Tariffs

[BIGUN 1,059]

19 hours ago, normiss said:

Right? With a single click it's easily verified.

I wonder if that's why Kirstjen Nielsen quit.

Right. And here we are 24 hours later - and, maybe not so much.

Quote

I wonder if that's why Kirstjen Nielsen quit.

Please help me understand the correlation between the two comments. 

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, Coreece said:

FIFY

 

Didn't the most prominent one reverse her accusation?

[billvon 2,403]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Didn't the most prominent one reverse her accusation?

I don't think so.  Which one?  At last count there were 23 women accusing Trump of sexual misconduct.  And of course he's on tape saying that he grabs women by the pussy - and he's admitted to a few others.

[SkyDekker 1,129]

4 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Right. And here we are 24 hours later - and, maybe not so much.

So what new item was agreed to?

[BIGUN 1,059]

3 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

So what new item was agreed to?

So, even the Times article that everyone is touting as the "go to" for their position that it was agreed to months ago acknowledges, that Mexico's pledge to deploy up to 6,000 national guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala "was larger than their previous pledge," and that Mexico's "agreement to accelerate the Migrant Protection Protocols could help reduce migrants in the United States by giving the country a greater ability to make asylum-seekers wait in Mexico" 

The Mexican government also dragged its feet on providing the shelter, health care, job benefits and basic care that would allow the United States to send the migrants over. The new deal reiterates that Mexico will provide the “jobs, health care and education” needed to allow the program to expand.

[billvon 2,403]

8 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

So, even the Times article that everyone is touting as the "go to" for their position that it was agreed to months ago acknowledges, that Mexico's pledge to deploy up to 6,000 national guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala "was larger than their previous pledge," and that Mexico's "agreement to accelerate the Migrant Protection Protocols could help reduce migrants in the United States by giving the country a greater ability to make asylum-seekers wait in Mexico" 

The Mexican government also dragged its feet on providing the shelter, health care, job benefits and basic care that would allow the United States to send the migrants over. The new deal reiterates that Mexico will provide the “jobs, health care and education” needed to allow the program to expand.

So nothing new.  They agreed to not drag their feet as much, and send a few more troops.

And Mexico will pay for the wall.

[gowlerk 1,915]

16 minutes ago, billvon said:

So nothing new.  They agreed to not drag their feet as much, and send a few more troops.

The real story is what Miller wanted and did not get. That is a safe third country agreement. Mexico refused and Trump caved. That's the bottom line.

[wolfriverjoe 1,346]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The real story is what Miller wanted and did not get. That is a safe third country agreement. Mexico refused and Trump caved. That's the bottom line.

Well, he either caves or walks out on the discussion.

 

North Korea, China, the government shutdown, infrastructure, Mexico, the "wall", the list is endless.

His accomplishments? Huge tax cuts for his rich buddies, at the cost of skyrocketing deficits. 

[billvon 2,403]

On 6/8/2019 at 4:10 PM, airdvr said:

To be fair I would have needed a crystal ball.  So, Trump is pretty much the same as Hillary, except Hillary managed to rig the DNC to force Bernie out.  She's been a focal point of more scandals and has excused her husbands well known philandering with multiple women in order to stay close to power. 

So forgiveness is unforgivable.  Abusing almost two dozen women, using his power to siphon money to his family, taking money from Russia then dropping sanctions, supporting Nazis  - all completely forgivable.

[billvon 2,403]

So much for the "secret deal" Trump had with Mexico:

============================

No Secret Immigration Deal Exists With U.S., Mexico’s Foreign Minister Says

By Michael D. Shear and Maggie Haberman NYT

June 10, 2019

WASHINGTON — The Mexican foreign minister said Monday that no secret immigration deal existed between his country and the United States, directly contradicting President Trump’s claim on Twitter that a “fully signed and documented” agreement would soon be revealed.

Marcelo Ebrard, Mexico’s top diplomat, said at a news conference in Mexico City that there was an understanding that both sides would evaluate the flow of migrants in the coming months. If the number of migrants crossing the United States border is not significantly reduced, he said, both sides have agreed to renew discussions about more aggressive changes to regional asylum rules that could have a bigger effect.

“Let’s have a deadline to see if what we have works, and if not, then we will sit down and look at the measures you propose and those that we propose,” Mr. Ebrard said, describing the understanding reached by negotiators last week.

The public statement served as an official response to several days of tweeting by Mr. Trump, who has reacted angrily to the suggestion that he withdrew his threat of tariffs on all Mexican goods in exchange for a weak deal on immigration.

===========================

To paraphrase Otter - "you fucked up; you trusted Trump."

[normiss 622]

On 6/10/2019 at 8:47 AM, BIGUN said:

Right. And here we are 24 hours later - and, maybe not so much.

Please help me understand the correlation between the two comments. 

Her meeting with Mexico, for the agreement Trump now claims is new.

[gowlerk 1,915]

9 hours ago, billvon said:

The Mexican foreign minister said Monday that no secret immigration deal existed between his country and the United States, directly contradicting President Trump’s claim on Twitter that a “fully signed and documented” agreement would soon be revealed.

A "Possible Order of Events"?

[SkyDekker 1,129]

17 hours ago, BIGUN said:

So, even the Times article that everyone is touting as the "go to" for their position that it was agreed to months ago acknowledges, that Mexico's pledge to deploy up to 6,000 national guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala "was larger than their previous pledge," and that Mexico's "agreement to accelerate the Migrant Protection Protocols could help reduce migrants in the United States by giving the country a greater ability to make asylum-seekers wait in Mexico" 

The Mexican government also dragged its feet on providing the shelter, health care, job benefits and basic care that would allow the United States to send the migrants over. The new deal reiterates that Mexico will provide the “jobs, health care and education” needed to allow the program to expand.

Thanks for the link. I don't really see anything new in there. The framework of that was agreed to quite some time ago. The threat of tariffs seems to have gotten a slightly larger troop commitment and an accelerated timeline. Seems like a heavy hand for limited return.

[gowlerk 1,915]

18 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

The threat of tariffs seems to have gotten a slightly larger troop commitment and an accelerated timeline.

Yes, and I'm sure those promises will be kept. Like Trump keeps his agreements.....

[DJL 232]

On 6/8/2019 at 7:10 PM, airdvr said:

I've noticed over the years the Dems have a proclivity for excusing their party member's illegal activities. Chappaquiddick anyone?

That's a pretty lame one, do you really need to go 50 years to find an example?  How about the whole damn Vietnam War courtesy of JFK and LBJ?

[turtlespeed 212]

21 hours ago, BIGUN said:

So, even the Times article that everyone is touting as the "go to" for their position that it was agreed to months ago acknowledges, that Mexico's pledge to deploy up to 6,000 national guard troops to its southern border with Guatemala "was larger than their previous pledge," and that Mexico's "agreement to accelerate the Migrant Protection Protocols could help reduce migrants in the United States by giving the country a greater ability to make asylum-seekers wait in Mexico" 

The Mexican government also dragged its feet on providing the shelter, health care, job benefits and basic care that would allow the United States to send the migrants over. The new deal reiterates that Mexico will provide the “jobs, health care and education” needed to allow the program to expand.

You can't expect fairness, and objectivism when there is that amount of hate in their heart.

[BIGUN 1,059]

5 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

I don't really see anything new in there. The framework of that was agreed to quite some time ago.

It's nothing grandiose and the 'newness" can be interpreted as building a larger footprint on an existing foundation with a penalty clause. A codicil of enhanced numbers on both of their borders, ensuring for the health, wealth and safety on that side of the border until the asylum hearings on this side can occur - with a penalty clause if those things don't happen. 

On a similar note: We as Americans (both sides) should look at the advantages of this. No more argument about whether its illegal to enter or show up, HOPEFULLY, a methodical method to entry, and a reduction in illegal crossings (~150,000 in May and ~610,000 YTD) is a bit much. And, that's just those that were caught. Anyone who says we can sustain that over a period of time IMO doesn't want to face some hard facts about the situation.      

 

Edited June 11, 2019 by BIGUN
Grammar

[BIGUN 1,059]

7 hours ago, normiss said:

Her meeting with Mexico, for the agreement Trump now claims is new.

Yeah. Sorry about that. I connected the dots afterwards and didn't let you know. 

[SkyDekker 1,129]

4 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

It's nothing grandiose and the 'newness" can be interpreted as building a larger footprint on an existing foundation with a penalty clause. A codicil of enhanced numbers on both of their borders, ensuring for the health, wealth and safety on that side of the border until the asylum hearings on this side can occur - with a penalty clause if those things don't happen. 

On a similar note: We as Americans (both sides) should look at the advantages of this. No more argument about whether its illegal to enter or show up, HOPEFULLY, a methodical method to entry, and a reduction in illegal crossings (~150,000 in May and ~610,000 YTD is a bit much. And, that's just those that were caught. Anyone who says we can sustain that over a period of time IMO doesn't want to face some hard facts about the situation.      

 

Except we don't know whats in the agreement. It isn't public. Your President and Mexico's top diplomat are disagreeing about what is in this secret agreement or if it even exists.

The Joint Declaration has no penalty clause, it doesn't speak to numbers, nothing. certainly nothing in there that would suggest anything "new".

[turtlespeed 212]

19 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

It's nothing grandiose and the 'newness" can be interpreted as building a larger footprint on an existing foundation with a penalty clause. A codicil of enhanced numbers on both of their borders, ensuring for the health, wealth and safety on that side of the border until the asylum hearings on this side can occur - with a penalty clause if those things don't happen. 

On a similar note: We as Americans (both sides) should look at the advantages of this. No more argument about whether its illegal to enter or show up, HOPEFULLY, a methodical method to entry, and a reduction in illegal crossings (~150,000 in May and ~610,000 YTD) is a bit much. And, that's just those that were caught. Anyone who says we can sustain that over a period of time IMO doesn't want to face some hard facts about the situation.      

 

codicil?   Had to look that one up - good word.

Your hopes are in vain.

A conservative could open the borders and allow all the previously illegal aliens in and the left would find issue with it.

Something is always going to be wrong with whatever a moderate or a conservative does in this group of left leaning frequent posters.

Its a no win situation.  Catch 22 - 

Its by design as well.

[BIGUN 1,059]

2 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Something is always going to be wrong with whatever a moderate or a conservative does in this group of left leaning frequent posters.

Yeah, but I'm not giving up on the bastards. 

[turtlespeed 212]

7 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Yeah, but I'm not giving up on the bastards. 

Me either!

[billvon 2,403]

6 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Thanks for the link. I don't really see anything new in there. The framework of that was agreed to quite some time ago. The threat of tariffs seems to have gotten a slightly larger troop commitment and an accelerated timeline. Seems like a heavy hand for limited return.

Hey, today he waved around a piece of paper and said it was a secret additional agreement that's REALLY REALLY great.  Not like that other stuff he lied about.  Why isn't everyone celebrating?

[wmw999 2,125]

Guys, a lot of the folks in here only post on the topics that polarize them. Kind of like how I have tons of friends in Houston who are way more vocally conservative than some of the more conservative folks here. 

This isn’t the real world, where generally you have to keep dealing with people after expressing your opinions. 

Wendy P. 

[kallend 1,633]

11 hours ago, billvon said:

Hey, today he waved around a piece of paper and said it was a secret additional agreement that's REALLY REALLY great.  Not like that other stuff he lied about.  Why isn't everyone celebrating?