Democrats: Get it straight what “bipartisan” means!

[Lisa558]

Bigots are the ruination of this country, always have been

Unless they are leftist bigots against Jews. Then it’s OK, hmmmm?

And I don’t know why you introduced bigotry into this debate, unless it’s just the usual leftist default to yelling “.waaaacist!!” at people who point out the harm in Democrat policies. So I repeat: letting in millions unvetted high school dropouts from foreign countries will bring Down this country.

 

[Hollie]

Which is not going to happen
Even Republicans realize that

So, by insisting on zero, Radical Republicans end up with 10,000 plus a day

Nonsense. It’s the Dems / Marxists who encourage criminal illegals and terrorists to cross the border. The Dems / Marxists are literally paying the criminal illegals and terrorists with gift cards and welfare.

 

[Lisa558]

American welfare recipients should be required to take the jobs illegal immigrants often risk their lives for.

Exactly! I keep hearing leftists cry “but the illegals are willing to do the dirty work that Americans refuse.” Well, they refuse because they have an option of welfare. Require welfare recipients to take jobs in order to keep the money flow going, and I guarantee you the welfare recipients will do that rather than starve.

 

[iku]

There is no enabling of 5,000 illegals a day in the document. Did you read it?

It’s funny you start a thread about lies with lies.

https://www.aila.org/aila-files/365B6379-B0CE-4DCA-B33E-8020435267EA/24020431a.PDF

Are you sure? DID YOU READ IT?

Page 212 of that bill states "‘‘(B) MANDATORY ACTIVATION.—The Secretary shall activate the border emergency authority if— ‘‘(i) during a period of 7 consecutive calendar days, there is an average of 5,000 or more aliens who are encountered each day; or ‘‘(ii) on any 1 calendar day, a combined total of 8,500 or more aliens are en10 countered. ‘‘(C) CALCULATION OF ACTIVATION.—

Lisa558

 

[Crepitus]

Democrats keep calling the bill that enables 5,000 illegals in a day as “bipartisan.” It is quite misleading to call a bill bipartisan just because a minority of Republicans voted for it. The way you people talk, if a Democrat bill has a few Rhinos that go along with it, then it’s bipartisan.

Definition of BIPARTISAN

of, relating to, or involving members of two parties; specifically : marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

YOu know what was bipartisan? tRump's second inpeachment.

 

[iku]

You didn’t read it.

https://www.aila.org/aila-files/365B6379-B0CE-4DCA-B33E-8020435267EA/24020431a.PDF

I did

 

[iku]

Democrats keep calling the bill that enables 5,000 illegals in a day as “bipartisan.” It is quite misleading to call a bill bipartisan just because a minority of Republicans voted for it. The way you people talk, if a Democrat bill has a few Rhinos that go along with it, then it’s bipartisan.

Definition of BIPARTISAN

of, relating to, or involving members of two parties; specifically : marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

The bill clearly states 5,000. I read it. citygator did YOU read it ? Dadoalex can YOU read it?

 

[iku]

We don' need no steekin readin'

View attachment 911141

Here are the FACTS

‘‘(B) MANDATORY ACTIVATION.—The Secretary shall activate the border emergency authority if— ‘‘(i) during a period of 7 consecutive calendar days, there is an average of 5,000 or more aliens who are encountered each day; or ‘‘(ii) on any 1 calendar day, a combined total of 8,500 or more aliens are encountered. ‘‘(C) CALCULATION OF ACTIVATION.—

HOW YOU LIKE THEM FACTS ?

 

[Lisa558]

YOu know what was bipartisan? tRump's second inpeachment.

Name the Reoublicans who went along with the Democrats‘ witch hunt of Trump.

 

[Care4all]

R

What's the penalty, the remedy if more that 5,000 Illegal democrat voters cross in a day?

Right now, under existing law, there is no limit for asylum seekers attempting to cross the border. So if a big caravan of refugee seekers hits, there is no cut off, under the Law.

In December 2023 during a big rush of refugee seekers there was a couple of weeks period where 10,000 attempted to cross a day.

The 5000 is 1/2 the amount or more reduction if a surge like the one in December occurs again...

would you prefer the 10,000?

Fyi
TRUMP tried to close the border completely, but was sued, it made it to the Supreme Court, who RULED AGAINST Trump.... Ya can't legally, shut down the border, for any asylum seekers....it breaks the Law of the Land.

Also, you have to take the measures in the bill in full, one measure affects another.

You can't get asylum seekers status if you try to cross outside a port of entry in the new bill....that's good, money is in it to expand detention centers, enlarge border patrol agents to catch the smugglars, drug dealers, traffickers that are presently GOT-AWAYS, add more immigration courts and judges to speed up required court hearings which will deport most, increase staff and guards at port of entry ports....and yes, even more money for the Wall.

Why would you pass that up? For at least another year and a half in hopes of a Trump presidency, that likely could get NOTHING better passed? Why oh why oh why?

 

[j-mac]

YOu know what was bipartisan? tRump's second inpeachment.

You mean the one where they impeached a citizen who was no longer in office?

 

[j-mac]

R

Right now, under existing law, there is no limit for asylum seekers attempting to cross the border. So if a big caravan of refugee seekers hits, there is no cut off, under the Law.

In December 2023 during a big rush of refugee seekers there was a couple of weeks period where 10,000 attempted to cross a day.

The 5000 is 1/2 the amount or more reduction if a surge like the one in December occurs again...

would you prefer the 10,000?

Fyi
TRUMP tried to close the border completely, but was sued, it made it to the Supreme Court, who RULED AGAINST Trump.... Ya can't legally, shut down the border, for any asylum seekers....it breaks the Law of the Land.

Also, you have to take the measures in the bill in full, one measure affects another.

You can't get asylum seekers status if you try to cross outside a port of entry in the new bill....that's good, money is in it to expand detention centers, enlarge border patrol agents to catch the smugglars, drug sealers, traffickers that are presently GOT-AWAYS, add more immigration courts and judges to speed up required court hearings which will deport most, increase staff and guards at port of entry ports....and yes, even more money for the Wall.

Why would you pass that up? For at least another year and a half in hopes of a Trump presidency, that likely could get NOTHING better passed? Why oh why oh why?

First we have to define asylum…What’s going on now is not that.

 

[Coyote]

Democrats keep calling the bill that enables 5,000 illegals in a day as “bipartisan.” It is quite misleading to call a bill bipartisan just because a minority of Republicans voted for it. The way you people talk, if a Democrat bill has a few Rhinos that go along with it, then it’s bipartisan.

Definition of BIPARTISAN

of, relating to, or involving members of two parties; specifically : marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

It is far more bipartisan than the crap the House produced and more Repubs were for it until the Almighty Trump said “no, thy shalt not support this bill for chaos at the border is my wish”.

So spoketh Trump.

Our Leader, Who art in MAGAverse, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on the border as you command. Give us this day our daily tweet; and never forgive, as we will not forgive those who trespass against us in thought or in action, and lead us not into moderation, but deliver us from rationality. Amen.​

​

 

[candycorn]

No compromise.

So your idea of compromise is no compromise and you’re criticizing the Democrats?

No surrender

You poor soul...you don’t know that you just didi

 

[Crepitus]

Name the Reoublicans who went along with the Democrats‘ witch hunt of Trump.

Huh?

I don't recollect any "witch hunts".

But CHeeto Jesus is the only president ever to have a single member of his part vote to convict and remove him from office.

That's bipartisan.

 

[Crepitus]

It is far more bipartisan than the crap the House produced and more Repubs were for it until the Almighty Trump said “no, thy shalt not support this bill for chaos at the border is my wish”.

So spoketh Trump.

Our Leader, Who art in MAGAverse, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on the border as you command. Give us this day our daily tweet; and never forgive, as we will not forgive those who trespass against us in thought or in action, and lead us not into moderation, but deliver us from rationality. Amen.​

​

​

View attachment 911193​

 

[Crepitus]

You mean the one where they impeached a citizen who was no longer in office?

Wow kid, deflections this early in the game make you look really weak.

 

[bdtex]

If brought to the floor, the bill would pass both Houses with overwhelming support.

What is partisan is Republicans blocking the bill because Trump does not want Biden to have a victory in the Immigration Crisis

Yep. There were more than "a few" Republicans who supported it. House and Senate GOP leaders bent over for Trump again.

 

[SavannahMann]

Democrats keep calling the bill that enables 5,000 illegals in a day as “bipartisan.” It is quite misleading to call a bill bipartisan just because a minority of Republicans voted for it. The way you people talk, if a Democrat bill has a few Rhinos that go along with it, then it’s bipartisan.

Definition of BIPARTISAN

of, relating to, or involving members of two parties; specifically : marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

The bill was a compromise and met the definition of Bipartisan. Republican and Democrat leadership worked out the details. Your definition of Compromise is where Democrats all die, and Republicans start fifty years of single party rule.

 

[Coyote]

Huh?

I don't recollect any "witch hunts".

But CHeeto Jesus is the only president ever to have a single member of his part vote to convict and remove him from office.

That's bipartisan.

In MAGA land holding Trump accountable equals a witch hunt. Remember, this is the man who could shoot a man in the middle of the street in broad daylight and not lose a single follower.

Just like a bipartisan bill, which contains most of what the Republicans want, becomes “a give away” Rhino bill upon Trumps command.

Such good little sheep, obeying their shepherd.

Fodder for an election, to the Republicans, is more important than fixing the border.



5…4…3… let the rightist projection begin!