45th President of the United States, Donald Trump (Vol. 8)
Discussion
Gameface said:
Sigh.
It was perfectly valid because jimbeaux said no-one has ever reversed themselves on this thread, but Paul had politely done so less than 24 hours previously.
The hypocrisy is Jimbeaux's (and I'm not just talking about this single incident).
Paul was not who accused me of lying about my “bigly” definition, Walm was. Paul backed me up, Walm has yet to say anything after being corrected. If you are going to call someone a hypocrite, at least bother to know the situation. That will make your insults a bit more effective. It was perfectly valid because jimbeaux said no-one has ever reversed themselves on this thread, but Paul had politely done so less than 24 hours previously.
The hypocrisy is Jimbeaux's (and I'm not just talking about this single incident).
but otherwise I think we have similar interests.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I happen to know that those are not lies. I am posting what I know to be true. Through my job, Homeland Security and Emergency Management in Louisiana, we have constant cross information with our adjacent states; Texas being one. Yes, the children are often not belonging to the parent but placed with them as I described. I mention it was discovered during Obama, thus why the separating of children began in his administration. That was not a hit on him, it was just necessary. I realize you want to just keep the bad news to purely this administration but that is just not the truth. There was a reason immigration critics referred to Obama as the “Deporter in Chief”; he deported more illegals than Trump. Fact. You say I’m just giving talking points, I’m telling you they are facts. If they don’t square with what you want them to be, you will just have to get over that. Edited by Jimbeaux on Sunday 23 February 11:19
Jimbeaux said:
Gameface said:
Sigh.
It was perfectly valid because jimbeaux said no-one has ever reversed themselves on this thread, but Paul had politely done so less than 24 hours previously.
The hypocrisy is Jimbeaux's (and I'm not just talking about this single incident).
Paul was not who accused me of lying about my “bigly” definition, Walm was. Paul backed me up, Walm has yet to say anything after being corrected. If you are going to call someone a hypocrite, at least bother to know the situation. That will make your insults a bit more effective. It was perfectly valid because jimbeaux said no-one has ever reversed themselves on this thread, but Paul had politely done so less than 24 hours previously.
The hypocrisy is Jimbeaux's (and I'm not just talking about this single incident).
That's absolutely priceless coming from you, the man who admits he only reads what suits him and his agenda.
Practice what you preach.
Gameface said:
Bother to know the situation?
That's absolutely priceless coming from you, the man who admits he only reads what suits him and his agenda.
Practice what you preach.
Yea, yea, but back to this particular situation. Do you grasp it? Let’s stick to the subject of your post before you hop to the “yea but what about....”.That's absolutely priceless coming from you, the man who admits he only reads what suits him and his agenda.
Practice what you preach.
Jimbeaux said:
Gameface said:
Bother to know the situation?
That's absolutely priceless coming from you, the man who admits he only reads what suits him and his agenda.
Practice what you preach.
Yea, yea, but back to this particular situation. Do you grasp it? Let’s stick to the subject of your post before you hop to the “yeah but what about....”.That's absolutely priceless coming from you, the man who admits he only reads what suits him and his agenda.
Practice what you preach.
But once again you're being a hypocrite and don't even recognise it.
Calling someone else out for "yeah but what about..."
You are Pied Piper of squirrels! The king of whataboutism!
Gameface said:
I grasped it just fine.
But once again you're being a hypocrite and don't even recognise it.
Calling someone else out for "yeah but what about..."
You are Pied Piper of squirrels! The king of whataboutism!
Again, you called me out about something that was between myself, Walm and Paul, who corrected Walm. You misinterpreted it. That was that. If you wish to persist with your “squirrels”, etc. Please continue, but do so by yourself; It’s childish and tedious. But once again you're being a hypocrite and don't even recognise it.
Calling someone else out for "yeah but what about..."
You are Pied Piper of squirrels! The king of whataboutism!
Gameface said:
I grasped it just fine.
But once again you're being a hypocrite and don't even recognise it.
Calling someone else out for "yeah but what about..."
You are Pied Piper of squirrels! The king of whataboutism!
Again, you called me out about something that was between myself, Walm and Paul, who corrected Walm. You misinterpreted it. That was that. If you wish to persist with your “squirrels”, etc. Please continue, but do so by yourself; It’s childish and tedious. But once again you're being a hypocrite and don't even recognise it.
Calling someone else out for "yeah but what about..."
You are Pied Piper of squirrels! The king of whataboutism!
Wasn't there some secret Facebook group of these border 'professionals'?
Let's see ... "joked about the deaths of migrants, discussed throwing burritos at Latino members of Congress visiting a detention facility in Texas on Monday and posted a vulgar illustration depicting Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez engaged in oral sex with a detained migrant".
When the photo of the father+daughter who had drowned en route got out, there was even "I HAVE NEVER SEEN FLOATERS LIKE THIS, could this be another edited photo. We’ve all seen the dems and liberal parties do some pretty sick things…"
Let's see ... "joked about the deaths of migrants, discussed throwing burritos at Latino members of Congress visiting a detention facility in Texas on Monday and posted a vulgar illustration depicting Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez engaged in oral sex with a detained migrant".
When the photo of the father+daughter who had drowned en route got out, there was even "I HAVE NEVER SEEN FLOATERS LIKE THIS, could this be another edited photo. We’ve all seen the dems and liberal parties do some pretty sick things…"
anonymous said:
[redacted]
My work allows me direct access to border state information as well as our own as a “pass through” state on the Interstate highway. I am not an “immigration professional”; although my wife is in consistent touch with family and friends who are dealing directly with this situation from the immigrant side of things. Excerpt from the NYT:
“ In most cases, government officials have said, border officers who make a decision to remove a child from an accompanying adult do so because there are questions about the child’s welfare, or doubts that the adult is genuinely the child’s parent. Some children have appeared at the border accompanied by adults who later were determined to be using the child to try to gain entrance to the United States, officials have said.”
Edited by Jimbeaux on Sunday 23 February 12:57
More for Midenginedcoupe:
The below link explains that the practice of child separation predates Trump and even Obama. Trump officially ended the practice in August of 2019. As my previous posted excerpt from the NYT explained, separations that do still occur are down to child welfare or the discovery that the child was not the adult’s and being used to gain entry.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonexamine...
BTW, sorry to bother you on a Sunday. Have a pleasant afternoon in that time zone.
The below link explains that the practice of child separation predates Trump and even Obama. Trump officially ended the practice in August of 2019. As my previous posted excerpt from the NYT explained, separations that do still occur are down to child welfare or the discovery that the child was not the adult’s and being used to gain entry.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonexamine...
BTW, sorry to bother you on a Sunday. Have a pleasant afternoon in that time zone.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Sunday 23 February 13:11
Gameface said:
As if I'm the only one who accused you of shouting squirrel. 
It's your f
king playbook mate.
Of course not, you just stand out in the front. That’s your playbook. It's your f
king playbook mate.No need to cuss and be censored. Just express yourself in a calm and adult manner. You can do it if you just try.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Sunday 23 February 13:07
Escapegoat said:
When the photo of the father+daughter who had drowned en route got out, there was even "I HAVE NEVER SEEN FLOATERS LIKE THIS, could this be another edited photo. We’ve all seen the dems and liberal parties do some pretty sick things…"
History tells us, there are no depths that certain parts of Man-kind wants to inhabit. No matter where they are or their heritage. The South American immigration question is no different to those fleeing Africa and Parts of the middle-east to the U.K.
We can apply similar rule of thumb to parts of south america where the murder rate looks more like a country in Civil War than a successful state.
For whom Mexican immigration was a big election issue, Trumps approach was clear and strong.
The Democrats have not even debated the immigration issue properly this time around, we don’t know where the Democrats stand.
The assumption is that unless Democrat policy is clarified, the Democrats stand for more Mexican immigration where there has already been a disproportionate percentage and that won’t help with swing voters.
At some point the Democrats need to debate where they stand and declare what they are going to do about the issues surrounding what is happening in South America.
I sure as hell wouldn’t be voting for any change of policy against the Mexican government, it’s clear they (the Mexican authorities) weren’t doing much prior to Trump threatening them.
Carl_Manchester said:
History tells us, there are no depths that certain parts of Man-kind wants to inhabit. No matter where they are or their heritage.
The South American immigration question is no different to those fleeing Africa and Parts of the middle-east to the U.K.
We can apply similar rule of thumb to parts of south america where the murder rate looks more like a country in Civil War than a successful state.
For whom Mexican immigration was a big election issue, Trumps approach was clear and strong.
The Democrats have not even debated the immigration issue properly this time around, we don’t know where the Democrats stand.
The assumption is that unless Democrat policy is clarified, the Democrats stand for more Mexican immigration where there has already been a disproportionate percentage and that won’t help with swing voters.
At some point the Democrats need to debate where they stand and declare what they are going to do about the issues surrounding what is happening in South America.
I sure as hell wouldn’t be voting for any change of policy against the Mexican government, it’s clear they (the Mexican authorities) weren’t doing much prior to Trump threatening them.
And to add to that, Obama is on video stating polices in regard to immigration that in many ways mirror today’s policies. It is just that those similar policies have Trump speaking of them, so now they are bad. The South American immigration question is no different to those fleeing Africa and Parts of the middle-east to the U.K.
We can apply similar rule of thumb to parts of south america where the murder rate looks more like a country in Civil War than a successful state.
For whom Mexican immigration was a big election issue, Trumps approach was clear and strong.
The Democrats have not even debated the immigration issue properly this time around, we don’t know where the Democrats stand.
The assumption is that unless Democrat policy is clarified, the Democrats stand for more Mexican immigration where there has already been a disproportionate percentage and that won’t help with swing voters.
At some point the Democrats need to debate where they stand and declare what they are going to do about the issues surrounding what is happening in South America.
I sure as hell wouldn’t be voting for any change of policy against the Mexican government, it’s clear they (the Mexican authorities) weren’t doing much prior to Trump threatening them.
Jimbeaux said:
And to add to that, Obama is on video stating polices in regard to immigration that in many ways mirror today’s policies. It is just that those similar policies have Trump speaking of them, so now they are bad.
Dissembling again. It's the bits that 'do not mirror' Obama that creates the criticism of Trump.Examples: 's
tholes vs Norway', 'send them back', 'Newcomers compete for jobs against the most vulnerable Americans', 'invasion', etc, etc. Escapegoat said:
Dissembling again. It's the bits that 'do not mirror' Obama that creates the criticism of Trump.
Examples: 'stholes vs Norway', 'send them back', 'Newcomers compete for jobs against the most vulnerable Americans', 'invasion', etc, etc.
We were speaking of border immigration. But that’s fine. Examples: 's
tholes vs Norway', 'send them back', 'Newcomers compete for jobs against the most vulnerable Americans', 'invasion', etc, etc. anonymous said:
[redacted]
Trump ended Sessions policy in August 2019. What else do you want to discuss? As to how I am personally, you have no idea. I do have an extended immigrant family from Central America, do you? I thought not, yet you lecture me from across half the world as if you are an expert. It just might be that between my proximity to the border and my family from below it, I may just have a bit up on you. Temper both your anger and especially your arrogance; you will benefit from both. 
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff