POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
This is why I would still be shocked if there will be a daca deal. Dems will never ever agree to wall funding. Just won't happen. They won't agree to ending chain migration and other aspects either, but a blizzard will appear at the gates of hell before Schumer and Pelosi go along with wall funding. I think the program is destined to die off in the courts.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Reports now that Miller just had a heated conversation with a few immigration hardliners from the Freedom Caucus. They like everything else, but refuse to accept the 1.8 million number because it's almost three times the 690K DACA recipients.Add those on top of the Democrats wanting amnesty for all 3.6 million DREAMers, no money for a wall, continuation of chain migration, etc... and you're right, this deal more than likely doesn't get done.
I think Trump is using DACA as a bargaining chip. He always throws in something that everyone dislikes at first.
Add those on top of the Democrats wanting amnesty for all 3.6 million DREAMers, no money for a wall, continuation of chain migration, etc... and you're right, this deal more than likely doesn't get done.
Strzok, who is the agent that questioned Hillary, purposely went easy on her because they assumed she would be the next president and were scared she would hold a grudge.
Weren't they having an affair. Page is the woman, shouldn't she be the inbox...amirite?
@Anthony B, just looked it up. Was from a book signing before he became president.
But, if he's saying 1.8 million DACA recipients plus eligibles, then his math is wrong. There are only 690K illegals registered in the DACA program.
I'm confused. Is he saying 690K DACA recipients plus eligibles, which equals a total 1.8 million? Because that makes sense.
But, if he's saying 1.8 million DACA recipients plus eligibles, then his math is wrong. There are only 690K illegals registered in the DACA program.
His second tweet cleared it up. He meant 1.8 million total. 690K DACA recipients plus eligibles. I'm still not convinced that's the number the WH has settled on. Think I'll wait until Trump announces it Monday.
I take that back. Looks like up to 1.8 million is the number decided on. Tom Cotton signed off.
So 690K DACA recipients plus those who are eligible, depending on if they meet requirements, in exchange for $25 billion (wall+border security), end chain migration/visa lottery.
So 690K DACA recipients plus those who are eligible, depending on if they meet requirements, in exchange for $25 billion (wall+border security), end chain migration/visa lottery.
I find multiple attempts to control the narrative fascinating. The number of psy ops coming from both sides to control the narrative is unreal. The tactics used to destroy threads or to push a hashtag is being analyzed as we speak and the info will be weaponized in the near future.
I trust no singular news or info outlet but I like watching the wars to control the narrative.
Don't forget to drink your Ovaltine.
The Curious Case of Adam Schiff
The one man in America uninterested in whether the Steele dossier is true or not.
Has there ever been a more incurious congressman than Adam Schiff ?
The California Democrat serves as ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a powerful oversight panel. Recently this committee succeeded in wresting key documents from the Justice Department and FBI after months of being stonewalled, and Republican staffers have summarized the info in a classified four-page memo. Those who have read the memo say it includes evidence of abuses by Justice and FBI officials handling the investigation into Donald Trump’s alleged ties with Russia, most salaciously summed up in the infamous Steele dossier named for the former British spy who compiled it.
But whether it’s material submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a warrant on a Trump campaign official or conveniently missing texts between an FBI agent and his FBI mistress—who both hated Mr. Trump and would each serve on the special counsel’s team—Mr. Schiff exhibits no interest. Saturday on CNN he implied that the only ones who are interested are Russian bots on Twitter .
When CNN’s Ana Cabrera asked him why not let the American people see the info and decide for themselves, Mr. Schiff went full Jack Nicholson : “The American people, unfortunately, don’t have the underlying materials and therefore they can’t see how distorted and misleading this document is,” he answered. Translation: The American people can’t handle the truth.
It makes no sense. If the American people lack context, that’s an argument for more disclosure, not less. But it fits a pattern. Mr. Schiff tells us there is “more than circumstantial evidence” of collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow. But he never produces it.
To put it another way, Mr. Schiff appears to be the only man in America who doesn’t seem to want to know whether the material in the Steele dossier is true or not. All along he has stood against getting relevant information—fighting subpoenas for Justice, fighting subpoenas for the FBI, and fighting the subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS (which ultimately prompted the admission that the Clinton campaign had helped fund the Steele dossier).
Last week offered a good example of the Schiff standard in operation. Democrats wanted the House testimony of Fusion co-founder Glenn Simpson made public, and Republicans on the Intel committee joined them to vote in favor of releasing it. But when it came to making the classified memo available to any congressman who wished to read it, Republicans alone stood for transparency. Every Democrat, led by Mr. Schiff, voted to keep the memo secret.
Meanwhile, even Democrats not on the Intel Committee have been infected by the same lack of curiosity that afflicts Mr. Schiff. In the few days since the memo became available to every member of the House, roughly 190 Republicans have read it, compared with only a dozen Democrats.
Congress—especially the oversight committees—is supposed to act as the people’s watchdog. Mr. Trump is routinely slammed for his indifference to reading, especially the endless memos and policy papers that find their way onto a president’s desk. But what does it say when the ranking member of a vital oversight committee appears uninterested in what his committee has unearthed about a matter that speaks to the integrity of our highest institutions of law enforcement?
The one man in America uninterested in whether the Steele dossier is true or not.
Has there ever been a more incurious congressman than Adam Schiff ?
The California Democrat serves as ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a powerful oversight panel. Recently this committee succeeded in wresting key documents from the Justice Department and FBI after months of being stonewalled, and Republican staffers have summarized the info in a classified four-page memo. Those who have read the memo say it includes evidence of abuses by Justice and FBI officials handling the investigation into Donald Trump’s alleged ties with Russia, most salaciously summed up in the infamous Steele dossier named for the former British spy who compiled it.
But whether it’s material submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a warrant on a Trump campaign official or conveniently missing texts between an FBI agent and his FBI mistress—who both hated Mr. Trump and would each serve on the special counsel’s team—Mr. Schiff exhibits no interest. Saturday on CNN he implied that the only ones who are interested are Russian bots on Twitter .
When CNN’s Ana Cabrera asked him why not let the American people see the info and decide for themselves, Mr. Schiff went full Jack Nicholson : “The American people, unfortunately, don’t have the underlying materials and therefore they can’t see how distorted and misleading this document is,” he answered. Translation: The American people can’t handle the truth.
It makes no sense. If the American people lack context, that’s an argument for more disclosure, not less. But it fits a pattern. Mr. Schiff tells us there is “more than circumstantial evidence” of collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow. But he never produces it.
To put it another way, Mr. Schiff appears to be the only man in America who doesn’t seem to want to know whether the material in the Steele dossier is true or not. All along he has stood against getting relevant information—fighting subpoenas for Justice, fighting subpoenas for the FBI, and fighting the subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS (which ultimately prompted the admission that the Clinton campaign had helped fund the Steele dossier).
Last week offered a good example of the Schiff standard in operation. Democrats wanted the House testimony of Fusion co-founder Glenn Simpson made public, and Republicans on the Intel committee joined them to vote in favor of releasing it. But when it came to making the classified memo available to any congressman who wished to read it, Republicans alone stood for transparency. Every Democrat, led by Mr. Schiff, voted to keep the memo secret.
Meanwhile, even Democrats not on the Intel Committee have been infected by the same lack of curiosity that afflicts Mr. Schiff. In the few days since the memo became available to every member of the House, roughly 190 Republicans have read it, compared with only a dozen Democrats.
Congress—especially the oversight committees—is supposed to act as the people’s watchdog. Mr. Trump is routinely slammed for his indifference to reading, especially the endless memos and policy papers that find their way onto a president’s desk. But what does it say when the ranking member of a vital oversight committee appears uninterested in what his committee has unearthed about a matter that speaks to the integrity of our highest institutions of law enforcement?
I am not thrilled with the notion of amnesty for 1.8 million. How many of those ppl would be voting? The talking heads keep trying to make it sound like it is only a small sliver of Trump's base that would have a problem with this and that is definitely not true. On the other hand, an end to chain migration and funding for the wall might be enough to keep his supporters on board.
I was cool with the 690K DACA. I agree, up to 1.8 million is kind of steep and not thrilling, but I'm assuming all that are eligible won't end up meeting requirements, so it's probably going to be less in the end. It looks like Trump and company thought it was worth including the eligible for DACA pool to secure the extra $9 billion.
Pretty sure none of them, at least not until they become citizens 10-12 years from now. Also, 10-12 years in a long time. Very doubtful they all stay on the pathway to citizenship.
If this is the case then fine. I'd just hate to have a scenario where Trump could lose a tight election because of it.
that is literally what they are doing
It's looking like no one is even going to have to worry about it. The far left Democrats and their base are already losing their shit, denouncing the proposal as racist. They'll never agree to what Trump is asking. DACA deadline will more than likely pass and suffer its fate in court.
Trump is playing the dems on DACA. IF dems supported the bill and it passed, guess who gets credit for the DACA part? Trump. Not the democrats.
If dems don't support the bill, it also means dems don't support the DACA part and judging by this past week, DACA folks are not happy with dems tanking it to re open the Govt.
Have fun with that one, dems.
lol that mfer is the same age as Trump. I can’t get over that. He’s got dementia and aids.
Lil George W Bush is 71, too.
Trump is strong like ox and can eat 10 Big Macs a day. Amazing.
100% chance the NYTs is full of fake news bullshit again tonight with its Mueller story.
California: Where marijuana is legal, but plastic straws are not.
in other words, similar to the Jim Rome caller rule: Have a toke, but don't suck.
Similar threads
