Thread: Trump's effort to secure the border is making America safe again

Originally Posted by Judy

It doesn't matter that you don't see. You'll see as time goes by. That's all I can say about it.

Well, thanks for your not-vote in my competence.

Obviously you also feel we should have trusted Obama that Obamacare, the Iran-Nuclear deal, and so many other of his schemes would work as time goes by. Obamacare hasn't fallen flat yet. Iran hasn't fire a nuclear missile yet. The economy has picked up. We just needed to trust Obama's judgement.

It has nothing to do with your competence or feelings. I don't like to respond to snippets.

Originally Posted by Judy

What you missed was why Trump did that. Trump did that to fund the government and increase military spending. He got what he needed, now he's using our fully-funded functioning government and increased military spending to defend our nation including our borders. Now he doesn't need DemoQuacks or more funding to secure the border, because under our US Constitution, he can secure that border through the US military .... forever. Personally, I prefer it over the wall.

A delusion on our part doesn't necessarily mean one on our part.

Trump clearly said he was not happy with the spending bill and would not sign one like it again. Bush and Obama also used the National Guard in the same capacity as Trump is, this is nothing new and it's only a short term fix. It's delusional to think Trump signed the bill with the intention of securing the border. Border security was why he asked for funding for his border wall and more BP agents (he got neither). It had nothing to do with military funding. Using the NG in a support function was a secondary thought that didn't come until Trump received news of the Honduras caravan.

It's ludicrous to think Trump can or will secure the border indefinitely with NG troops. The cost to do so would be extremely prohibitive. Temporarily securing the border with NG troops is not an alternative to a border wall. Honestly, to suggest such is just silly. It has already been confirmed that the NG will not be utilized in a enforcement capacity.

Trump got funding for 5,000 more Border Patrol agents in last years Omnibus Bill. He didn't request more BP agents in this year's bill, he asked again for 10,000 more ICE Agents.

Originally Posted by Judy

It has nothing to do with your competence or feelings. I don't like to respond to snippets.

So if I post them in one continuous paragraph, that is acceptable because you can respond to one part giving the impression that you are responding to all of the items?

Originally Posted by Judy

Trump got funding for 5,000 more Border Patrol agents in last years Omnibus Bill. He didn't request more BP agents in this year's bill, he asked again for 10,000 more ICE Agents.

Congress Rejects Trump’s Bid for More Immigration Enforcement and Border Patrol Agents

• By Eric Katz
• March 26, 2018
• 56 Comments

Excerpt:

"The same executive order called on CBP to hire 5,000 new Border Patrol agents, and Trump’s budget requested funding for 500 to come on board this fiscal year. But Congress did not authorize any new hires at Border Patrol, and instead provided $7 million for 351 customs officers at ports of entry. Lawmakers noted that “despite significant investments in hiring, retention and recruitment strategies,” CBP now expects Border Patrol to lose more agents than it will gain in fiscal 2018."

http://www.govexec.com/management/2018/03/congress-rejects-trumps-bid-more-immigration-enforcement-and-border-patrol-agents/146978/

Surprised that you only responded to one single item in my post. Figured you'd have more to dispute than that.

Originally Posted by jtdc

So if I post them in one continuous paragraph, that is acceptable because you can respond to one part giving the impression that you are responding to all of the items?

It makes it more difficult to obfuscate when you have to respond to individual comments.

Originally Posted by Judy

Trump got funding for 5,000 more Border Patrol agents in last years Omnibus Bill. He didn't request more BP agents in this year's bill, he asked again for 10,000 more ICE Agents.

Did you see the thread: Border Patrol has thousands of openings it can't fill? He can call up the NG now until maybe we get those additional 5000 Border Patrol Agents. The hole in the "wall" needs to be plugged NOW!

No, just quote my whole quote that your responding to, then ask your questions or make your comments below it, so I don't have to scroll all the way back to find my whole quote your responding to. Do it in a manner so that everything I said and what you're asking about or disagreeing with is all in one place. You can even use your snippets if you like below my whole post, because I can see my whole post inside your post to know what you're talking about, asking about or disagreeing with.

I don't even know what we're supposed to be arguing about at this point. I like to argue, but to do so, I have to know what we're arguing about.

Originally Posted by jtdc

Did you see the thread: Border Patrol has thousands of openings it can't fill? He can call up the NG now until maybe we get those additional 5000 Border Patrol Agents. The hole in the "wall" needs to be plugged NOW!

Yes, you also saw where McAleenan, the guy in charge of hiring said it would take 10 years to fill those slots at the rate they're going. so it will not be a short-term mission as things stand now.

Yes, the holes and gaps in the fencing need to be gated, most of those openings are for the farmers who own the land so they can get in and out of their property.