Ash.J.Williams wrote: » I'd say Putin got stuck into trump behind closed doors
Rjd2 wrote: » Outlaw Pete wrote: » Yeah, he's a real "doormat" to Putin.https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/982966315467116544https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/984022625440747520 Have said before I'd like Trump to be impeached, but the absurd over the top hysteria and braindead hot takes not just from the grifters in the resistance was grim. It was a relatively harmless meeting. Interesting and grim to see the push back towards Rand Paul one of the few Republicans who is a genuine non interventionist also while war mongering politicians like John Mc Cain are been lionised by the media. Check this out for an incredibly **** take.https://twitter.com/KyleKulinski/status/1018923857699332096 That's the standard level of hysteria I have seen today.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Yeah, he's a real "doormat" to Putin.https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/982966315467116544https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/984022625440747520
Christy42 wrote: » Given the sheer amount of dumb **** Trump has done I feel like it is worth a little anger that he has been called on precisely none of it by his supporters and very little by congress.
2 Scoops wrote: » Christy42 wrote: » Given the sheer amount of dumb **** Trump has done I feel like it is worth a little anger that he has been called on precisely none of it by his supporters and very little by congress. You know why that is right?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf Legitimate complaints get drowned out by the 2 years of non stop hysteria to the point the media criticizing him has very little effect.
Christy42 wrote: » See the effect of throwing kids in cages. It was one of the few things Congress called him on (after public pressure) and he had to back down. If they hadn't that situation would have gotten worse. That needs to happen for more of his idiotic plans.
2 Scoops wrote: » Where were your complaints about the cages during the previous administration?http://uk.businessinsider.com/photos-migrant-children-policy-under-trump-obama-2018-6?r=US&IR=T
Midlife wrote: » yeah, YEAH cause OBAMA!!!
2 Scoops wrote: » Call a spade a spade. I don't agree with separating legitimate families at the border but to try run a narrative that the detention centres under Trump are vastly more monstrous to what they were under previous administrations is disingenuous.
prawnsambo wrote: » Unaccompanied minors as opposed to minors accompanied by their parents, separated from them and then thrown in cages. But it's the same because something, something, whataboutery. :rolleyes:
2 Scoops wrote: » prawnsambo wrote: » Unaccompanied minors as opposed to minors accompanied by their parents, separated from them and then thrown in cages. But it's the same because something, something, whataboutery. :rolleyes: Needs more verbs like thrown to really sell it. The irony is the outrage started because people circulated pictures of the cages from the Obama administration through social media and falsely attributed them to the Trump regime. I'm sure your hearts were bleeding back then too, just not quite as hard.
2 Scoops wrote: » Needs more verbs like thrown to really sell it. The irony is the outrage started because people circulated pictures of the cages from the Obama administration through social media and falsely attributed them to the Trump regime. I'm sure your hearts were bleeding back then too, just not quite as hard.
prawnsambo wrote: » There's a hell of a difference between putting unaccompanied teenagers in holding pens, cells, cages (whatever outrages you most) and putting preteens, toddlers and babies in them. When there's absolutely no need to separate them from their parents. There were also plenty of pictures of the current detention centres. It was just handy to have the earlier ones floating around to muddy the waters. Exactly what you're doing now.
2 Scoops wrote: » If you read a few posts up you'll see I said they shouldn't be separated. Christy's original post mentioned the cages, I just wanted to clear up the fact that they did, indeed exist before Trump took office.
2 Scoops wrote: » prawnsambo wrote: » There's a hell of a difference between putting unaccompanied teenagers in holding pens, cells, cages (whatever outrages you most) and putting preteens, toddlers and babies in them. When there's absolutely no need to separate them from their parents. There were also plenty of pictures of the current detention centres. It was just handy to have the earlier ones floating around to muddy the waters. Exactly what you're doing now. If you read a few posts up you'll see I said they shouldn't be separated. Christy's original post mentioned the cages, I just wanted to clear up the fact that they did, indeed exist before Trump took office.
prawnsambo wrote: » Yes, they did. Out of necessity. You can't pick up children crossing the border on their own and just dump them in the same adult detention centres the adults who are picked up are placed in. So yes, it was not ideal. But it's not correct to create an equivalence with what's been happening recently. The cages aren't the issue anyway. It's the fact that multiple young and very young kids were being placed in them unnecessarily. Never mind the fact that a teenager who's made the journey on their own, is far better equipped to deal with such a situation.
2 Scoops wrote: » It's not a black and white issue, child trafficking, mules and people pretending to be family to seek illegitimate asylum are real issues at the border. They weren't doing it to intentionally break up families and upset people, quite the contrary. It could have been handled better, that's the best you'll get from me.
prawnsambo wrote: » No. Taking the "kill them all, God will know his own" approach is not defensible in any way, shape or form. It's a morally bankrupt defence and has no place in a civilised society. The direct answer to this, is that they have been detained. They are in custody. There is no danger to the rule of law inherent in that situation. And the practice of separating kids from their families does not go one step towards identifying such issues. If they existed in any kind of appreciable numbers in the first place.
ELM327 wrote: » So what do you suggest... open door immigration? The "merkel" solution? Because that worked soooo well in Europe
Midlife wrote: » Ha ha. Read's dodgy short reply with suspect undertones. **checks post history** instantly gets hits about how Nigerian parents can't have Irish children. Wouldn't happen to have any issues with race, would you? How was Jordan Henderson theother night?
everlast75 wrote: » There was statistically and factually better results in terms of absenteeism and absconding and cost, with the 2x previous administration approaches. DJT came in and decided, aided and abetted by Sessions and Miller to implement "zero tolerance" interpretation of the law which effectively meant you went to jail for a misdemenor. But the incompetence made a bad situation worse, as they began to lose the kids and then when the Courts ordered that the kids be reunited the admin failed to do so. But it doesn't matter to Trump supporters and or defenders. Essentially they bought into a pyramid scheme. They were warned by friends or family that it was a hoax, but they are hanging in there in the hope that it will work out, that he wants what they want, that he will act in their interests... but sooner or later, the realisation will dawn on them - they were had, pure and simple.
Leroy42 wrote: » What has it done so wrong in Europe? You know, actual specifics. And compare that to the current state of play in the US, you know with all the school shootings, national terorrists being pardoned by POTUS.
ELM327 wrote: » Well that's a myriad of Trump hate and millennial tears. You should go to jail for illegally claiming asylum, for faking being a family, for falsifying information to fraudulently enter a country.
ELM327 wrote: » The only thing that they could do differently is detain the families together, but then the liberals would probably complain that children were detained at all. You can't win. How you you deter people from trying to enter the country illegally without there being some form of deterrent? If it's not detaining and treating their crime as a crime, then what do you suggest? Bear in mind that "open borders" is not a realistic solution.
ELM327 wrote: » I think the liberal media have gotten used to the oft mentioned rhetoric that Trump supporters are inbred hicks, but there are a lot of well off conservative businessmen too. Heck even Bill Belichick is a Trump supporter, one of the greatest football brains of our time.
ELM327 wrote: » [...] The only thing that they could do differently is detain the families together, but then the liberals would probably complain that children were detained at all. You can't win. How you you deter people from trying to enter the country illegally without there being some form of deterrent? If it's not detaining and treating their crime as a crime, then what do you suggest? Bear in mind that "open borders" is not a realistic solution.
ELM327 wrote: » Factually they cannot, this is not After Hours, and this is not Soccer, so please stick to the issues at hand thanks. Now, after all your warbling, have you a point? Well that's a myriad of Trump hate and millennial tears. You should go to jail for illegally claiming asylum, for faking being a family, for falsifying information to fraudulently enter a country. The only thing that they could do differently is detain the families together, but then the liberals would probably complain that children were detained at all. You can't win. How you you deter people from trying to enter the country illegally without there being some form of deterrent? If it's not detaining and treating their crime as a crime, then what do you suggest? Bear in mind that "open borders" is not a realistic solution. I think the liberal media have gotten used to the oft mentioned rhetoric that Trump supporters are inbred hicks, but there are a lot of well off conservative businessmen too. Heck even Bill Belichick is a Trump supporter, one of the greatest football brains of our time.