Trump!!!

I guess this is where Trump's heavy resentment comes from:

Trump Says He Didn't Know He Employed Illegal Aliens
Published: July 13, 1990

I bet he still has a number of illegals in his construction team... knowing or unknowingly...

 

The point about HRC is that Sanders is a non-threat who the press are trying to trump, ha, up as a type of threat to give us pause thinking that maybe HRC isn't bad compared to him(socialist). The Trump fiasco is designed to make the Hispanic crowd trend toward HRC.
No way Trump actually makes it to the general election. He is only damaging the Republicans likely to get some quid quo pro in NY after the election.(just a hunch) It makes sense since it is time for Hillary according to the press and the Dems.

 

I expect the Republicans to totally screw up their platform on this issue, but I know HRC will face this later in the campaign:

***************
On Tuesday in Las Vegas, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said if elected, she would “fight for comprehensive immigration reform and a path to citizenship.”

However, in a February 2003 interview on WABC Radio’s “John Gambling Show,” which is featured in a new video from the Republican National Committee, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) said, “I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.”

“People have to stop employing illegal immigrants. I mean, come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand on the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx, you’re going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work.”

 

I'm not an HRC fan and seriously hope that her pre-ordained status as presumptuous Democrat POTUS nominee is upended. Are those statements incongruous though? One can be against illegal immigration and for a solution to solve it.

 

Trump is an attention seeker and everyone is providing that attention for him.
I wish we could focus on what he said about how many criminals are getting in and how many crimes they keep committing even after repeated deportations .Sanctuary cities aid the illegals and more crimes are committed
The woman shot in SF is but the tip of an iceberg of crimes illegals have and are committing.
Trump was not wrong about that. Yet BO keeps releasing convicted criminal illegals and they keep committing crimes.
I wish that would get as much attention as anything that attention ***** gets. People ignore what he said and keep on ranting about what they pretend he said.
Some complain that it is inhumane to deport part of an illegal family, " the right thing to do is keep a family together"
Really? tell that to the families of people murdered or raped or severely injured by illegals

 

Big difference between "illegal immigration" which is process and "illegal immigrants" which are people. She stated she was against the people, not the process.

I do agree that you can be against illegal immigration and for a solution. Too bad neither party has an answer. they just pander to their base as evidenced by her sudden switch in positions. Much like her same sex marriage position change.

And to your point, I personally think the Dems are very vulnerable with her pre-ordained status.

 

maybe Trump will sell all of the federal lands to pay for the upgrades to the White House Trump Tower he will build after he is elected?

 

I'm surprised no one has posted about this. I'm seriously starting to question whether or not Trump's candidacy is a fraud. This is just way too over the top to be serious.

Booze+twitter=bad decisions

 

yeah, but Hillary, so . . .

 

Trump is dangerous because he has the resources to run as a self-funded third party candidate. Just as Perot single handedly put Clinton in office, a Trump candidacy will guarantee 4 more years of Demo rule.

The Repubs need to handle him with care. They need to make him feel included and part of the process, while selecting someone else.

 

People like Trump should be treated with the utmost ridicule and contempt for being the shallow, immature dolts that they are.

Provoke him on legitimate points—like his hypocrisy on "getting tough" on China while they are lining his pockets with cheap labor—and let him hang himself with stupid reactionary rhetoric. His ego won't let him refuse the bait. It will be immensely entertaining.

 

Exactly this... he needs someone to figuratively punch him in the mouth and look at him and say "what? what are you going to do?". He needs to be humiliated and humbled to be any sort of productive. Until then, he truly believes that all his mistakes and idiocies are criticizes because the general public is too stupid to see what he sees...

 

I know he's more a partisan than I generally like, but Jonah Goldberg wrote a good piece on Trump.

And he makes this statement, and it's so true. "Look, these are rough times for conservatives, for reasons too lengthy, and all too familiar, to go into here. But none of our problems — demographic, political, cultural — can be solved unless conservatives take the cause of persuasion to heart."

So many on the Right value inflammatory smack talk and anger over good old-fashioned persuasion - convincing people who disagree (in whole or in part) that conservatism is right way to go, and you do that by explaining why conservative policy is good policy for the state, nation, world, etc. Frankly, it's not hard to do if you have a brain and are willing to use it a little.

 

Chapo is gonna kill Trump if he doesn't shut the f**k up.

Trump said that he would "kick his ***", referring to El Chapo, and Chapo replied to him on twitter saying that he would make him "eat his words"... Trump called FBI to report him.. Trump doesn't quite understand that on pride alone, Chapo will spend his last cent to literally make Trump eat his works... probably dipped in acid and then scalp him raw... I wanted someone to figuratively punch Trump in the mouth and humble him, but if he keeps at it, someone might do it literally...

 

I don't wish death on anyone, but if Chapo would just rough him up a little, I'd condone that.

 

It is not hard to imagine a Crim Law 101 exam question like this:

Trump is a candidate for POTUS. El Chapo is a drug kingpin who recently escaped from prison in Mexico. Trump mocked his opponents for being so soft on immigration that they would allow Mexican drug lords to freely cross the Mexico-US border. In contrast, Trump said, he would "kick Chapo's ***". A Twitter account purportedly owned by El Chapo replied that he would make Trump "eat his words."

HornFans is a website that allows individuals to post comments on issues of local, state, or national concerns. Dang-Str8 and Deez are well-respected, regular posters on Hornfans. Dang-Str8 posted a news article about the Trump-Chapo feud and suggested that he wanted someone to "figuratively punch Trump in the mouth and humble him". Deep replied that he doesn't condone murder, but he does wish that "Chapo would rough him up a little."

Who committed what crimes, including common-law offenses and federal and state statutes, and what defenses are available?​

 

Wouldn't that just prove Trump's point that America is not in control of its own borders anymore and that most illegals are thugs and criminals?

By the way, as if our security wasn't lax enough, BO just ordered ICE to quit tracking illegals via a fingerprint database of arrested persons that was started after 9-1-1.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ws-host-obama-ended-program-tracking-undocum/

 

One man, roughing up another man, would "prove" that America is not in control of its borders? I'm pretty sure you don't know what prove means.

 

If the "man" doing the roughing up entered our borders illegally that act would indicate the gov't is not in control of our borders.

 

Would it PROVE that America is not in control of its own borders anymore and that most illegals are thugs and criminals -like Stonewall Jackson said up there?

 

That would be a fun hearing... specially the part where pictures of Trump's bruised face would be shown to the jury... And I would act like I feel sorry for him... And then the part where the ACLU would help me file a law suit against the federal government for infringing on my rights to have an opinion. And I would, as a consequence, cause the greatest reversal of government laws that are design to "be all up in people's ****"... they would call it the "back the f**k up of my ****, you dirty pig" movement... And then the first Libertarian President would be elected.

 

It really blows me away that people don't realize what "most illegals are thugs and criminals" sounds like... I know in the US we are really ethnocentric and we see the world from our own little privileged filter, but beyond that point, to make a generalization like that is enraging... and "people" don't see that. Trump could have said "some immigrants are thugs and criminals and even a handful is more than we can accept" and that would be a perfectly understandable point... But dude, that statement is what pisses people off...

I think more people would understand if they imagined the dean of their college say that all (insert frat name) are date rapists and need to be kicked out of school... or some **** like that.

 

Dang-str8, you also have to realize that some people are just ********, and very proud of it. (edit -I meant Trump)

 

Exactly right. I suspect that the vast majority of immigrants just want to make a better life for their families.

 

We clearly need to change immigration quotas. However there is a difference between illegal aliens/immigrants and legal immigrants.
Legal immigrants should be welcomed since they have shown a respect for our laws simply by obeying the very first law that applies to them.
I agree D8 the vast majority of legal immigrants probably do come here wanting to make a better life for their families and are willing to work as hard as needed for that. That has been the story of most legal immigrants since the first landed here.
I don't think most legal immigrants feel a sense of entitlement. I contrast that with many illegal immigrants who seem to feel we owe them a life and BO has certainly fostered that sense. He is not alone but he is the face of what is going on.

IF there were a way to identify the illegal immigrants who want to work and contribute from the ones who want to scam every benefit they can I would be all for a easier path to legal immigrant status for the ones who are not looking for every hand out they can scam.

 

It doesn't need to be proven. It's proven every single day. Just ask Kathryn Steinle's parents.

 

OK: While we are trashing Obama for having an insecure border with Mexico, can anybody suggest there was an administration that produced a "secure" border with Mexico since James K. Polk was president?

 

I don't think you folks realize what it means to come to the US legally. It really sounds like you think illegal immigrants are just rebels that don't care about obeying laws and by nature just come in illegally for the f**k of it. They likely tried the process and they got denied because they were not skilled professional or were not highly educated... and even if they were, they probably waited years to get visas... and those skilled workers that can wait for visas are able to stay and wait and support their families... the other cant afford that.

Typically the next argument is "well, f**k them then... it's not our job to feed those uneducated criminals... because that's what they are, criminals because they break our immigration laws." OK, point taken... it's not our job to feed them... But at this point, the need for them goes beyond obeying a law that the government sends mixed signals on... a law they say is enforced, but not really... The "word on the street" since the 80's in Latin America is that the US government just fronts enforcement to shut people up, but they know how necessary immigrant labor is, so they just enforce it softly... and people are willing to risk that trip because of desperation... They know when they come in that they will have to bust their *** to work and earn money... they know they will not be able to call the cops when they need protection for fear of deportation, they know that they are very much on their own... but they have little to no choice if they want to live and/or eat. Do you realize how desperate a mother has to be to send her child on a dangerous trip across the border? and to go so long with no information or contact on how they are? Sad part is that some of you think "they don't care, they are probably happy they're gone"... no, dude... I've seen the desperation first hand... many times before. Eating tortillas with salt as a meal can only take you so far.

Many of us are too disconnected and makes us not understand the situation people are in... Yes, its beautiful when LEGAL immigrants come in and contribute to our society and do what needs to be done. In a perfect system, the borders would be shut down completely to illegal immigration and free flow of registered, legal immigrants would be in place... taxes collected and backgrounds checked... but that's not reality... not only is it too expensive, but its a fiscal nightmare... and political suicide... the easy way out it to have the laws in place, just in case, but not enforce...

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/...id-but-he-could-take-the-republican-down-too/

no mention of quid quo pro but the reflections back to '92 are clear.

 

If he runs, it will be Armageddon for the GOP - worse than 1992. Ross Perot drew some Democratic support, and he ran on the budget deficit, which doesn't motivate GOP voters anywhere near as much as illegal immigration does (though the opposite should be the case). If he runs as an independent and makes a similar effort to Perot's, he could win 25 percent of the vote, almost all of it coming from the GOP. If that happens, Hillary should campaign in Texas. She'd have a very real shot of carrying it.