Harris accepts CNN debate invitation for October 23

[Slade3200]

Not passing a bad bill is the fault of of anybody? We live in a representative republic where everyone has a say in any legislation. Citizen Trump has every right to voice opposition as does anyone. How many bills that were passed didn't have any yea or nea opposition from citizen entities?

You call it a bad bill because you repeat talking points, but in reality it had many measures that help the border situation that now are not being done. It shows how unserious Trump and his puppets are about the border. Party over country

 

[Slade3200]

I didn't say anything of the sort to what you just claimed.

Ok, so are you admitting it funded border wall and fencing aka security?

 

[Slade3200]

How true, it was funded back in 2015 and levels increased in 2019 by the Trump administration

Funded under Obama/Biden in 2015?

 

[Slade3200]

My God man, US law already prohibits that, why do we need another law to address that?

What does it hurt to reemphasis and better define?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

CNN fails to settle defamation suit with Navy veteran who says Jake Tapper segment ‘destroyed his reputation’​

CNN fails to settle defamation suit with Navy veteran who says Jake Tapper segment ‘destroyed his reputation’

CNN and Zachary Young, who is suing the network for defamation, were unable to reach a financial settlement as mediation talks between the parties fell apart last week.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Super tough?! Uhh maybe. But yes at a point it triggers a mandatory emergency summary deportation process. You do understand what the word mandatory means right? That’s a mandate

But yes at a point it triggers a mandatory emergency summary deportation process.

Wow! Post that part.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

triggers a mandate if a prez isn’t taking action.

If the President isn't taking action, we need one who will.

 

[Slade3200]

But yes at a point it triggers a mandatory emergency summary deportation process.

Wow! Post that part.

What are you talking about. It was posted in the snippet we’ve been discussing. You pasted it and commented on it

 

[Slade3200]

If the President isn't taking action, we need one who will.

That’s what elections are for. Meanwhile a law dictating how to handle these situations can help. More the conservative cause than the liberal.

 

[Delldude]

You call it a bad bill because you repeat talking points, but in reality it had many measures that help the border situation that now are not being done.

Almost every section leaves enforcement/decisions, etc, totally up the 'The Secretary'. Bet there'd be no partisanship in that appointment. (already is).

Yes the prez has the authority. This bill has a provision that triggers a mandate if a prez isn’t taking action. Again… better than the current situation

Only if the invasion exceeds 5000/day. So lets say State calls south of the border and tells them slack it off..........keep it at 4999/day.

And Langford (R)

Not the same Lankford who voted against his own bill is he?

Party over country

Yep.............lets get these babies in country and fast track them to permanent resident status so we can naturalize them ASAP to support the democrat party.

Ok, so are you admitting it funded border wall and fencing aka security?

I care more about the numbers invading our country and addressing that first and foremost. You do realize there's no mechanism in the bill for immediate funding for border wall construction, don't you? Ah, we'll get around to that in the future.

Funded under Obama/Biden in 2015?

Yes, created in 2006.

What does it hurt to reemphasis and better define?

Well, existing immigration law isn't being followed now, so why would this law suddenly be obeyed? Boy Scout oath or something?

 

[WEATHER53]

What does it hurt to reemphasis and better define?

On Wednesday exactly 12 posts between noon to 11pm then gone
Exactly as I have stated
12 paids per day
Cycle resumed short while ago

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What are you talking about. It was posted in the snippet we’ve been discussing. You pasted it and commented on it

The government would be allowed to opt people out of summary removal for a variety of reasons, including operational constraints such as overcrowding. Non-Mexican unaccompanied children would also be exempted. Those set for summary removal could receive a screening for non-asylum humanitarian protection by affirmatively “manifesting” fear of persecution or torture to a border official—volunteering without prompting that they fear return or showing an obvious sign of fear.

Looks like a bunch of loopholes. Loopholes tend to make it not so mandatory.

 

[Delldude]

The government would be allowed to opt people out of summary removal for a variety of reasons, including operational constraints such as overcrowding. Non-Mexican unaccompanied children would also be exempted. Those set for summary removal could receive a screening for non-asylum humanitarian protection by affirmatively “manifesting” fear of persecution or torture to a border official—volunteering without prompting that they fear return or showing an obvious sign of fear.

Looks like a bunch of loopholes. Loopholes tend to make it not so mandatory.

We have a bingo......no chance that's another reason to salvo the bill?

 

[Slade3200]

The government would be allowed to opt people out of summary removal for a variety of reasons, including operational constraints such as overcrowding. Non-Mexican unaccompanied children would also be exempted. Those set for summary removal could receive a screening for non-asylum humanitarian protection by affirmatively “manifesting” fear of persecution or torture to a border official—volunteering without prompting that they fear return or showing an obvious sign of fear.

Looks like a bunch of loopholes. Loopholes tend to make it not so mandatory.

Yup mandatory and with some exceptions and loopholes… like with most complex systems

 

[Delldude]

Yup mandatory and with some exceptions and loopholes… like which most complex systems

Dude, you swallow very well.

 

[Slade3200]

Dude, you swallow very well.

And you care why?

 

[Delldude]

And you care why?

Already outlined my concerns over your border bill.............useful idiots have been in vogue for sometime, thought you were a cut above.

 

[Slade3200]

Already outlined my concerns over your border bill.............useful idiots have been in vogue for sometime, thought you were a cut above.

No you didn’t. You’re just too deep in Trumps sack to admit that something is better than nothing and this bill would have helped things at the border.

 

[Delldude]

No you didn’t. You’re just too deep in Trumps sack to admit that something is better than nothing and this bill would have helped things at the border.

That was very useful, you idiot.

 

[Slade3200]

That was very useful, you idiot.

Ditto