WestCanMan

The facts I linked were in direct response to you questioning whether or not Trump was doing what he said he was going to do when he was running for election. So my facts are actual facts and if you're being honest you will acknowledge that they were spot on. https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762 Yes the deficit is growing. It was going down in the early stage of Trump's first year, until he passed the tax cuts, but the government is still bringing in more revenue than it was under Obama despite the tax cuts. If you research and understand the Laffer Curve you'll see why govt revenue is up even though the taxes are "lower" now. You laugh at "restoring confidence in and respect for America" but it's actually true. The entire country was experiencing widespread rioting, looting and arson and racial tensions were incredibly high in Obama's last years. Remember? Cops were getting murdered in groups and he linked their deaths to slavery which was abolished well over a century ago. Would you have travelled to Baltimore or Ferguson or a dozen other cities for the last year Obama was president? When people got gassed in foreign countries despite Obama's warnings they merely faced his indignation. Islamic state was growing despite Obama's "best efforts". China stole what they wanted and ran the trade table. NATO relied on the US and no one was spending their fair share. Other countries might have liked Obama more than Trump, but that's not always a good thing and in this case it wasn't. Trump has made headway against China. So there's always that, right? Or does some progress just count as nothing? China is becoming a bigger and bigger problem and it has nothing to do with Trump. They were on this path for a long time. The thread states something, but that doesn't make it true. It's just a symptom of people watching and believing too much of what CNN is belching up, not an actual prognosis of what's happening in the US. People are getting jobs, getting off food stamps, and prospects are much brighter for the average citizen under Trump. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, and I know that you'll want to focus on the 2% who are worse off than the 98% who are better off, but that's normal for liberals. There's no holding them to rational dialogue.

I think you must know I was talking about more than just the China incident there. India, the US, Trudeau's last visit to China, and everywhere else he goes. He waves at empty airports, and he gets greeted at the airport by Agriculture ministers.... They basically send a donkey to pick him up lol. i wonder if you see the irony of you being critical of my post just because I was critical of Princess Glitterfarts. Are you forgetting that you just admitted to being a terrorist sympathizer a couple of hours ago? If you were a bit smarter you wouldn't admit to being a terrorist supporter while you're voicing your support for Trudeau in this forum. I think you must frequent a few sites where you can openly proclaim your love of Justin Trudeau and your love of terrorist attacks against the US together, but this isn't it. There are still a lot of people who support Trudeau who would change their tune if they understood where his sympathies lie. You shouldn't be helping the avg Joe make that connection.

It's hilarious how Trudeau tries so hard to suck up to every political leader on earth, and how he just continues to make things worse. He's like the dorky guy who tries too hard to be friends with people and just ends up being harder to like. His picture should be in the dictionary beside the word obsequious.

You have no idea how much people here hate Trudeau. If he gets re-elected the possibility of Alberta separating will be very real. I would personally vote for separation with no reservations whatsoever.

I answer everything you say directly with facts and you come back with more insipid accusations: "Trump is making the USA worse", "a trade war with China is unnecessary and unwinnable and it's hurting his base", blah, blah blah. Is the USA really worse with low unemployment and an increased military budget, among a whole host of other things that are on the two lists that I linked above? Can you explain how the US is worse in any specific way? You do know that even Chuck Schumer admits that it was important for the USA to stand up to China re: trade right? He's the last guy on earth to blow sunshine up Trump's exhaust pipe, so if even he says that then who are you to say different? And without anything more than your own opinion. LMAO.

You say "the zionists are going crazy with bloodlust" and you're insinuating that I'm not telling the truth and that I'm a bigot? Can you even see the shit you just typed???????????????? Do the Israelis have a stated goal of genocide against Palestinians? Can you answer the question about why there are no Pakistani refugees? You have no answers, you jump from stupid accusation to lie to stupid accusation and then you repeat the cycle. FYI we have good friends from Jordan and Lebanon. We know people who are here from Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you know what they all have in common? When war comes to their towns, and they leave in the middle of the night with whatever they can carry with them to their car, they call it a "vacation". My wife's best friend did that twice. If you know people from there then you know I'm telling the truth. In Afghanistan the Taliban go around the town enforcing that women have their windows closed. If they can see women in their own homes through their windows they'll come f them up. No woman can walk around without a hijab or they'll be raped and beaten. Even in the more "civilized" places like S Arabia women aren't allowed to go outside without hijabs. In Iran they just threw women in jail for taking their hijabs off. Muslims don't just commit genocide against Hindus, Christians, Yazidis, atheists and Buddhists, the Shia do it to the Sunni and vice versa. There are more terrorist attacks between muslims than from muslims against other religions. If you are trying to tell me that you can't see that there are ridiculously violent people all over the middle east spoiling for fights with each other then you're just lying. How on earth can you see Syria as being more peaceful under Obama than Trump? There was no war there when Obama became Prez. He told the UN he wanted Assad out. He armed rebels. The war started. He said it would last years. When Trump said that he could defeat islamic state in months Obama said it was impossible. TRUMP WAS THE PRESIDENT WHO MOVED AMERICA'S STANCE FROM "ASSAD MUST GO" to "THE WAR IS DOING TOO MUCH DAMAGE, ALL WE WANT NOW IS TO GET RID OF ISLAMIC STATE". That was one week before Assad gassed his own people for the first time since Trump was President. We all know what happened when Assad gassed those people. We all know how quickly islamic state stopped growing and started shrinking after Trump took over. If you like peace in Syria, thank Trump. Not Obama. That's just truly idiotic. If Iran had the power that the US military had do you think you'd be free to choose your own religion? Do you think that you'd be allowed to go on the web and talk crap about the Ayatollah? You're insane dude. You literally have no clue about life in general.

Don't lecture us on "the evils of western civilization" vs "the religion of peace" thing unless you want a whole shitload of truth buddy. And don't think you can hide behind bill m-104 or whatever it is either. It's not going to pass the glass houses test. Did the muslims need to invade India because of Donald Trump? Were they retaliating for NATO bombs while they were in the process of chopping off tens of millions of people's heads? Estimates go as high as 100 million people slaughtered. That's not because of a viral outbreak indiscriminately killing people either, that's heads chopped off. That's a whole lot of evil intent, or else it's "trying not to harm people" gone incredibly wrong. When Pakistan was formed, did they kill millions of people and systematically rape 300,000 women because they don't like harming people? How evil do you have to be to join that gang? Did the muslims not invade southern Europe for 400 straight years before the Crusades started, taking slaves and force-converting people? Do you refer to the Crusaders as "Freedom Fighters"? If so, then congrats. If there was going to be a "universal symbol of mass systemic rape" would it not be the hijab? Because over the last 14 centuries, all over the muslim world, lack of a hijab has been the cause for the rape and murder of women. Like I said, if you want to sit there and paint western culture and America as villains, just be prepared for a whole shitload of truth.

Wow. You don't think that Assad had chemical weapons, but you admit that they used them on people who were the enemies of the Syrian government? 'Splain plz.... And you think that Obama didn't want Assad out? Despite his speech to the UN? Saying directly that Assad had to go? You think that Obama is a hero for working with Iran, the place where women go to jail for taking off their own hijab, and Russia? Then you must think it would be cool if Trump colluded with Russia? Or you must think that Russia would never collude with Trump because the Russians are friends with the Democrats? OOH plz fill us all in Monty! Has peace come to Syria? It seems like peace was in Syria before Obama elected. Call me crazy. So you call islamic state "freedom fighters", and they wanted to win their freedom by beheading journalists and committing genocide against the Yazidis, because the Yazidis were somehow a threat? And you say the US "had it coming" for 9/11? Ladies and gentlemen, this is what's going on inside the mind of Trudeau's staunchest supporter here at MLW. Soak it up. That's why we call him Justa Traitor.

1) If Canada doesn't sell them the weapons then someone else will. We need the money now that our idiot PM is killing off entire sectors of our economy. 2) The US understands that you don't need to "start" wars in the middle east, you just need to sell them weapons and they'll do it themselves. And bringing the entire m.e. into your sphere of influence would be like herding cats. Even if you accomplished it momentarily you could just count the minutes before some new group kills off the other groups to seize power, or someone turns on you. How many different people and groups were trained by the CIA or some other branch of the US military machine, just to eventually become their enemies? Eventually the Kurds will join some army or other to fight against the US. We helped train them too. You can blame Obama for the policy to oust Assad, and for the rise of islamic state. Or at least for the power vacuum that allowed islamic state to grow. Hate groups spring up in muslim countries faster than sand dunes. Interesting but not surprising to see that you're on the side of Assad & Putin, and that you're also a Trudeau supporter. The only thing that's giving me any cognitive dissonance is the fact that Trudeau supporters are usually Obama apologists as well. How can you be a Trudeau supporter and yet hate Obama policy? It's like you're a sheep, but maybe a bit lost? You need to tune back in to Al Jazeera for further programming. And fwiw Putin/Assad kill people over there too. Don't act like they're innocents compared to the US. LMAO. If I could just probe the mind of a prominent America hater for a sec.... Why do you think there are still Palestinian refugee camps after 70 years? Obviously the people who fled there could have walked all the way to South Africa and back a few times by now. Israel is only about 1% of the land mass of the Arabian Peninsula and all the other countries there share the same culture as the Palestinians.... Can't they find homes? Millions of Syrians re-settled and that war just started a few years ago. Pakistan was formed at almost exactly the same time as Israel and yet there are no Pakistani refugee camps. Can you explain all that within the context of why we should really hate America and the people of the middle east have a really awesome culture?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed There are two lists of his work since he became president. So the answer to your first question is a resounding yes. Trump hired a campaign finance guy who helped win elections in the past. It's wise to do that. Do you think he needed to work with a guy who knows the ins and outs? Do you know that Trump knew Manafort had committed crimes? People don't usually brag about that, just like there are no 265 lb guys walking around admitting that they took steroids. Do you think that Trump isn't trying to get the wall built? He shut down the government. If that's not trying I don't know what is. It's not like when Trudeau "tries" to get a pipeline built, while he's going around the world saying that they're phasing out the oil sands, as if it's good for business. Why is the stock market tanking? That's a stupid question that you already know the answer to. Because of a trade war with China. Trump is doing what Obama should have done, and what even Chuck Schumer was praising him for. Protecting American intellectual property for starters. And by "tanking" do you mean "why is it only 4,000points higher than it has ever been now"? If you think that NAFTA now is almost unchanged since Trump came in then that's your own issue. Ford and GM alone have reversed the trend for moving out of America. They won't admit that it had anything to do with Trump, but it was pretty sudden. I've never said that Trump wasn't a sleazeball. He's just way less of a sleazeball than Hillary Clinton. In a perfect world Trump wouldn't be president. In a perfect world the whole middle east wouldn't be a shithole. Our PM wouldn't be racking up debt, killing jobs, paying huge gobs of cash to terrorists, insulting Canadians and saying that we have no culture. Etc, etc. Trump isn't below avg for a politician in terms of sleaziness, the media just hates him like they hate all Republicans. They hated Bush Sr too, they just suddenly liked him when he died. Yes I admit to things and I tell the truth iznogoud. Weird hey?

Why can’t we sell arms to the Saudis? Are you being a racist or a religious bigot?

Trudeau is a complete and total idiot, and it seems as though he's doing his level best to destroy the country by simultaneously destroying our economy and racking up massive amounts of debt. In his attempt to be the next J Chretien, Trudeau stopped bombing Islamic State. He also elevated returning Islamic State members to the level of "returning soldiers" by refusing to recognize them as war criminals, even when they brag about it. He even gave Omar Khadr $10.5M of our tax dollars when it wasn't his place to do so and it was done erroneously (there was also no precedent for that kind of money going to an actual terrorist, because other accused terrorists who were awarded settlements were actually found to be innocent). It was an insult to Albertans to take billion$ in equalization payments, kill the economy, drive away over a hundred billion in investment, and then offer a $1.6B loan. How about if you give me $10M and then I get you fired and give you a $16K loan? I don't know who called you a commie, or a socialist, but I don't see evidence of that in the few posts I read. I'd say you're naive and that you're intentionally ignorant because you love virtue signalling. You are being disingenuous by saying "accepting" people in, when you're really talking about people muscling their way across the border whether we like it or not, and then staying on the public tit for life if they so choose. We're all immigrants of some stripe unless we're 100% native, but our forefathers came here, learned the language, and then worked or starved. They also obeyed the laws and didn't demand that the majority changed their ways to be less offensive to them. Skin colour isn't a problem for anyone. Culture is a problem. Just like you have a problem with Republicans because they don't believe in open borders, other Canadians have a problem with "accepting" people in who don't appreciate our way of life or our freedoms, we don't like being taken advantage of, we don't like terrorism, we don't like people who support genocide and we don't like our laws being challenged just because they're not medieval enough. People who are happy to contribute to our economy and respect our way of life are welcome. It's important to have some "Republican types" who insist on maintaining our values and upholding our standards. It would be ridiculous to just let people in here when they have the intent of draining the economy, being involved in criminal activity, or changing our way of life for the worse. I know that you call that racist. I call it understanding that freedom and democracy are still just an experiment, compared to thousands of years of the various forms of authoritarianism all across the planet. Look around the world and think about how many countries there are that you would actually call free or truly democratic. What percentage of the earth's population live in countries that aren't free? We're a minority, and not by skin colour. It's by our form of government and way of life.

Your accusations of bigotry are pathetic and shallow. The reality is that you're just refusing to see facts because you'd rather do some virtue signalling than deal with real world issues. Conservative priorities have everything to do with helping people in need, but we are more interested in helping those who are most afflicted than helping the ones who make us look good. What did you think of your precious LIBERAL government government while they were staunchly refusing to admit that Daesh (that's the term that Trudeau uses for Islamic State, it's just a middle eastern acronym for Islamic State) was committing genocide until the UN (the 2nd most useless organization on the planet, after our own Liberal party) begrudgingly admitted it? What do you think of Trudeau's policy to allow war criminals back into the country without facing prosecution, even when they brag about it on the radio? As a Liberal you should kinda hate those types of people, no? Your ignorance of American population demographics and their electoral system is duly noted, and your accusation of racism is again pathetic and shallow.

Blah, blah blah. trump used Manafort just like other Republicans before him. He had a sleazy lawyer to cover up his affairs. He lied about his affairs. So what? Democrats don't care about that stuff either. There's a difference between lying about personal affairs and lying about matters of state. Hillary cheating in the Dem primaries and the Presidential debate are both bigger than any of Trump's "lies". Ditto for her lying about Benghazi, lying about her email servers, and deleting subpoenaed evidence. Trump supporters don't consider him a liar because he's doing everything that he said he would do when he was running for election. If Trudeau had run on decent campaign promises, stuck to them, and lied about a couple of affairs that he had our country would be far better off.

So then you're admitting that you're being completely disingenuous when you keep on referring to the "30 indictments" and insinuating that they're all somehow proof that the Trump administration colluded with Russians to influence the election. That's the frustrating part about watching CNN or debating with liberals, is that you always know they're saying things that they know aren't true, and jumping from topic to topic so that they can't be pinned down to any one lie. It's like you're chasing a wagon that's on fire, putting out little flames to the left and the right and then eventually you just give up on it/them. Here's the thing about the meeting that Trump's son attended - it was completely legal and moral from every angle that you look at it, and you'd have to be an idiot to think otherwise. Even by the information contained in the emails surrounding it. People offered to meet with the Trump campaign to give them information about crimes by Hillary and/or her campaign. It wasn't illegal for them to go and listen to evidence of a crime, at all. Not immoral, not shady, not slimy, not underhanded, at all. People offered it, they accepted the chance to listen. You could make a better case that it was their duty to listen to the information than it was a crime to listen to it. It also makes sense for them to get the information themselves and not to trust the FBI to properly act on it when you look how Hillary's email/destruction-of-evidence investigation was handled, along with the "random, coincidental tarmac meeting where they only talked about the grandchildren that Bill Clinton doesn't even have". Juxtapose: [Trump's son accepting an offer from Russians to listen to information of a crime and doing nothing more than just that] beside [Hillary covertly paying a law firm (Perkins Coie LLP) to secretly transfer money to Russians through a foreign agent (Christopher Steele - who was subsequently fired from the FBI for leaking information and lying) so that they will dig up information or make up stories that you will then submit to a FISA court, presented as independently verified and corroborated evidence even when you know that it is not verified and some of it is untrue and that the corroboration was faked by the aforementioned disgraced foreign agent who gathered the information, to get a warrant to spy on Americans.] I'm not being the least bit disingenuous, or intentionally inaccurate, or skewing this story by omitting key details. I could even add that when Peter Strzok was asked to start this investigation he freely gave his own opinion of it's validity to his girlfriend via text message, and he didn't think much of it. That's the "there's no there there" text that I posted about, along with a link, earlier in this thread. I could also add that Strzok and his boss were both demoted/fired for their own malfeasance since this investigation started. Funny when you think about Steele getting fired for leaking/lying, and Comey leaking/lying and then saying that "he couldn't remember" over 240 times during his recent deposition, and Hillary saying that she couldn't remember over 40 times during her deposition, and McCabe being fired for tampering with official FBI witness statements, and Strzok being demoted for his blatant bias and documented proof of his own bad intentions, and then you think that these are all the main characters behind this whole Russian collusion investigation. All of the accusations I made are pretty severe, yet easily verifiable. There's no obfuscation, inaccuracy, deception, misrepresentation or anything else untoward in this post. I'm being extremely forthright here. If there's anything I know thats connecting Trump to Russian collusion I'm not withholding it. As far as I know the only connection between Trump and Russian collusion so far is the dossier, which seems to be bogus and made up for political reasons by Hillary (who we all know for certain to have cheated in the Dem primaries and the presidential election debates) and the host of unscrupulous people mentioned above. Do you blame me for being skeptical? On "your side" people are getting fired and demoted and getting caught cheating, lying under oath (is it possible that Comey and Hillary don't remember anything at all when they're in court and yet they have perfect recollection the next day? Are they the only two humans in history to share this crazy medical condition?) etc etc, and they're buying testimony from criminals by reducing their prison sentences on crimes which are all completely unrelated to Russian collusion. On Trump's side there was no evidence or indictment against Carter Page - the target of the original FISA warrant. Nothing has surfaced against Trump or his sons. None of them have been proven to have lied about Russian collusion. Trump didn't rig the primary or cheat in the debates. Where's the beef? It's been more than 2 years of nothingburger (to use Van Jones' apt turn of phrase) It seems like you just have this big unholy alliance behind Mueller, and not much else. My faith in American justice would be somewhat restored if Trump was actually found to be guilty, but I will still be extremely skeptical of any "evidence" turned up by those guys now. And I find it incredibly disturbing that so many people are still considering him to be the guilty party here, up against Hillary. She's the known liar/cheater/misogynist and to this day the only American known to have colluded with Russians in the 2016 election. Honestly, people still talk about Hillary like she could run for President again when they KNOW THAT SHE CHEATED AND LIED HER WAY THROUGH THE ENTIRE 2016 ELECTION!!!!!! How stupid do you have to be to think she has even a shred of integrity??????????? Like completely brain dead. Nothin goin on, at all. Do you notice that all of her lies are material ones, directly related to her capacity to act as commander in chief, and her ability to rise through the ranks to almost get elected POTUS??? Trump's biggest lies regard his inability to say no to Playboy bunnies. That's not related to his ability to be President at all. In a perfect world he wouldn't be President, but the other option was Hillary, and you know that only an idiot would vote for her.

He's not a criminal if Trump colluded with Russians, but if there was no evidence of Russian collusion and they kept on renewing the FISA warrant then he's a criminal. It's pretty basic.

Yup. All those zombies were programmed to believe everything they see on CNN, and since they were told "THERE'S A 90% CHANCE THAT HILLARY WILL WIN THE ELECTION!!!!" they can't wrap their heads around the fact that it didn't happen. All those useful idiots just hopped right up on the Russian collusion bandwagon on day 1 and they're still there over 2 years later. b_c, you should sell some Mueller blankies down there. That would be a hoot.

Iznogood, Hardner - you guys seem to be on the same page re: the 30 indictments and their direct links to Trump. Can either of you explain how even two of these indictments directly relate to Trump? I’ll even count the ridiculous confession to campaign finance violations for the NDAs as one. You just need to come up with one other thing. Can you guys describe how even one of those indictments ties Trump to Russian collusion?

Yes, a criminal. The bridge to becoming a police state is crossed when a bogus investigation is opened on an individual just to find evidence of some sort of crime. To this point there’s no evidence that the “crime of colluding with Russians” was ever committed, yet a FISA warrant has been issued and then renewed 3 times. The warrant isn’t even supposed to be renewed unless more evidence of the crime under investigation has been found. No new evidence was ever submitted to the FISA court on subsequent renewals. So, it’s going to be obvious that the FISA court was mislead at some point. Iznogoud you keep referring to all these indictments that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP OR RUSSIAN COLLUSION! It just reeks of a deep ignorance and an inability to process iformation that’s being force-fed into your brain. Think about this: if the FBI opens an investigation into your son, and they arrest some of his associates for things that they did ten years before they ever knew him, and they offer those people reduced sentences to testify against your son, do you count that as evidence that your son committed a crime? Will their testimony in court seem fair to you? Is that what the police are really supposed to do? If they arrest Michael Cohen for fraud that’s got nothing to do with your son, and offer to take twenty years off his sentence for his testimony, do you think a guy as sleazy as Cohen won’t make shit up to get two decades of his life back? This isn’t the same as arresting a guy in a crime family for something that they all did together, and reducing his sentence for that crime just to get the whole group. It’s giving someone a break on unrelated crimes for what could possibly amount to false testimony on a crime that never happened. This is still at the level of “ most likely bullshit” and you’re portraying it as gospel truth. Theres still absolutely nothing to relate what all those random people did with Russian collusion. The fact that you say it did means nothing. Not even Mueller himself has ever said that there is evidence of Trump/Russian collusion. He just says that people are cooperating with his “investigation”. His investigation is just into whatever he can find, or get his stoolies to fabricate.

If they actually prove Trump colluded with Russia then good on Mueller. If they don’t then Mueller is a criminal because the FISA court was misled, among other things. Not to mention the fact that this crap has gone on too long with too little evidence and too many grand accusations have been made. Not one person has been indicted on a single charge that has anything to do with collusion. The only person known to have colluded with Russians at this stage is Hillary Clinton. Mueller needs to shit or get off the pot.

Trump’s antics have been pretty boring lately. Hard core anarchists are experiencing some cognitive dissonance right now because they’re actually working for big government when they throw on their Antifa masks and run amok. That money they’re getting comes from Dem backers. When you say “real lefties” what do you mean? Are there people further left than princess glitterfarts? Or do you find him to be a bit of a fascist?

So it comes down to “I think that all the stuff they say on CNN will come true one day”? Cmon dude. Theyre such useless pieces of crap it’s way past the point of just being ridiculous. Honestly two years in, just a handful of riots and all but 1 was by belligerent Dem supporters, and CNN can’t find a single nice thing to say yet? How about “we don’t miss the constant rioting, looting and arson that plagued the country for the last two years under Obama”? How about “Trump sure did a good job of cleaning up Obama’s mess in Syria. Obama sure did overestimate the length of time that would take!”

Again, no specific instances of lying. I could say Morning Joe and his wife lied 6,257 times this year and it means nothing without specifics. Again we have Dem apologists referring to anonymous sources, unproven allegations with no evidence, and repeating other unverified stories. The only thing that they specifically mentioned was Trump saying something about Hillary colluding with Russians. They were really only implying that it was a lie but it wasn’t a lie at all. If Trump was found to have given a law firm money for them to secretly pass along to Russians and Brits for stories to influence the outcome of the election you’d all be screaming “Mueller hit the jackpot! That’s collusion!” We all know Hillary did that. Why is it “a lie” to call that collusion? Those idiots even tried to say it was illegal for Trump’s son to agree to just meet with and listen to a Russian who claimed to have proof of Hillary’s crimes. How is it illegal to agree to hear evidence of a crime? If so, isn’t it worse to offer to pay the same people to go looking for a crime that no one even knows about? Mueller hasn’t got anything like Hillary’s actions on Trump, Dem morons are saying Trump is guilty all the time. Where’s the lie clicker? Is it at ten billion yet? Nope, because just like the Nazis, the Dems believe that if you tell the same lie enough times it becomes the truth.

There are a lot of places where the natural land formations make a wall unnecessary. It’s not every single inch of the border. Walls just work better. You don’t need to separate families like Trump and Obama did. You don’t run the risk of re-uniting children with human traffickers like Obama did (check Snopes). You don’t have to send thousands of troops to the border to stop large migrant caravans all the time. No large-scale detentions and the subsequent processing of claimants, etc, etc. It’s reasonable to begin the discussion at “x number of kilometres of wall” but not at “walls are racist, so we will use drones, helicopters, K-9 units, thousands of border guards, and immigration officials all around the country but then we won’t deport people anyways”. How stupid do you have to be to follow Nancy and Chuck’s line of thinking? It’s just mindless drivel with some baseless accusations. Ie, Dem politics 101.

Grow up iznogood. If you can’t point to any specific instances of lying then you can’t make the accusation. You need to be accurate and honest when you make a serious claim like that. I get that it’s normal practice for a lot of people these days but I tune those people out, as should you. When I talk about CNN or CBC or CTV lying I at least point out the specific instances instead of making an unsubstantiated generalization.