claimaints.

 

[Dadoalex]

You keep saying that you like the Senate bill. What is in the house bill that made it a non-starter? Here is the bill itself:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/2

It would be a better source than commentary about the bill. But if you prefer to find commentary from your own source please post your opinion, whatever it is based on.

Not trying to sharp shoot anyone. I’m just curious about what your objection was to that bill, now that you are so eager for the Senate bill to be passed?

(Sec. 102) This section requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to resume all activities related to constructing a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border that were underway or planned prior to January 20, 2021.

Trump lost.
This is just one of the reasons.

Sec. 108) This section modifies a provision that exempts certain applicants for CBP law enforcement positions from having to take a polygraph test. For example, this section provides this exemption to certain law enforcement officers, whereas currently the waiver is only available to eligible veterans.

Really? Exempt LE from lie detectors?
Have you ever heard the phrase "testalying?" It's a LE tradition.

(Sec. 116) This section requires DHS to ensure that CBP is, within 14 days of this bill's enactment, fully compliant with federal DNA and biometric collection requirements at U.S. land borders.
14 days to fully implement a biometric program but no money?

(Sec. 119) This section requires CBP to, within seven days of this bill's enactment, certify to Congress that CBP has real-time access to the criminal history databases of all countries of origin and transit for non-U.S. nationals encountered by CBP.

Impossible to enforce

(Sec. 121) This section prohibits DHS from (1) issuing any COVID-19 vaccine mandate unless expressly authorized by Congress, or (2) taking any adverse action against an employee based solely on the employee's refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

Congressional politics forced on DHS, stupid.

There's more, only finished the first dozen or so.

But, TRUMP LOST.
That's why this is nowhere.

 

[Seymour Flops]

(Sec. 102) This section requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to resume all activities related to constructing a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border that were underway or planned prior to January 20, 2021.

Trump lost.
This is just one of the reasons.

Thanks for giving a real response, even if I disagree with most of it.

I get it.

Walls keep people out, we want bridges to let people in, right? Except now we DO want to keep people out? You're strong on border security but Ukraine's border comes first?

It's very confusing.

Also, walls do NOT keep people out, right? (they do and they don't) In fact, you don't even have walls at your house, because they don't do anything. Biden would never build walls at his residence, and Obama welcomed illegals to his home on Martha's Vineyard. It's only those mean MAGAts that want to keep people out.

Sec. 108) This section modifies a provision that exempts certain applicants for CBP law enforcement positions from having to take a polygraph test. For example, this section provides this exemption to certain law enforcement officers, whereas currently the waiver is only available to eligible veterans.

Really? Exempt LE from lie detectors?
Have you ever heard the phrase "testalying?" It's a LE tradition.

I'll agree with you on that. I know that LE officers often believe that lying is acceptable in their mission to fight crime, and thus they commit the crime of false testimony themselves. One only need look at our current DOJ/FBI/DNC to understand how corrupt law enforcement often is.

I'd like to ask the authors what the point of that section is, since it has little to do with border security. Maybe it was a knee jerk reaction to the incredibly unfair treatment of border patrol officers in the "whipping migrants" story.

(Sec. 116) This section requires DHS to ensure that CBP is, within 14 days of this bill's enactment, fully compliant with federal DNA and biometric collection requirements at U.S. land borders.
14 days to fully implement a biometric program but no money?

They have PLENTY of money. They are spending too much of it providing shelter, food, and medicine to the illegals they are required by Mayorkas and Biden to let in. If they turn that money to collecting the data, they can comply. It might slow down the flow of illegals, while the data is collected, but isnt' that the point?

Keep in mind that Democrats are now strong border security hawks, right?

(Sec. 119) This section requires CBP to, within seven days of this bill's enactment, certify to Congress that CBP has real-time access to the criminal history databases of all countries of origin and transit for non-U.S. nationals encountered by CBP.

Impossible to enforce

How so?

All it requires is that CBP certify that it has access to information that they should already have. If for some reason they do not have that access, Congress needs to know it to find out why. Let them tell Congress "we do not have real-time access to the criminal histories of the millions of people we are letting in unvetted. Is that important?"

(Sec. 121) This section prohibits DHS from (1) issuing any COVID-19 vaccine mandate unless expressly authorized by Congress, or (2) taking any adverse action against an employee based solely on the employee's refusal to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

For a minute there, I thought you meant that the bill would not allow DHS to require illegal immigrants to have the vaccine.

So, let me understand you on that point. You believe that all employees of DHS, including border patrol officers, should be required to have up-to-date COVID vaccines, but the literally millions of illegals streaming in should not even be asked?

Congressional politics forced on DHS, stupid.

There's more, only finished the first dozen or so.

But, TRUMP LOST.
That's why this is nowhere.

Yea, but now he's going to win.

So, you'll be cool with it then?

 

[Mac-7]

The collection of peeves from the culture wars scattered through Republicans’ bill underscores just how crazy it is for anyone to believe the GOP would take an honest shot at solving the immigration issue. H.R. 2 — specifies that “no funds are authorized to be appropriated for electric vehicles.”

The bill is a joke of a bill without any serious attempt to secure the border. The fact that you would even bring it up would suggest you didn’t read it.

The House is exercising its proper due dilligence

Just as the greenies use their authority when they have it to push electric cars

 

[Mac-7]

It isn't an invasion if they are invited.

When other white people invite them to do shitty jobs, they aren't invading.

Does that apply to sex traffickers also?

Perverts are keen on having sex with young boys and girls and libs are protecting their right to do so using your argument

 

[JoeB131]

Does that apply to sex traffickers also?

Perverts are keen on having sex with young boys and girls and libs are protecting their right to do so using your argument

Maybe if we made prostitution legal, we wouldn't have these issues.

 

[JoeB131]

Walls keep people out, we want bridges to let people in, right? Except now we DO want to keep people out? You're strong on border security but Ukraine's border comes first?

It's very confusing.

Not confusing at all. Ukraine is being invaded by a hostile foreign power. We have people coming in after they've been invited by other Americans do to crappy jobs.

Also, walls do NOT keep people out, right? (they do and they don't) In fact, you don't even have walls at your house, because they don't do anything. Biden would never build walls at his residence, and Obama welcomed illegals to his home on Martha's Vineyard. It's only those mean MAGAts that want to keep people out.

I have walls in my house to protect myself and my possessions from the elements. The Roof also helps. Do you ever get tired of saying stupid things?

I'll agree with you on that. I know that LE officers often believe that lying is acceptable in their mission to fight crime, and thus they commit the crime of false testimony themselves. One only need look at our current DOJ/FBI/DNC to understand how corrupt law enforcement often is.

Remember when Republicans USED to be the party of law and order?

I'd like to ask the authors what the point of that section is, since it has little to do with border security. Maybe it was a knee jerk reaction to the incredibly unfair treatment of border patrol officers in the "whipping migrants" story.

What unfair treatment. These fuckers weren't even fired after running down migrants and whipping them with the reigns of their horses.

They have PLENTY of money. They are spending too much of it providing shelter, food, and medicine to the illegals they are required by Mayorkas and Biden to let in. If they turn that money to collecting the data, they can comply. It might slow down the flow of illegals, while the data is collected, but isnt' that the point?

Keep in mind that Democrats are now strong border security hawks, right?

Probably better than Republicans, who just claim they are, but want to benefit from illegal labor.

What Donald Trump Knew About Undocumented Workers at His Signature Tower

He has long denied knowingly using undocumented workers to demolish the building that would be replaced with Trump Tower

time.com

Yea, but now he's going to win.

So, you'll be cool with it then?

Nope, we are going to oppose everything he does.
We are going to keep going after his business interests, until he's broke.
We will keep filing criminal charges against him in as many jurisdictions as we can.
We are going to make his life as absolutely miserable as humanly possible.

But he won't win. Not if he keeps getting on stage thinking Obama is still President.

 

[Mac-7]

Maybe if we made prostitution legal, we wouldn't have these issues.

The hedonist / libertine desire for sex with children will not go away by legalizing prostitution involving adults

Which is already de facto legal in most lib jurisdictions anyway

 

[Seymour Flops]

Sec. 108) This section modifies a provision that exempts certain applicants for CBP law enforcement positions from having to take a polygraph test. For example, this section provides this exemption to certain law enforcement officers, whereas currently the waiver is only available to eligible veterans.

Really? Exempt LE from lie detectors?
Have you ever heard the phrase "testalying?" It's a LE tradition.

Dado, I had agreed with you before. But, I've learned from experience that when it appears that the Democrats are right about something, look further into it. Turns out there is a good reason for the provision:

Just the News: Huge number of border agent candidates failing DHS polygraphs, union suggests it’s intentional

Congressman Austin Scott

austinscott.house.gov

I had thought that maybe the administration was harassing officers by polygraphing them at every turn, maybe asking questions about their opinion of the way the agency is currently being run. It's not that, but it's something:

More than half of the job candidates seeking to become U.S. border patrol agents are failing the Homeland Security Department’s polygraph, though many passed such tests in other jobs, a pattern that is alarming some in Congress and leading a prominent union to suggest something sinister is happening.

Brandon Judd, president of National Border Patrol Council union, told Just the News that half to two-thirds of applicants continue to fail the lie detector test, and it is crippling the Customers and Border Protection (CBP) agency’s ability to keep staffed with the ongoing border crisis.

"They're failing an awful lot of qualified candidates,” Judd told the John Solomon Reports podcast on Friday, the day the Trump-era Title 42 policy expired, ushering a new wave of illegal migrants across the southern border. "And the reason why we know that they're failing them is because these individuals have already passed other polygraph tests, or they fail ours and then they go pass a state polygraph test."

Judd, whose union has clashed regularly with the Biden administration over what it considers lax border-security policies having allowed historic numbers of illegal aliens to enter the country, said he believes the polygraph failures are intentional.

“We are losing out on a lot of applicants because they don't want the number of border patrol agents," he said. "They do not want to ensure that we have enough for patrol agents. Everything that this administration is doing – they are undermining the mission of the Border Patrol.

Undermining the mission of the border patrol? Yes, the Biden administration is doing that openly. So, I get that the Republicans don't want seasoned officers subjected to such nonsense. The bill should include applicants also. The polygraph is useless as a fact-finding tool if it is administered or read in order to get a specific result, so it's a waste of time anyway.