Twitter mocks ‘creepy twins’ Schumer and Pelosi for their Trump response

[MDC 5,875]

that's not what trump is asking for you farkin hack

Trump was often criticized for lacking precision in policy ideas, but he had bold and detailed requirements for his wall. It would be 1,000 miles long. (The other 1,500, he said, were covered by natural barriers.) He gave various estimates of its height-between 30 and 50 feet, with the most common number being 35. His barrier would be an impenetrable physical wall composed of precast [concrete] plank30 feet long, 40 feet long. He also insisted that it would be aesthetically pleasing.

While he said after the election that a fence may be appropriate in some areas, he added that a wall would be better, and he has since vigorously corrected reporters who describe the project as a fence. Throughout the campaign, he described the current fences as a joke, implying that he would not only build a superior barrier, but that he would replace the one that exists at some points now.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-work

 

HTH!

[jerryskids 5,166]

 

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-work

 

HTH!

As per your quote, 60% of the border would not have a wall. Is this your definition of "continuous"?

[sderk 1,040]

 

ESac intentionally misled with the wapo supports Trump post....just admit it ESac. Its not so hard. You've done it before.

Keep trying. Maybe someday you will learn something.

[MDC 5,875]

As per your quote, 60% of the border would not have a wall. Is this your definition of "continuous"?

The 60% would not have a wall because there are already natural barriers there. Youre right hes not calling for 2,500 miles of wall. He is calling for a consistent 35-foot barrier.

[edjr 5,546]

https://external-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQDHOVSZqgkSn-dd&w=476&h=249&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnoiimages.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fimages%2Fredstate%2F201901081581114350.png&cfs=1&upscale=1&fallback=news_d_placeholder_publisher&_nc_hash=AQC_auNLKEElZ2hr

[Herbivore 904]

Keep trying. Maybe someday you will learn something.

thanks sderp

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

This seems like such a no-brainer to me, I'm finding it hard to understand how there could be opposition to more border security. We aren't talking spending 25 Billion for a huge wall.

 

This is 5B for walls in certain places that make sense and adding border agents.

 

Why is this such a hot button topic? This is a slam dunk no-brainer for any reasonable American. Of course LEGAL immigration is still going on. People legally immigrate every day to this country. The front door is open, just have to knock.

 

I really don't get it. I do not like a lot of things about the President but this is nonsense.

I think that the big issue that people have is that most believe that the wall will not solve the issue. If you put in a wall, you still have the regular border crossings that don't have sufficient people to process asylum claims resulting in families coming in anyway. It also doesn't solve the problem of drugs coming into the country (despite what Trump claims) since most of that comes in through ports of entry anyway.

 

Trump is looking for a monument to his presidency and that is a wall. However, walls won't get it done. We need a new way to address large groups of people coming here claiming asylum - process them quickly and turn them back around. Once they realize that they cannot overwhelm the system, they will give up.

 

A wall will take a very long to build. Ramping up the number of people processing asylum claims would create jobs and would fix the problem much more quickly. Of course, I have not thought this out completely, but then again, neither has Trump.

[jerryskids 5,166]

The 60% would not have a wall because there are already natural barriers there. Youre right hes not calling for 2,500 miles of wall. He is calling for a consistent 35-foot barrier.

No he isn't, at least per your own link. Between 30 and 50 ft for the wall sections, and natural barriers of presumably various types and sizes for more than 1/2.

 

I suggest you stop now.

[Reality 2,710]

No he isn't, at least per your own link. Between 30 and 50 ft for the wall sections, and natural barriers of presumably various types and sizes for more than 1/2.

 

I suggest you stop now.

 

You weren't supposed to read the link.

 

[KSB2424 3,082]

No he isn't, at least per your own link. Between 30 and 50 ft for the wall sections, and natural barriers of presumably various types and sizes for more than 1/2.

 

I suggest you stop now.

 

Not only that, but the 5 Billion he is asking for, you know, the amount in the Budget that we are talking about......isn't what MDC quoted.

[drobeski 3,061]

 

You weren't supposed to read the link.

 

[MDC 5,875]

No he isn't, at least per your own link. Between 30 and 50 ft for the wall sections, and natural barriers of presumably various types and sizes for more than 1/2.

 

I suggest you stop now.

Youre right continuous was the wrong word. What I should have said was consistent, meaning he is talking about a 35-foot wall along all portions of the border not currently obstructed by natural barriers, unlike the mismatch of vehicle vs pedestrian obstructions, gates / fences etc. we have now.

[sderk 1,040]

thanks sderp

Not knowing what is going on in this country, and no creativity to top things off. You never cease to amaze.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

 

you've really turned into lying troll

You liberals want to maintain staus quo. Currently Americans are dying due to current policies like 'Catch and Release', 'Sanctuary Cities', etc... At the same time migrant women and children are being victimized by traffickers.

 

Own that sh!t snowflake. Wash your hands before supper; there's blood on them.

[mobb_deep 917]

You liberals want to maintain staus quo. Currently Americans are dying due to current policies like 'Catch and Release', 'Sanctuary Cities', etc... At the same time migrant women and children are being victimized by traffickers.

 

Own that sh!t snowflake. Wash your hands before supper; there's blood on them.

 

To be fair, the same could be said about republicans and gun control.

[Herbivore 904]

Not knowing what is going on in this country, and no creativity to top things off. You never cease to amaze.

what the f are you going on about...since ESac won't own up, I guess we can ask you. Is ESac's post that wapo supports trump with the link to Marc Thieesen's opinion article in wapo accurate? Or is it misleading? or more accurately an outright lie?

[Herbivore 904]

You liberals want to maintain staus quo. Currently Americans are dying due to current policies like 'Catch and Release', 'Sanctuary Cities', etc... At the same time migrant women and children are being victimized by traffickers.

 

Own that sh!t snowflake. Wash your hands before supper; there's blood on them.

I want the everify thing..mdc I think brought it up a few times. The problem isnt people coming for jobs..its people giving them jobs.

[drobeski 3,061]

what the f are you going on about...since ESac won't own up, I guess we can ask you. Is ESac's post that wapo supports trump with the link to Marc Thieesen's opinion article in wapo accurate? Or is it misleading? or more accurately an outright lie?

wow it really bothers you that those hacks at WaPo might have accidentally displayed some journalistic integrity huh

Don't fret buddy they're still their normal hack biased fake news source they have always been.

Relax

[Herbivore 904]

wow it really bothers you that those hacks at WaPo might have accidentally displayed some journalistic integrity huh

Don't fret buddy they're still their normal hack biased fake news source they have always been.

Relax

i have already said I dont follow wapo..my original post covers this and how ESacs post is stupid and misleading

[sderk 1,040]

wow it really bothers you that those hacks at WaPo might have accidentally displayed some journalistic integrity huh

Don't fret buddy they're still their normal hack biased fake news source they have always been.

Relax

Hopefully that eases his pain a little bit.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

 

To be fair, the same could be said about republicans and gun control.

What do 99% of the shootings in America have in common? Another law would NOT have prevented it.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

I want the everify thing..mdc I think brought it up a few times. The problem isnt people coming for jobs..its people giving them jobs.

The problem is inadequate security.

[Herbivore 904]

The problem is inadequate security.

maybe..do you agree with the idea for more asylum rqst processing and proper turning away for people who do not qualify

[Cloaca du jour 2,064]

What about the Tunnels?????

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,492]

 

you wrote wapo supports Trump. you are intentionally misleading on our low rent message board. seriously why?

 

I did not defend anyone...I called out your blatant and obvious lie. again on our low rent message board. why would you do this? its pathetic.

 

I did not say Wapo supports Trump, I said that Wapo said that Trump won LAST night.

 

It wasn't a blatant lie so I accept your apology once you go back to my original post and re-read it. You took what I said, twisted it to fit your narrative and then accused me of saying something i never said.

 

So now I'm going to turn this around and ask you why you would blatantly lie about my post? Or at least intentionally mislead?

[Herbivore 904]

 

I did not say Wapo supports Trump, I said that Wapo said that Trump won LAST night.

 

It wasn't a blatant lie so I accept your apology once you go back to my original post and re-read it. You took what I said, twisted it to fit your narrative and then accused me of saying something i never said.

 

So now I'm going to turn this around and ask you why you would blatantly lie about my post? Or at least intentionally mislead?

 

Here is my first post in this thread

 

Its painful how stupid this post is. Here are some other article titles from wapo today.

Trump plays on fear and misleads from start to finish.

Trumps address was pure propaganda opportunity. Networks shouldn't allow it again.

Trump tries one more gambit in a battle he seems to be losing.

I responded to Eternal in the Southern Border thread, that the Wapo says Trump won was not very accurate, as it obviously is not. No matter how much you cover you eyes No. Vike. or Filthy. Suggesting that Wapo is supporting Trump in this debate is ri-god damn-diculous. Serious question, what the f are looking to accomplish by posting something so obviously misleading on our low rent ff message board.

 

 

WAPO did not say Trump won...you lose, good day sir!

[drobeski 3,061]

 

Here is my first post in this thread

Its painful how stupid this post is. Here are some other article titles from wapo today.

Trump plays on fear and misleads from start to finish.

Trumps address was pure propaganda opportunity. Networks shouldn't allow it again.

Trump tries one more gambit in a battle he seems to be losing.

I responded to Eternal in the Southern Border thread, that the Wapo says Trump won was not very accurate, as it obviously is not. No matter how much you cover you eyes No. Vike. or Filthy. Suggesting that Wapo is supporting Trump in this debate is ri-god damn-diculous. Serious question, what the f are looking to accomplish by posting something so obviously misleading on our low rent ff message board.

 

 

WAPO did not say Trump won...you lose, good day sir!

wow! what a biased rag that paper is, my god.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,492]

 

Here is my first post in this thread

 

Its painful how stupid this post is. Here are some other article titles from wapo today.

Trump plays on fear and misleads from start to finish.

Trumps address was pure propaganda opportunity. Networks shouldn't allow it again.

Trump tries one more gambit in a battle he seems to be losing.

I responded to Eternal in the Southern Border thread, that the Wapo says Trump won was not very accurate, as it obviously is not. No matter how much you cover you eyes No. Vike. or Filthy. Suggesting that Wapo is supporting Trump in this debate is ri-god damn-diculous. Serious question, what the f are looking to accomplish by posting something so obviously misleading on our low rent ff message board.

 

 

WAPO did not say Trump won...you lose, good day sir!

 

You don't need to go any further. I've already accepted your apology.

 

All I ask is that from this point forward you read posts 2 or 3 times to understand what the poster is actually posting/saying before you go off half-cocked about them. It's important that you get the full meaning of the post and not follow some narrative handed down by your liberal masters.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,492]

wow! what a biased rag that paper is, my god.

 

Yeah, they've been in the tank for Democrats for decades now. They make no bones about who they support and will go to any lengths to do so, even if they have to make ###### up or fudge the truth or even to throw up distractions if necessary.

 

That's why it was a bit refreshing to see the OpEd this morning.

[Herbivore 904]

 

You don't need to go any further. I've already accepted your apology.

 

All I ask is that from this point forward you read posts 2 or 3 times to understand what the poster is actually posting/saying before you go off half-cocked about them. It's important that you get the full meaning of the post and not follow some narrative handed down by your liberal masters.

flailing

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,492]

flailing

 

Apology accepted again. Thanks!

[MDC 5,875]

Shiny thought the WaPo said Trump won. Then he figured out the WaPo ran several Op Eds and most thought Trump sucked. Now he doesnt like the WaPo again.

 

What a hack.

[mobb_deep 917]

What do 99% of the shootings in America have in common? Another law would NOT have prevented it.

 

What do 99% of illegal aliens in America have in common? Another wall would NOT have prevented them.

 

I like this game.

[sderk 1,040]

Kind of looks like Schumer is copping a feel off of old Nancy's rear end. The sly old dog.

 

 

https://www.google.c...ponse?_amp=true

[wiffleball 4,631]

Does anybody know if they've already run all the traps on eminent domain? Seems like there could be a states rights issue here as well as a individual rights issue. If they haven't already run these traps, then it doesn't much matter what the hell they pass. The thing will be delayed for years in the courts.

 

And don't even get me started on the Sierra club and the arbor foundation Etc and of course I'm sure PETA will want to save some sort of Mexican border crossing snail.

[wiffleball 4,631]

[Hardcore troubadour 12,576]

 

You weren't supposed to read the link.

 

Lol. You never are!

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

maybe..do you agree with the idea for more asylum rqst processing and proper turning away for people who do not qualify

Uh hell yeah provided we agree on what the qualifications are. Simply wanting to leave where you're at wouldn't be one of them. Showing you can and will contribute to the work force (no welfare after first 6 months here).

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Does anybody know if they've already run all the traps on eminent domain? Seems like there could be a states rights issue here as well as a individual rights issue. If they haven't already run these traps, then it doesn't much matter what the hell they pass. The thing will be delayed for years in the courts.

 

And don't even get me started on the Sierra club and the arbor foundation Etc and of course I'm sure PETA will want to save some sort of Mexican border crossing snail.

They havent and it will take many years before they solve just the land rights issue. Details, details, details. Wheres my wall??!!!

[jerryskids 5,166]

Youre right continuous was the wrong word. What I should have said was consistent, meaning he is talking about a 35-foot wall along all portions of the border not currently obstructed by natural barriers, unlike the mismatch of vehicle vs pedestrian obstructions, gates / fences etc. we have now.

 

So we agree that he doesn't want a continuous wall, but rather a wall along 40% of the border which doesn't have natural boundaries.

 

The height is beyond my pay grade, I don't know how high it should be. I'll let others decide. But physics dictates you'd need a pretty deep footer for a 35 ft high wall, so that would make tunneling a challenge. Also for little cost they could install sensors to look for movement under the walls. Tunnels are solvable IMO.

 

Wiff's eminent domain question is a good one, I don't know the legal challenges of federal claims to eminent domain. FWIW to my knowledge there is no private land ownership in Mexico (one reason I never invested in Puerto Penasco property - you don't own it, you have a long-term lease from the government). Trump could try to tell Mexico he is building it on their side and avoid the whole American legal issue. I'm just brainstorming here but it would create a fun shiot show.

 

I'm not personally a fan of the wall but presidents have run on much more expensive platforms (ACA, not-ready-for-production green techs, off the top of my head). They should just give him the damn wall and extract some quid pro quo for it. IMO.