The Border Wall or Fence

[rangerx]

7 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Their own "permanent solution" for DACA.

They had one, but Trump nixed it.

In the real world, a compromise would mean restoring DACA as it was intended, not a watered down version and offering something else.

But no, instead Republicans insist on bad faith negotiations and scorched earth tactics to get what they want.

7 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Pelosi has responded with her own deal(Before Trump had even stated his publicly).

 

If Trump signs a bill to reopen the government, extends DACA and TPS protections permanently, the Democrats will discuss potentially increasing border security.

https://wsvn.com/news/politics/pelosi-dismisses-trump-proposal-as-non-starter/

 

 

Additionally, Trump has offered three other things that Democrats claim they support. 

• INcreased infrastructure investments at our ports of entry, including additional ports and roads.
• Advanced technology to scan for drugs, weapons, and contraband where the vast majority of drugs come into our country and advanced technology to detect unauthorized crossings.
• More customs personnel including filling the more than 3,000 customs and border patrol vacancies

This stuff is unfolding as we speak, so I've not had the opportunity to review it.

I will do that now and comment (if necessary) later.

[iNow]

8 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Additionally, Trump has offered three other things that Democrats claim they support. 

Those things were already in each of the bills democrats have been passing for weeks in attempts to reopen the government. Trump as recently as wednesday said he’d not support it. He’s only introduced it now because even his own aids see him as losing badly on this issue (especially since Trumps safety on DACA has fallen through and SCOTUS didn’t agree to take it up in June as Trump’s been promising). 

 

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/19/18189549/trump-shutdown-announcement-deal-daca-democrats

Quote

Reports from inside the White House indicate that Trump advisers have gotten increasingly anxious to end the shutdown. One administration official told the Wall Street Journal’s Natalie Andrews and Michael C. Bender on Wednesday that advisers have warned Trump “this isn’t just a messaging war” and that he’s “playing with live ammunition” — with the implication that the president is taking the blame for the shutdown’s real-life casualties.

The White House’s sudden willingness to include DACA in shutdown talks, meanwhile, might stem from something that happened Friday — or rather, didn’t happen.

Observers on all sides have assumed that the Supreme Court was going to take up the lawsuit against Trump’s efforts to end DACA this term, and would rule (probably in the Trump administration’s favor) in June. But as of yesterday — the court’s traditional deadline for adopting cases for the current term — the Supreme Court hadn’t officially agreed to hear the DACA case.

 

In short, he’s not compromised. He’s just agreed to sign the previous republican bill that’s been on offer since December. 

The wall, however, hasn’t budged. That’s where the compromise exists. 

Democrats have also agreed to negotiate ALL of this once government reopens and Americans are no longer being held hostage 

[Raider5678]

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

In short, he’s not compromised. He’s just agreed to sign the previous republican bill that’s been on offer since December. 

 

The previous Republic bill included a three year extension on DACA and TPS?

[Ten oz]

Quote

 

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court took no action on Friday on the future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. It now appears likely that the court will not take up the issue during its current term, which would require the government to keep the program going for at least ten more months.

The Trump administration urged the justices to hear appeals of lower court rulings that prevent the government from shutting DACA down, but Friday was the last day for adding cases to the current term's docket, barring unusual circumstances. Any cases accepted in subsequent weeks won't be heard until the next term, which begins October 1, and it would take a few months more for the court to issue a decision. Link

 

 

@Raider5678 Trump can't end DACA at the moment. Trump must wait a minimum of 10 months just to see if he can get SCOTUS to him his case out. There is no guarantee they will (they could've already if they wanted to) and the no guarantee they'd side with Trump if they did. So with that in mind what good is a 3yr DACA extension? Looks like Democrats have at least the rest of 2019 to negotiate a DACA deal and they have control over the House to negotiate from. Trump's offer doesn't really give them anything. 

 

 

[Raider5678]

11 minutes ago, iNow said:

 The wall, however, hasn’t budged. That’s where the compromise exists. 

 

So, to you, it's not compromising unless he gives up the wall, or at least reduces it. It doesn't matter if he compromises elsewhere, such as DACA, TPS, increasing legal immigration capabilities, etc. Only if he compromises his wall.

 

That's not compromising. That's just refusal to negotiate.

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

It doesn't matter if he compromises elsewhere, such as DACA,

As Ten Oz has already pointed out, and I alluded to, he’s not compromising in DACA. He’s offering the current status quo to continue 

[Raider5678]

Just now, Ten oz said:

@Raider5678 Trump can't end DACA at the moment. Trump must wait a minimum of 10 months just to see if he can get SCOTUS to him his case out. There is no guarantee they will (they could've already if they wanted to) and the no guarantee they'd side with Trump if they did. So with that in mind what good is a 3yr DACA extension? Looks like Democrats have at least the rest of 2019 to negotiate a DACA deal and they have control over the House to negotiate from. Trump's offer doesn't really give them anything. 

 

Because a three year extension means they don't have to spend the rest of 2019 negotiating a DACA deal, and that in 2020, when they have another election, then they'll either win more control and be able to have far more leveraging power in DACA then when Republicans control the Senate and Trump controls the white house, or, if they don't gain more control and it remains relatively the same, then at least they still have another year to negotiate.

A three-year DACA extension gives them a lot. Especially since SCOTUS is highly expected to side with Trump(even though it's not guaranteed). Saying that it doesn't really give them anything is rather.........incorrect.

[iNow]

Just now, Raider5678 said:

A three-year DACA extension gives them a lot. Especially since SCOTUS is highly expected to side with Trump(even though it's not guaranteed).

And again, as I already pointed out, SCOTUS hasn’t agreed to take up the case. There is no offer here that changes the current situation 

[Raider5678]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

 Democrats have also agreed to negotiate ALL of this once government reopens and Americans are no longer being held hostage 

Actually they've agreed to negotiate on it if Trump opens the government AND offers a permanent extension to DACA and TPS.

 

Just my 2 cents here, but it's supposed to be negotiations here.

It's not negotiations to say "we'll discuss border security if you give us what we want."

Imagine negotiating for a house and being told "you give us $10,000 more, and we'll consider potentially repairing the roof."

1 minute ago, iNow said:

And again, as I already pointed out, SCOTUS hasn’t agreed to take up the case. There is no offer here that changes the current situation 

No. You claimed that it was already offered in December. Which wasn't true. 

Additionally, how in the world is a three-year extension to DACA nothing?

 

At the moment there are 600,000 DACA immigrants who can't get work permits. The extension would give them the ability to. That's not "nothing". THat's very significant. As well as a three-year extension to TPS for 300,000 more people. That's significant as well. How can you just sign this away as nothing changing? 

[Ten oz]

2 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

So, to you, it's not compromising unless he gives up the wall, or at least reduces it. It doesn't matter if he compromises elsewhere, such as DACA, TPS, increasing legal immigration capabilities, etc. Only if he compromises his wall.

 

That's not compromising. That's just refusal to negotiate.

The DACA extension is worthless. Trump currently can't do anything with DACA. As for the infrastructure, lawyers, and etc that is all stuff Democrats have already offered to give Trump.  

9 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Especially since SCOTUS is highly expected to side with Trump(even though it's not guaranteed).

If that is true why didn't SCOTUS it up at Trump's request? 

 

[Raider5678]

So we're back to sitting here looking each other as 800,000 federal employees aren't getting paid because Democrats have suddenly decided the things Trump is offering in this deal is worthless. 

Fine. But in my personal opinion, I now blame the Democrats for an extension of this government shutdown. Not Trump.

 

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Raider5678

[iNow]

5 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Fine. But in my personal opinion, I now blame the Democrats for an extension of this government shutdown. Not Trump.

That’s fine. You’re under no obligation to be correct. I mean, I’d agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong. 

[Raider5678]

Just now, iNow said:

That’s fine. You’re under no obligation to be correct. I mean, I’d agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong. 

Agree to disagree.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

So we're back to sitting here looking each other as 800,000 federal employees aren't getting paid because Democrats have suddenly decided the things Trump is offering in this deal is worthless. 

Fine. But in my personal opinion, I now blame the Democrats for an extension of this government shutdown. Not Trump.

 

 

DHS Budget this year is 47.5 billion dollars. They received 3.5 billion dollar increase over last years budget. In addition to the 3.5 billion dollar increase Democrats have already offered an additional 1.6 billion dollars. Here is 2019 budget as sign by Kistjen Nielsen the Sec. of DHS. Link .  Below are investments DHS sought and received. It already includes the stuff Trump discussed today.

Quote

 

• $1.6 billion for 65 miles of new border wall construction in the Rio Grande Valley Sector to deny access to drug trafficking organizations and illegal migration flows in high traffic zones where apprehensions are the highest along the Southwest Border.

• $223.0 million for the procurement of high-priority infrastructure, border security technology improvements, and aircraft acquisition to provide a layered defense at the border, and ensure CBP law enforcement personnel are supported with effective surveillance technology and equipment to improve their ability to detect and interdict illegal activity.

• $210.5 million to support the recruitment, hiring, and training of 750 additional Border Patrol Agents (BPAs). This is part of a multi-year initiative to hire a total of 5,000 additional BPAs as directed by Presidential Executive Order 13767 Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements. The new personnel will improve the integrity of the immigration system by adding capacity to interdict those aliens attempting to cross the border illegally.

• $382.1 million for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) to continue training personnel from over 95 law enforcement agencies government-wide, including an increase of $25.7 million over the FY 2018 President’s Budget for tuition and basic training costs associated with the training of the additional ICE and CBP law enforcement officers. Additionally, $85.6 million will support the construction and infrastructure expansion at FLETC for student housing,

 

Can you provided me with a formal proposal for what Trump would do with the 5.7 billion? Far as I can tell it is just a number he made up. No plan currently exists. As a matter of fact in DHS's 2019 budget they are allocating resources to "Developed the Agency Reform Plan, Comprehensive Border Security Study, and the Border Wall System Cost Estimate". DHS doesn't even know how much the wall will cost. They still need to research it. 

So DHS is already getting everything they asked. So that portions of Trump's compromise is no sticking pointing. Then there is the DACA issue and as previously stated it gives Democrats nothing. Trump can't act on DACA. It is a 3yrs extension but Trump can't do anything for a year anyway. So at best it is a 2yr extension and that would be assuming SCOTUS takes it up next year and sides with Trump. Something they could've have already done if they were inclined to do so. The DACA offer is a joke.  It makes more sense for the House to draw up comprehensive immigration reform and cut a DACA deal as part of that. Democrats can bring a House vote up regarding DACA anytime they are ready now that they control the House. 

[MigL]

That's a pretty long stretch, Raider.
As far as I'm concerned, D Trump is totally responsible for the wall mess ( and many others ).
Not the Democrats, nor most Republicans.

However, both Democrats, and most Republicans have it in their power to help 800,000 people affected by the Government shutdown, 600,000 DACA immigrants and another 300,000 ( not my numbers, I'm assuming they're correct ) affected by the TPS extension.

Instead of playing D Trump's game, why don't the Democrats release a statement saying...
" We are going to do what governments are supposed to do. Help people. We, and some of our fellow Republicans are going to give in to that idiot's demands for the good of the country. We will not hold the American people hostage because of ideology or ego ( in D Trump's case ) "

But that's just an opinion as I'm not one of the people affected by the government shutdown, or who could be helped by this deal.
( just wondering if anyone on this forum hasn't received any pay for the last month )

[iNow]

20 minutes ago, MigL said:

Instead of playing D Trump's game, why don't the Democrats release a statement saying...
" We are going to do what governments are supposed to do. Help people. We, and some of our fellow Republicans are going to give in to that idiot's demands for the good of the country. We will not hold the American people hostage because of ideology or ego

This makes zero sense.

If they give in and do what you suggest, the ONLY thing they’re doing is playing Trumps game and they’d be doing so COMPLETELY on his terms.

Trump gets exactly what he wants and loses absolutely nothing whatsoever by doing what you propose.

How is that “not playing his game?” What... it’s supposed to be different somehow because they gave a passive aggressive speech while doing so? Dufuq?

By standing firm, they’re telling him that his game isn’t funny and he needs to stop... that he needs to sign one of the several bills they’ve already passed to protect our border and reopen our government. 

Edited January 20, 2019 by iNow

[MigL]

I wonder, if you were one of the 800,000 who hasn't got paid in a month, would you still be so resolute in your opposition to D Trump ?

I fail to see why Congress can't get the message out that they would be the ones helping people, not simply giving in.
People that D Trump isn't willing to help, doesn't give a sh*t about and,is using as pawns to satisfy his ego.

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

 

I wonder, if you were one of the 800,000 who hasn't got paid in a month, would you still be so resolute in your opposition to D Trump ?

Even more so

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Even more so

Easy to say that. What if you had been struggling with your bills, through no fault of your own, prior to the shutdown?

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Easy to say that. What if you had been struggling with your bills, through no fault of your own, prior to the shutdown?

Then I’d still be struggling, only more so... and this time as a direct result of Trumps obstinance.

It takes some serious mental gymnastics to suggest this situation would somehow predispose me to displacing blame from Trump and instead onto others... on to Democrats who have REPEATEDLY tried to reopen government and who have been REPEATEDLY blocked by the GOP Senate and the president himself.  

If I’ve been struggling with bills as a federal employee, then Trump has made that struggle worse by using ME as a hostage in a policy diasagreement that has ZERO to do with government funding overall. 

No offense intended, but there’s not an ounce of valid logic in this suggestion you and MigL are here now making. I don’t want to call it dumb or ridiculous to suggest what you have, but it is both of those things. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

31 minutes ago, iNow said:

Then I’d still be struggling, only more so... and this time as a direct result of Trumps obstinance.

It takes some serious mental gymnastics to suggest this situation would somehow predispose me to displacing blame from Trump and instead onto others... on to Democrats who have REPEATEDLY tried to reopen government and who have been REPEATEDLY blocked by the GOP Senate and the president himself.  

If I’ve been struggling with bills as a federal employee, then Trump has made that struggle worse by using ME as a hostage in a policy diasagreement that has ZERO to do with government funding overall. 

No offense intended, but there’s not an ounce of valid logic in this suggestion you and MigL are here now making. I don’t want to call it dumb or ridiculous to suggest what you have, but it is both of those things. 

Not suggesting less blame to Trump, but say, additional to Trump, and finally some to the Democrats as well? If only for goading Trump and leaving him no "egomaniacal room" whatsoever?

[John Cuthber]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

If only for goading Trump and leaving him no "egomaniacal room" whatsoever?

How much "doing the plainly wrong thing and hurting America" should they allow, to compensate for the Republicans' incompetent choice of candidate?

This really isn't the Left's fault.

Stop trying to pretend otherwise.

[Raider5678]

6 hours ago, iNow said:

Then I’d still be struggling, only more so... and this time as a direct result of Trumps obstinance.

It takes some serious mental gymnastics to suggest this situation would somehow predispose me to displacing blame from Trump and instead onto others... on to Democrats who have REPEATEDLY tried to reopen government and who have been REPEATEDLY blocked by the GOP Senate and the president himself.  

If I’ve been struggling with bills as a federal employee, then Trump has made that struggle worse by using ME as a hostage in a policy diasagreement that has ZERO to do with government funding overall. 

No offense intended, but there’s not an ounce of valid logic in this suggestion you and MigL are here now making. I don’t want to call it dumb or ridiculous to suggest what you have, but it is both of those things. 

So. If you had missed two paychecks at this point and you were already struggling with your bills prior to the shutdown, by this point you'd be even more adamant that no matter what you don't give into Trumps demands.

Again. Easy for you to say that the deal is worthless and everything when you're not being affected by it. 

 

You care more about pinning the blame to someone and holding onto your ideological ideals, then you do about actually helping people who need it.

Congratulations. Politics has beaten your humanity.

[John Cuthber]

58 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

You care more about pinning the blame to someone and holding onto your ideological ideals, then you do about actually helping people who need it.

Congratulations. Politics has beaten your humanity.

I presume that's directed against Trump and his supporters who are actually responsible for the problems.
You know the old example of the moral dilemma where there's a runaway train and you have to decide whether or not to switch the points to kill one person, rather than 10?
Well, Trump has set that up, and you are blaming people for switching the points.

The real crook is the ****who tied the people to the track.

Stop trying to defend him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

[J.C.MacSwell]

 

3 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

How much "doing the plainly wrong thing and hurting America" should they allow, to compensate for the Republicans' incompetent choice of candidate?

This really isn't the Left's fault.

Stop trying to pretend otherwise.

I certainly have no real answer to your question, nor am I pretending anything. All I have is questions on that myself.

I think that is part of the  5.7 billion dollar question. Can this be put in economic terms? What is the dollar value of the what they should allow? What good is that much spending in dollars...say any residual value of that spending? .

Ten oz has at least explained why he can't ascertain any value to Trumps potential spending of that 5.7B, 

16 hours ago, Ten oz said:

+1, I am glad we are back on topic.

First off it is worth understand what the 5.7 billion would be spent on. The Budget approved and signed off by Sec of Dept. or Homeland Security only ask for 1.6 billion for 65 miles of new wall construction and Developed the Agency Reform Plan, Comprehensive Border Security Study, and the Border Wall System Cost Estimate. Here is a link to the full budget proposal..

Also as previously discussed the govt doesn't own the land needed to build the Wall. They are numerous lawsuits already pending. So even if Trump got 5.7 billion from Congress he neither has a plan in place to build the wall or legal authority to build it on the land he wants to build it one. 

You asked if it was worth 3 billion, 1 billion, or whatever but that can't be answered. The Wall is an idea. It is a symbol of Trump's brand. It is not a tangible thing construction workers are standing by ready to build. It is both worth nothing in technical terms and worth everything in political banner waving terms. I understand why you feel it is a game for both sides but in what universe would Congress give the President 5.7 Billion dollars so something which doesn't yet even have plan? Again, when Republicans where in charge of the House they refused to give Trump the money too. Both sides (Democrats and Republican) have told Trump no. So this isn't a game both sides are playing. This is Trump controlling the media cycle, whipping up his base, and looking to score symbolic points.

Trump has done this before. Early in his presidency he declared a travel ban but failed to roll out any legal instruction for it. It created chaos. Agencies dealing with immigration and travel were confused. The White House lawyers eventually wrote up official guidance but it was tossed out in court. That happened a few different times until they final created some temporary measures which weren't rejected in Federal Court. Trump also did this with Healthcare. After campaigning he'd replace the ACA with something better Trump demanded Congress vote to repeal the ACA and replace it with the Republican plan. However there wasn't a Republican plan and after attempting to assemble one on the fly Republicans failed to muster up the needed votes among themselves to repeal and replace the ACA. Trump is asking for 5.7 billion for a wall but doesn't have any idea what he'd do if he got it. 

So no one seems to have any idea of an answer in concrete terms. (or steel, or litigation etc)

OTOH there have been attempts to put the cost of the shutdown in dollar terms.

But maybe no one can really summarize the whole of it in this manner, and it is best left to hand waving arguments, hopefully at least based on the most objective evidence...and then "may the best rhetoric win"?

Edited January 20, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell