Bitcoin Forum

Hey peeps, was thinking about the current state of the wall. I'm thinking this wall has less and less chance of hapoening. Let me explain. First off, if you read the forum you know I'm no fan of Trump or this wall.

I assumed the wall would get built because Trump is such a friend of corporate interest. Nothing new in Washington, but interesting to see  it out in the open (if I can sum up my deal with the current administration, it would boil down to 'lack of subtlety'). The wall, like a war, would be a smorgasbord of corporate contract moneygrab. The labor, the material required are massive, and it will take years to complete. So, of course the wall was getting built, it fit right in with my idea of the Trump camp.

Now, the wall rhetoric continued even after 'lock her up' and 'drain the swamp' went silent. Mexico was going to pay, then we were going to Bill them/force them to pay. Bullshit from jump, you can't force a foreign, sovereign nation to build a giant infrastructure on your turf. If so, make China build us theme parks. In every state.

I digress.

In the meanwhile, our suddenly aggressive stance did the very thing that the wall was intended to do: reduce immigration, by a significant percent, roughly 40. So damned well, in fact, the wall became largely unnecessary. But it was still a talking point in Trump world. The onus for the wall shifted from Mexico to the Democrats, now, they were responsible for holding up our vital national security. He threatened to shut down the government, he threatened to defund Ocare. Ultimately,  gov didn't shut down, but yet we still had no wall.


Fast forward to now. A Breitbart reporter and Spicer get into an argument over the wall. Guy asked Spicer about the wall, Spicer pulls out slides of fences. Brief argument ensues. Guy leaves, writes a critical article on Breitbart (which is another thread).

So, do you think the wall is actually going to happen? It's certain not going to be the 'big beautiful wall' Trump promised his voters. Maybe some storm link and a turn style.

I'm all ears.

Looked like a pretty nice wall to me, I saw that.

So if you watched it you know that Spicer answered all your speculations, too.

The wall will be eventually built, and there is no doubt about it. That said, less and less Mexicans are immigrating illegally to the US, ever since Trump was elected as the president. The authorities are less tolerant towards the illegals now.

A small extension of the wall but Trump will advertised it as a huge increase in the defense. Maybe even add some motion sensor cameras drone patrols or electric fence as additional features. That said the budget he signed had no funding specifically set out for the wall so either he gets it from the military budget somehow tries to executive order that or some other means I have not considered like crowdfund it then take a commission.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-budget-no-mexico-wall-spending-money-government-funding-a7720826.html
The US really likes to leave their signing of bills till the Gov is about to shut down.

In what century do you live? Who'll stop the wall? Smugglers dug a kilometre long tunnel. And hang gliders? No wall is fake which only works on stupid Americans. An intelligent person would believe in such nonsense.

Spicer said in the press conference there was currently 1.5B for the wall.

He may have mispoke. That 1.5b is appropriated to repair and improve the existing fence. Specifically, new fence cannot be constructed; only replaced or renovated. Make no mistake. The Demoncraps ( ;) ) and the Rethuglicans came together on this one, and made a point to deny funding for the wall.

But the text of the spending measure states (on page 739) the $341 million would be used “to replace approximately 40 miles of existing primary pedestrian and vehicle border fencing along the southwest border using previously deployed steel bollard designs, that prioritize [border] agent safety; and to add gates to existing barriers.”

There is absolutely no provision for the wall in the budget.

And the true definition of a "wall of bollards" is a bunch of bollards forming a barrier. With a bollard being a reinforced, free standing post. I wouldn't even insult fences like that. An actual 'bollard wall' would be akin to a tall traffic obstacle.

Long Fence, a commercial and residential fence company, sells bollards and defines them this way: “Bollards are upright steel posts mounted in or alongside roads and parking lots to control, direct or obstruct vehicular traffic or impact.”

The structures are crafted primarily “for maximum vehicle control, and can be used to effectively increase pedestrian safety and building security as well as onsite amenties (sic) from vehicular damage,” according to Long Fence.

Trump has said that, along some parts of the country’s southern border, fencing might be more appropriate than a giant concrete-and-steel wall. But, even this week, the president and his top aides have been promising the administration will build it.

Where is the concrete and rebar we were promised?

To the OP, you're talking like a wall doesn't already exist. A wall along the Mexico border already exists for hundreds of miles. Trumps proposal tries to complete the wall that Bush jr. started. And controversy from the public comes from how Trump communicated his proposal and "the why" he used to claim that Mexicans are providing negative impact on society.

I think this is a colossal waste of money. I'm not for illegal immigration but it's clear that illegal immigrants aren't stealing the jobs that voters are concerned about. They're filling the jobs that people don't want to do. I wonder how many former factory workers that voted for Trump will be willing to wash dishes and clean hotel rooms if/when illegal immigrants are forced out?

The wall won't prevent terrorism either.

Let them build it. It was Trumps campaign promise after all. Just make it clear to them there's no way they'll get Mexico to spend a single centimo on it. Maybe then the gravity of their stupidity would finally sink in. Besides, it's not like the wall would stop smugglers - they'd just build tunnels or use drones. And people can still get in through airports and then just "overstay".

Also, Trump once mention the Great Wall in China. Funny, that never really stopped invaders from coming in.


Exactly. How many Americans want to give "perineal care"? How many of them would want to work picking apples? None? Who would do those? No one but immigrants. Oh, those fcukin countries like India and Philippines are stealing jobs through outsourcing? Well, how many Americans would like to sit on their ass for 7 hours a day, talking to obnoxious customers? I doubt American agents would be able to handle an irate American for 5 minutes without saying "fcuk, I'm out of here!".

Let Americans waste their money. Yes, THEIR money. I can't believe they actually thought some other country is going to pay far that stupid wall.  ;D

Let Trump spends his money on that wall. Such a crazy idea could arise only in his sick head.

What if Trump hires and fires thousands of contractors to build the wall and does not pay them for their work!!

Or he funds the wall by himself and goes broke

Funny part is that Trump says 'they're gonna pay for it eventually', which we all know is not gonna happen. In the end the US citizens will pay for the wall, if it will ever come that is. A lot of republicans aren't very keen on the idea as well

I think that wall is just a warning for the ilegal inmigrant inside US, its just a expression to caused fear and sop the huge amount of ilegal mexicans into the border.

You mean that bricklayers, concrete crews, stone masons, sheetrock crews, painters, lawn maintenance....Americans don't want that work?  They wanted it until illegal Mexicans that did not pay taxes pulled these entire trades and a hundred others out of reach of the honest American.

Please stop with the broad generalizations. They don't further understanding of an issue.

Actually, the wall is the first of many to be used to keep Americans in so they don't pollute the world with their freedom ideas.

8)

Oh, I'm definitely aware of the 'fence' we currently have, courtesy of Bush. That's what the 1.5b appropriated by Congress would go to, repairing and expanding the 'wall' already in place. It was a shit idea back then, at the worst time, economically.

And the effects of our new immigration policy arr already evident. Produce has gone up (mangoes are oddly cheap though), and I'm not seeing the crews I'm used to when I drive past the colossal farms in my neighborhood.

And yes, a wall will never stop a terrorist; the whole point of terrorism is to penetrate and disturb. And, a criminal would be pretty fucking dumb to just stroll up to the border.

Anything else you'd like to say?

There must be a lot of other similar things that are ridiculous and frustrating and that you'd like to put out for everyone to hear.

Why not just rant?

1.5B for the wall, more money is coming, some like it, some don't.

Given the war zone along the US / Mexican border, might I suggest reconsidering the cynicism?

There's nothing nice about it but the likes of your attitude is defeat before the battle begins. That's the problem with ideological thinking, it does not take into account real live humans and their suffering and problems.

This is what I was thinking as too when I first heard of this wall being built.
It is just an imaginary wall that is just in the american physe an nothing more.

I don't think he'll ever fund it with his own money. More likely he'll just get people to build it - and then not pay them. He's done that before and wouldn't have paid the contractors had it not been revealed during the campaign. Abominable.

Last I heard in the news, it was a Mexican company who said they'll build the wall. Maybe that's how Trump will get Mexicans to pay for it? "Oh no, I'm not paying you, that wall is to keep you out of beautiful Murica."

It seems to me that the wall between America and Mexico will never be. Besides, if you can not go by land, migrants will be on the water. Or Trump will build a wall along the coast of the ocean. Trump is a stupid man, therefore, offering such a stupid decision problems.

The flow of illegal Mexicans must be stopped. They are not paying the taxes, and they are exploiting the welfare system by claiming child benefits for their dozens of children. Cheap labor is good, as long as they are legal.

....meanwhile, a lot of people in Europe wish they had a wall....

It is a problem of the government. Children's allowance is not paid to the illegals is not an argument. Furthermore, let's understand why they are working illegally. In my country the third part of the salary should pay in tax. Who wants to honestly pay? You need not to deal with the phenomenon, and to make sure that everything was favorable.

The illegal criminal aliens have not only taken over industries with very good jobs, because their criminal employers found it was cheaper to give them low wages and no benefits, then the government intentionally didn't enforce our immigration laws for a couple of decades.

They have also been bringing in a lot of drug resident diseases that we didn't have here.
Killing citizens with their diseases.
Would you like drug resistant TB with your fries or your produce?

Thats not even including all of the hardened criminals and yes terrorist that are coming in over our southern border, from all over the world.

The wall will be built, our border patrol will finally be allowed to do their jobs, and all of these illegal criminals need to be deported.

I don't care where you are from, if you snuck in, or overstayed a visa.
It's time for you to take your ass home where you belong.


The politicians on capital hill have been for amnesty for a long time, so yes it will be a fight.
We will replace all of them also if we need to.

A wall, just like a door is just part of our border security.

Someone can break into your home also, that doesn't mean you don't close and lock the door as a deterrent and to give you time to grab your gun.
Or call the police if you want to be a victim.


It's all a process.

It is the criminal governments of the U.S. owned by the corporations that have promoted the presence of not only illegal but legal immigrants as well.  All for their own profit and at the expense of it`s citizens.

I read Huntington's Clash of Civilizations years ago. He remarked that America is lucky that 2 of it's largest immigrant groups are easy to assimilate - Mexicans (Catholic, Spanish-speaking) and Filipinos (Catholic, English-speaking). East Asians tend to value their own distinctive culture but they're not very religious anyway (and also tend to be model citizens).

Europe really had it bad with the immigrants they got which comes from a totally different culture and practicing a religion that is pretty much antagonistic to Europe's native faith. I would somehow like to blame humanism but then again it has brought us some progress. I'll chuck up their inability to recognize the threat to their history - save for Iberia, they never experienced Muslim occupation.

No wonder the first ones to put up fences are East Europeans. They've seen the Ottomans. Once bitten, twice shy.

Well, ya. 

But not just the USA. Looks like the same underlying dynamic is at work in Europe.

Look in the direction of George Soros.

Very easy to blame it all on Soros. I understand when he has a financial interest, and what have the migrants? It seems to me that you are a victim of propaganda. Soros is no angel but not a demon to blame it all on him.

"Look in the direction" ... I didn't mean "blame it all on..."

Soros is the major proponent of Open Borders, funding many such efforts, above and below the table.

well i think we have to wait till they buy enterely that wall, they cant closed a border in that way

I can still imagine there might be some sort of wall or other wall-like border obstacle built on the US-Mexico border. What I can't imagine is Mexico paying for it like Trump wanted. No way in hell can Mexico afford such a project and not go bankrupt. Not to mention they have absolutely no interest in it.

Wait and see on that. You can bet that he will fill his promise that Mex will pay for it.

The fact that it seems totally illogical and impossible is part of why he'll be impelled to make it happen.

Even if the federal government want to put an end to this practice, the deep-blue states such as New York and California, where most of these illegals are residing, will oppose. California is perhaps the most pro-illegal immigrant state.

Save kidnapping the Mexican president and holding him at gunpoint, how do you force a sovereign nation to pay you money they don't want to? In fact, don't tell me, tell Greece and Venezuela's creditors ;)

Any tax levied against Mexico on consumer goods, ultimately hurts the American citizens that purchase said goods, because like any sane person, they will pass the difference along to us.

The fact that it's totally illogical and impossible make me fuckin nervous, to be honest. I can promise you Trump won't be there next term, any costly, unfinished wall is going to be a taxpayer issue, as we will be paying for the wall. You and me, Spend. If they build it, we will pay.

I'd rather donate to the forum ;)

How do you get welfare benefits, or any social welfare, without a valid and unique SSN? Employers can collect taxes from them, and they can pay into social security because the government rarely questions when you give it money. E-verify isn't that sophisticated apparently (which is a while different issue). But even with perfectly good faked papers (a perfect copy of a legitimate persons identity), how do you claim benefits when you have to apply, in person, with a case worker? You would need to supply pay stubs, all types of shit, too much info for a non person to generate. If they can, they probably have enough resources not to want to go on record as being in the country, given that they are here illegally. Kinda like signing up for DirectTv as a fugitive.

And did you know that White America makes up the majority of social welfare recipients? It's kinda duh, given the overwhelming majority of America is white, but it's a talking point that may have gotten lost on Breitbart.  Because we all know colored people use all the food stamps, and do all the crime.

I finally get it! Does Make America Great Again actually mean " Please get these fuckin darkies out?"

The specific proposal IIRC was to tax remittances, money sent by Mexicans here back to their families. The major revenue source for Mexico.

They do this all the time.

Bitcoin is my answer to the first objection, and for the second objection, again how? It is literally impossible, I have a relation that works at a social security office in a very rural area. While the bar is low, really low, to qualify for help, they need a valid license that they actually run for validity, a valid social, and you need a valid address I believe. If they are stealing an identity, the addresses won't match up. If they fake it, no known person. And SS has access to the DMV. There is some shit you can get just with proof of address, I must admit. But this is usually during emergency situations, like a natural disaster.

Are you sure of this, or is this just talking points? You may have valid examples I'm not privy to, I'm not discounting your experience.it's just, per my experience, they tend to check these things, it's a more one on one process these days.

As a citizen myself, the only way I could think to do this would be to steal a neighbors identity, that you know the circumstance of, and phish enough details through casual conversation to fake pay stubs, mortgage or rent documents, and birth certificates social security numbers. It's possible, but if thats the most feasible way to do this, you can't tell me that the practice is widespread.

It's too hard to compromise an identity to the extent that you could get social welfare from it. You need current, intimate details that would indicate extreme proximity. How would illegals get this proximity as newcomers?

Oh.. common... we are talking about a country where there is no ID proof requirement for voting. Once an illegal manages to enroll in the voters list, he can cast his ballot in any election.

The fairest answer is that of the hundreds of programs you generalize about, some are easy and some are hard. The very definition of "illegal" is someone operating off-the-books, using a fake SSN at the minimum. The simplest example of off-the-books theft of services is the Mexican that comes across the border to have a baby in an American hospital. Hundreds do this every day.

The real answer to your incredulity is that access to the government programs and funds is easy when those running the programs make it easy — which is the exact intent of many liberals.

Next you'll be claiming if they don't have valid ID they can't possibly enroll their children in school. Again, they do this all the time, routinely.

It may be where you go wrong is assuming the same rules apply to illegals as to you. That's incorrect. For example, you need an ID and a bank account to buy a new car on a loan. An illegal does not.

Worth mulling over, isn't it?

I'll concede that, in one of the States that doesn't ID. But being on a voter roll doesn't make you a citizen, it doesn't confer a valid ID, and it doesn't make you eligible for SNAP benefits. Even if they did manage to vote. SNAP is a federal thing provisioned by the state. The requirements are the same in all states.

BTW, don't you think it's odd that for all the millions of illegal votes, none had abnormal vote counts? How do you add extra people to a system, that only counts votes attached to a social? How can a person that is not on a voting roll, vote?

https://www.quora.com/How-easy-is-it-for-an-illegal-immigrant-to-vote-in-California

The main point is that illegal immigrants generally avoid any interaction with local, state, or the Federal government if at all possible, because such interaction greatly increases the odds that they and/or their families will be deported. About the only public organization that doesn't ask any questions are the public schools, when new kids are presented by their parents.

This unwillingness to interact with government officials has disadvantages for the rest of us (beyond driving down wages, and not being able to "ship them out"). Crimes go unreported. Illnesses go untreated until the sufferer is finally forced to crowd into an emergency room. Drivers go onto the streets without proper instruction or knowing the rules of the road.

[Regarding Bill AB60:] California attempted to address the last symptom by allowing illegal residents to obtain driver's licenses with no questions regarding immigration status. While obtaining a license, the applicant is "automatically" registered to vote, unless they opt out. Potential voters have to demonstrate proof of age, for which most people show a birth certificate or a passport, which reflects citizenship.

Even if an invalid application makes it beyond a service window at the DMV, they electronically transfer the voter registration information to the Secretary of State's office, and the state rejects those for which they have no computerized record of citizenship. So, the state gets two whacks at preventing illegal voter registration. No registration means no name on the voter lists at the balloting sites come election day.

And the kids are citizens. They get whatever citizens get

No they don't. At least where the majority in the local culture talks Spanish, and where the immigrant is Mexican.

And pray tell where would that be? A place in America where the majority speaks Spanish, including law enforcement?

????

Man it seems there's a lot of places you have not seen.

"TEAR THAT NATIONAL BARREL DOWN"
One day I was walking down to the river.
On a plane near the riverbank, I saw a barrel in upright position.
In approaching to that barrel, I heard in my left ear a voice.
When I came to that barrel I lifted myself on my feet, and leaned over the rim.
Then I heard clearly that someone is calling loudly:
„Help, my god, help me somebody!“. I said: „How can I help you, I am just a boy, fourth grader, I am only Secular God Zikalkis, not Almighty God,
 what are you doing there, I don't see you!?“.
He replied: „You can't see me, I am black, I am Obama, I am chained here at the bottom of the barrel!“
I said: „I can't reach you, maybe I push this barrel in horizontal position, but it is too heavy for me!“
He said: „Go and find first people and tell them to help you to tear this barrel down!“. OK, I said, and went upstream to look for people.
Soon, I saw two men fishing on the other bank of the river.
I shouted: „Hi!“  .... http://zikalkis.blogspot.com and http://zikalkiszik.blogspot.hr/
They said: „Shut up boy, you may scare big fish!“
I sat down, calmly, thinking to myself:“ Zik, you are Secular God, you can't shut up in such matters!“.
Then I shouted: „Hi, You, Obama is in the barrel chained and I am too weak to tear that barrel down, come and help me!“
They smiled and said: „Can't he unchain himself!?“.
I answered: „No he can't. More he moves chains more squeeze!“.
After some consultations, they said, reluctantly: „Okay, okay, boy, we are coming!“.
They booted themselves and crossed the river and followed me to the barrel.
They leaned over and said: „ We don't see anybody!“
I said:  „How can you see a black man in that darkness!“ and I said firmly: „Tear this barrel down!“.
When they heard my strong command and weak voice of Obama they pushed barrel down to horizontal position.
I went inside and unchained himself and we went out:
He said: „I see now, there is god, but I couldn't imagine that it is you!“.
„I know, I know!“ said I, „ Will you now buy me a Berliner Doughnuts!?!“.
„You merit one barrel of Zinfandel!“ said he .... hahahaha .... we laughed!
But, after 2 mandates, not a bottle of Zinfandel arrived to my realm. Reminds me of the situation when usa peoples
collected money for the pedestal for the Statue of Liberty, or for to pay financial dues to UN. Rich to no poor it gives away.
I added you as hundred .... as the song: "you are one in a million" ... or, as "i am the one with a zillion" .....

Or rather, this magical  majority Spanish speaking place in the USA, doesn't exist. And yeah, I'm a homebody. Haven't travelled since I was a kid, in earnest at least.

There are plenty of such places in the United States. For example, 37% of the population in the Greater Los Angeles area use Spanish as a home language. This figure climbs to 40% in Miami, 72% in El Paso, and 43% in San Antonio.

Get out, go where the tacos and cold beer is, and have fun. Look for streets with lots of tire and hubcap shops. You can point at menu items and be understood. The key words are Cerveza and Tacos. Those will get you by.

Don't worry you will be accepted and sort of respected as one of the old white honkies. Just don't start prattling off that liberal horseshit or someone might decide you needed a lesson. They might be right, come to think of it.

I'm colored folk, for some reason I think me and the 'hombres' would be fine, I love vibrant culture, good food, and good people that can show me something different. And tacos are fucking delicious. The carnitas ones (slow cooker pork) are the best.

Although I'm a spirits guy, beer takes too long for me. Some tequila, racist bartender!

But seriously, you are describing SpanishTown USA. These are small communities in which the majority of residents are indeed Spanish speaking, but this doesn't include the law enforcement. Given that the majority of citizens in the US are white, the majority of police are as well, proportional. Ergo, no matter if the whole city speaks Spanish; the authorities that would interact with these 'bad hombres' and 'welfare queens' would not be the same ethnicity, and therefore have no tribal affiliation.



This is similar to ChinaTown USA, pretty much x town USA where x = an immigrant group that lives over here in a community. Shit, even whites and blacks do this, people always tend to cluster around others that share their culture. Not to their exclusion, but certainly for familiarity.

We have taken a diversion, but let's return to the priori dispute. I cited something that said that illegal immigrants avoid interaction with Leo's in order to avoid arrest, you disputed this with the assertion that this occurs in majority Spanish speaking communities. I concede that there are large concentrations of immigrants in these areas, but I advance that this still does not enable them the ability to vote, because of the nature of the process, and the language preferences of the community would not influence policing outcomes, as the police are typically of a different race than tthehe suspect, ESP in this situation.
I simply cannot envision a scenario where people would risk arrest to cast a vote, that barely even matters given the nature of the electoral college.

That's what elections are all about... in small towns especially. Get your people together and elect a mayor and town council who are going to do it your way if you don't like white cops. After all, some very big cities have many black and hispanic cops... even chiefs of police.

8)

*killed the quote train, it was getting long*

But community race/police race affiliation doesn't seem to correlate to positive policing outcomes for minorities. Although they may have minority department leaders, this does not necessarily represent a more permissive environment for said represented minority. Let me cite:

http://www.newsweek.com/racial-makeup-police-departments-331130


The Washington Post has written on several studies detailing the link between police diversity and community relations. Lydia DePillis noted that a 2004 analysis of data from St. Petersburg, Florida and Indianapolis, Indiana concluded “black officers are more likely to conduct coercive actions” than their white colleagues when resolving conflicts. DePillis also references a 2006 analysis of Cincinnati Police Department records; in her words, the study found “white officers were more likely to arrest suspects than black officers overall—but it also found that black officers were significantly more likely to make an arrest when the suspect was black.”

Moreover, she writes that a 2011 Washington Post poll found that black residents rated the police department at a “relatively low 60 percent” even though “the force is highly integrated.” She also notes: “The New York Police Department’s demographics are close to those of the rest of the city, but a Quinnipiac poll from 2014 found that only 54 percent of black residents approved of its performance. The Detroit police department is so dominated by African Americans that it’s been sued for discrimination against whites, and yet only 18 percent of black Wayne County residents approved of its work in 2009.”

This is just one place, but I'm suggesting that having a minority leader doesn't indicate sympathy for the policed community. The policing institution is much older than the recent uptick of diversity than it has experienced.  I'm not suggesting there is not truth to what you are saying; I'm suggesting that the prevalence of this would be miniscule at best. If this was where the illegal voting happened, they would not be able to have much of an influence, given the size of the communities. An abnormal number of votes in places like this would be really obvious as well. And there would still be Republican oversight in these places even if in minority. They would not stand for that bullshit, and rightfully so.

This is actually true. One of my friend who doesn't know Spanish stayed in El Paso for a week and he was like hunting for English stores. Learnt lots of Spanish words, we were wondering whether he went to Paso or Spain..

Spanish explored and settled the southwestern US a long, long time ago. Think in terms of starting in the 1600s.

Again, not arguing there is a significant Spanish speaking population in places in the US. If there wasnt, we wouldn't be having this conversation. I'm simply saying that the illegal.immigrants aren't walking up to the voting boths, because of the risk of detection and subsequent expulsion. I'm here hiding, and I'm trying to sneak into a government office to falsely ID myself, to vote?  That seems very unlikely to me. The article was stating that; Spend was saying that this isn't true in majority Spanish communities. I then asked for a community to be identified that would have a majority Spanish population, with the law enforcement being Spanish as well, as per BADs addition to the argument. Because I'm saying it's interaction with the government that gets you sent home; people trying to avoid going home have probably learned to largely avoid the government.

But yes, to concede your point, it is thick with Mexican immigrants in some places, just Latin Americans in general. Parts of Florida are like that too, and even when I was a kid, when I went to Texas to go to AstroWorld (6 Flags? It's been so long) I saw a bunch of really pretty Latin girls; it was my first time seeing so many Latin people in one place. I'm from Louisiana, was used to the local phenotypes ;) if diversity means pretty ladies, then dammit, put this fucker in a blender, my man.

Two words...

"Sanctuary Cities."

Side note - Realistically, El Paso and Juarez form one large interconnected community, the existence of a national border down the middle is largely irrelevant. The people are the same.

That's just one town, one example.

Alright, I will concede that point. I did some research on the actual policies of said sanctuary cities. I can concur that the diminished level of cooperation with federal authorities would technically constitute police assistance. But, take this with the grain of salt that this is law enforcement officers disagreeing with other, different law enforcement officers. The sanctuary policies aren't intended to harbor violent criminals, but I can see that the refusal to cooperate fully does cause 'gaps' so to speak, that allow violent immigrants to persist for longer than they should. However, I don't think the police allow crime to proliferate; I think they just aren't cooperative with federal law enforcement. Those monolithic Spanish communities you were talking about earlier? Cops rely on them to self report. The sanctuary city idea incentivized reporting of the actual bad hombres by the populace, to fill the gap in policing that I was trying to point out earlier. If they don't feel the need to cooperate with authorities, policing gets so much harder.

And none of that has to do with the fact that non citizen voting is really, really hard. Sanctuary city concept encompasses criminal deportation rather than voting issues, it seems. The protections that prevent double voting, prevent illegal voting. Otherwise, fuck illegals, people would just do this domestically if it were so easy a non citizen could do it. People would pay people to double vote, to hell with lobbying. You could literally buy the vote per citizen, or make the people up/steal identities yourself to influence the vote.

The reason you can't vote twice easily, is even more reason why an illegal can't. Do you see what I am trying to say?

If you can do this so easily in sanctuary cities, why havent underground conservative forces used this apparently very replicable technique to remove illegal influence, and restore balance?

This is a typical argument propagated by various liberal media outlets. But research shows that a lot of the illegal immigrants do vote, especially in the deep blue states. And deportation is not a big deal. It is a joke. Check this:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/05/11/lennox-lake-california-boy-hurt-dui-crash-illegal-immigrant-who-was-deported-15-times

God protect the little girl. That's pretty tragic. But will a wall prevent someone that is this incentivized to come back? 15 times.  And I don't think those 'bollard walls' would do to much to stop a chap like this.

We would probably do well to simply jail them here. The assumption of non prosecution would largely dissappear, and the fear of a lengthy US prison sentence would dry this shit up but quickly. Would be expensive, but hey, we already jail minorities at a disproportionate rate; let's just switch up the demographic. I'd rather see violent offenders and repeat offenders in jail, than low level drug offenders. We are reembracing private prisons again despite the progress we had made moving away from this model; let's lock the real bad hombres up. Fuck deportation.

But dammit, show me this voting evidence! We keep getting tangential. I'll even take a biased article, I just need the talking points so I can investigate myself.

In the deepest blue States, does voting oversight not exist? Even at a federal level? How are illegal immigrants getting on voting rolls, when they aren't citizens? Save absentee ballot abuses, this is the only way to vote. How come, for all this sanctuary/deportation/crime rhetoric, no one can still explain to me how people with no identities vote in appreciable numbers, at the risk of incarceration?

If what you are saying is true, ICE should just camp elections. They could get millions of immigrants, no?

Hell yeah the argument is common. Common sense. It has a familiar taste because it's rooted in facts and reality, to the best of my ability. My argument has nostalgia because it's valid, you have indeed heard it before, from other sources that tried to present you with a factual truth. Like non partisan research tanks. And mainstream media outlets. But this reliance on biased news sources, to exclusion, is going to be y'alls undoing.

Reject my argument piecemeal. Dissect it. Destroy it. I want the clarification, not just the refutation:

Explain the mechanism by which illegals vote

Identify and describe the Democrat introduced legislature that enables this alleged behavior (here's a hint, try non citizen ID laws, it's a common rhetorical point on this from your side)

Describe a specific geographic region with characteristics that could facilitate illegal voting

Any of these weakens my argument, but does not invalidate it. Show me my error.

A better option would be to enter in to a deal with some third world nation for housing the criminal immigrants, just like what the Australians did. If the illegal commits a crime in the US, then he will serve his jail time in Uganda or Nigeria.

Have you thought why third world countries need in their country have found refuge thousands of criminals? No amount of money will justify itself. Besides, all criminals tend to organize gangs, and this is a threat to the state.

Google is your friend. Don't expect people to waste their times on things that are patently obvious.

In the spirit of argument, not vitrol, can you provide just a singular source? My friend Google has told me that you are on that bullshit, and I believe him.

Is is that you won't, or that you can't?

And dammit man, join a goddamned Sig campaign, I want to see you profit. I enjoy your opinions, even though I disagree with them. It's a big enough world for both of us.

Ever been to a precint meeting? Or stood around and watched a bit at voting?

RE Sig, no thanks. I am self employed and work for income.

No. I don't think that these criminals pose a threat to the third world nations. They will remain in the prison during their jail term. Once their sentence is over, the criminals will be deported back to their own countries. The third world nations which house them will gain, in the form of increased employment and financial grants.

Yezzir. Keeping said inmates here would simply eat up our tax dollars, as you can't deport them with a bill (we should though). I'm all for it, we spend a ridiculous amount of budget supporting the private prison system, let it actually help us, for once. Besides, Sessions just got tough on sentencing, and CCA just went ham building new illegal immigrant detention centers. I think they are preparing ;)

But yeah, this is all about security.

well the longer it takes I think the less chance that this will be I fruitition. I agree with all your points dude especially that we're billingmexico for this thing. it doesn't make sense why they would agree to do so and would they do if the mexicans don't pay for it :D

I think so as well. This from the beginning seems a bit to comical to come true and to have the Mexican government pay for it would make it almost impossible for Trump's supporters to see implemented. It can probably be done if we're paying but I think there are a lot more things and issues that warrants attention and funds aside from an ambitious wall

Donald Trump's wall is simply pandering to the masses. He is reading his own press. He cannot truly believe that building a wall will seriously address the complex issue of immigration. He cannot be that shallow, right? He speaks like he has always done, like he is still on his own TV show. He reigned supreme on his show. He decided on who would stay and who would go. He talks like that is exactly how he would run the country. And people are falling for this? How does he expect to run the country like this? He cannot simply impose his rule on the country and decide what is good and what is bad. Makes him no better than what we already have. So, back to the question. No. I agree with some of the other comments here...the Berlin and Great Wall, great answer and he cannot fire Mexico because they won't do what he wants them to do. Put more effort into making the process of legal immigration more attainable in less time. Maybe more people would follow the rules.

I don't think that the Mexicans have any choice other than paying for it. If they refuse to pay, then Trump will impose duties on products from Mexico. A lot of people (especially the factory workers) will be left jobless in Mexico.

Let Trump spends his money on that wall. Such a crazy idea could arise only in his sick head.

United states of america has a lot money to waste them on this stupid wall. Let Donald Trump build this unreasonable wall. But This wall will bring his end at the end of the day for sure.