Black Dog Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 8 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Correct me if i'm wrong but isn't 're-entry' having been turned away once and then coming BACK into the country after being told not to? That's not "merely crossing the border". That's a much more serious crime. Yes it's "merely crossing the border" more than once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Rebound said: Republican Senator James Langford this week stated on the Senate floor that he was told by a powerful Republican influencer that he would “destroy him” if he votes to solve the immigration crisis during this election cycle. And Langford stated that they have been trying to do just this. (Video of his speech below). The Dems are not trying to "solve" the immigration crisis, so there's no worry of that happening. If the Dems wanted to solve it that had all of 2017 through 2023 to do it. This 11th hour hackjob is just an election gimmick they're also just trying to use the border issue to pry more money free for Ukraine. Quote The Republicans do not want to solve the immigration crisis. They want it to continue so that they have a “crisis” they can complain about. All you are is an endless stream of id10tic talking points. Would it kill you to just try facts one single time in your life? You might enjoy it, and Trump/Poilievre could use another vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 2 hours ago, Black Dog said: Yes it's "merely crossing the border" more than once. TBH, if that many people are re-crossing the border, it's sad evidence of just how little respect illegals have for the system, and how much faith they have in the Dems letting them get away with everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: TBH, if that many people are re-crossing the border, it's sad evidence of just how little respect illegals have for the system, and how much faith they have in the Dems letting them get away with everything. Or maybe they're just that desperate, has that possibility crossed your mind at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 This is a really good take by Ann Coulter regarding the border crisis. THE FALL OF ROME, UPDATED - Ann Coulter REFRESHER: Reagan won the Cold War three decades ago. It’s over, move on. (Incidentally, at the time, liberals were firmly on the commies’ side.) But conservatives are play-acting that it’s 1941: They view every peasant uprising anywhere in the world as if it’s the next Hitler, and only America can stop him! None of these upheavals are the Third Reich. But more important, it’s our country that’s being invaded — by bands of destitute, culturally backward people. We were worried about Germans? If they’d invaded, at least things would work. Now we can’t even maintain the roads, subways, electrical grids and sewage systems built by previous generations. We didn’t have to worry about a third-world invasion during World War II because we weren’t a welfare state. Until LBJ’s Great Society programs, any preliterate people who wandered into our country would starve to death. Now we lure them here with free iPhones, hot meals, hotel rooms, airline flights, housing, gigantically expensive medical care and the promise of welfare for life. All paid for by you, taxpayer. Fall of Rome, modern edition: The Romans offered the barbarians free iPhones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 35 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Or maybe they're just that desperate, has that possibility crossed your mind at all? Not really. The only real places that they need to run from in South/Central America are the places where the drugs are that are headed into the USA, and if they get into the USA, they'll end up living in the areas where the drugs were smuggled to. There are a lot of places down south that are better to live in than Oakland, Baltimore, and other cities that the Dems have run into the ground. Add San Fran to the list I guess. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 3 hours ago, Black Dog said: Yes it's "merely crossing the border" more than once. More than once isn't "Mearely" crossing the border anymore. Now you're knowingly breaking the law without even the excuse of asylum or refugee status after having been refused. That's a serious crime. Hint - putting the word "Merely" in front of something doesn't make it ok You might as well say "merely" raped a girl. Repetitively violating a country's laws is not 'merely' doing' something 42 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Or maybe they're just that desperate, has that possibility crossed your mind at all? Your argument is that "it was ok that they committed a serious crime because they really really wanted to". Yeah - that's not how it works 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, CdnFox said: More than once isn't "Mearely" crossing the border anymore. Now you're knowingly breaking the law without even the excuse of asylum or refugee status after having been refused. That's a serious crime. Hint - putting the word "Merely" in front of something doesn't make it ok You might as well say "merely" raped a girl. Repetitively violating a country's laws is not 'merely' doing' something It wasn't my word choice, it was this guy's. Quote Your argument is that "it was ok that they committed a serious crime because they really really wanted to". Yeah - that's not how it works No, thats not my argument, but you're gonna make up whatever bullshit you want anyway so what's the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 minute ago, Black Dog said: It wasn't my word choice, it was this guy's. Fair point and as noted for the first crossing maybe that's fair, But to quote you, You DID say it was 'merely crossing a second time". Well .. the second time is more serious. You've been told to get out and now you're violating that, Quote No, thats not my argument, but you're gonna make up whatever bullshit you want anyway so what's the point? It was the argument you made, but you seem to have a habit of changing your argument when you're challenged on it. But - in the interest of fairness go ahead, why don't you clearly spell out your argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, Black Dog said: It wasn't my word choice, it was this guy's. 1.You clearly missed the distinction between crossing once, and maybe getting some form of asylum, and crossing again after you were denied for whatever reason. 2.The thread is about crimes by non-Americans in America. Leftists contend that those crimes are mainly just border crimes, and I entered into that discussion with you guys on your own terms. I even broke down your own stats for you. I conceded that a lot of the crimes actually are at the border, and then pointed out how many of them are the kinds of crimes mentioned in the OP. The difference between illegally crossing once and illegally crossing after you know that you are not allowed was Cdn Fox's distinction, completely separate from my point of just crossing, but his point has its own merits which you need to take up with him. Don't act like I ever said crossing after you were already kicked out once was no big deal. I didn't do that at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: 1.You clearly missed the distinction between crossing once, and maybe getting some form of asylum, and crossing again after you were denied for whatever reason. 2.The thread is about crimes by non-Americans in America. Leftists contend that those crimes are mainly just border crimes, and I entered into that discussion with you guys on your own terms. I even broke down your own stats for you. I conceded that a lot of the crimes actually are at the border, and then pointed out how many of them are the kinds of crimes mentioned in the OP. The difference between illegally crossing once and illegally crossing after you know that you are not allowed was Cdn Fox's distinction, completely separate from my point of just crossing, but his point has its own merits which you need to take up with him. Don't act like I ever said crossing after you were already kicked out once was no big deal. I didn't do that at all. About that.... 3 hours ago, WestCanMan said: So 72%+2%(misuse of visas)=74%, let's make it an even 75% of their crimes are just for border crossings, and they commit 65% of the federal offences. That makes 1/4 of their 65% of all their federal crimes the serious types of offences we're talking about here. If we knock that 65% down by 75% it's still 16.25% of all these types of crimes. Are 16.25% of the people in the US "non-Americans"? I don't think so. It seems like they're punching way above their weight class. You know the actual numbers are in the report, including a breakdown by offence type. Quote Non-U.S. citizens, who make up 7% of the U.S. population (per the U.S. Census Bureau for 2017), accounted for 15% of all federal arrests and 15% of prosecutions in U.S. district court for non-immigration crimes in 2018 Of those 21% were for fraud, 23.5% for drugs. Like illegally border crossing, both of these strike me as crimes that are largely specific to the circumstances of the population and not the population in and of itself. Violent crimes represented 8.8% of the total, which is not all that disproportionate to the total population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 28 minutes ago, Black Dog said: You know the actual numbers are in the report, including a breakdown by offence type. I didn't bother to look back, but yes it does say "re-entering". Tsk tsk. SOOOOO bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: I didn't bother to look back, but yes it does say "re-entering". Tsk tsk. SOOOOO bad. The point here is if one wants to claim, as the OP's article does, that "illegal aliens with criminal histories and those who commit crimes within our borders pose a threat to the safety and security of American communities" citing statistics that show 98% of the offenses committed by immigrants are directly the result of their immigration status is not the way to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 20 hours ago, WestCanMan said: It's hilarious how quickly you guy change your stance to align with your party's bogus narratives. 👮♂️ Hold on there, dum-dum. I'm entirely consistent. I'm a Law and Order conservative. I've been calling for stringent laws against illegal immigration in Canada since forever, as well as less immigration overall. And the one thing I agreed with Trump about was securing the US southern border. My position hasn't changed one bit over the years. Unlike the Republican party and Donald Trump, who no longer wish to secure their southern border. For some reason. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 4 hours ago, WestCanMan said: The Dems are not trying to "solve" the immigration crisis, so there's no worry of that happening. If the Dems wanted to solve it that had all of 2017 through 2023 to do it. This 11th hour hackjob is just an election gimmick 👮♂️ Hang on there, Dum-Dum! You're on the fringes of something almost correct! The Democrats want to solve this damned issue so Trump and the Republicans can't use it against them in the election. Which meant they were weak, vulnerable. The Republicans pushed hard during the negotiations and got almost everything they wanted! It would have been a great victory in halting the influx of illegals the Republicans have been harping on. Then The Donald spoke. He wants this as an election issue. Kill the bill. Of course, in his clumsy way he has actually screwed the usefulness of having this as an election issue because now the Dems can all shout back "We had it solved and you said no!" Further. More than a million more people will come into the US because of this. Which means some people will die because of this. Some people will die crossing the border. Some Americans will be killed by those crossing the border. Because Trump, in his clumsy way, wanted to use this as an election issue he could hammer Biden with. But now it's no good. Just like people are dying in Ukraine right now because they don't have the ammunition and weapons Trump is holding up to please his master, Putin. Human beings, men and women are dying and will die all year because of Trump's venal political hopes and corruption. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 7 hours ago, Deluge said: There's no need for legislation. The President just needs to secure the border, and Texas is showing Joe Biden how to do it. You have no idea what's going on on the Texas border. Nor how much it's costing Texas (billions). There's no evidence it's working. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/record-number-migrant-border-crossings-december-2023/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Black Dog said: The point here is if one wants to claim, as the OP's article does, that "illegal aliens with criminal histories and those who commit crimes within our borders pose a threat to the safety and security of American communities" citing statistics that show 98% of the offenses committed by immigrants are directly the result of their immigration status is not the way to do it. It didn't show that at all. The stats are just on the other page there. Go look again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, I am Groot said: 👮♂️ Hold on there, dum-dum. I'm entirely consistent. I'm a Law and Order conservative. I've been calling for stringent laws against illegal immigration in Canada since forever, as well as less immigration overall. And the one thing I agreed with Trump about was securing the US southern border. My position hasn't changed one bit over the years. Unlike the Republican party and Donald Trump, who no longer wish to secure their southern border. For some reason. Hold on there dum dum. If your IQ is over 8 then you know that the Republicans actually do try to get immigration handled. Trump was like a salmon swimming upstream for his whole presidency while Dems, leftards and the MSM mob all cried 'racism'. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted February 9 Report Share Posted February 9 1 hour ago, I am Groot said: 👮♂️ Hang on there, Dum-Dum! You're on the fringes of something almost correct! The Democrats want to solve this damned issue so Trump and the Republicans can't use it against them in the election. Which meant they were weak, vulnerable. The Republicans pushed hard during the negotiations and got almost everything they wanted! It would have been a great victory in halting the influx of illegals the Republicans have been harping on. Then The Donald spoke. He wants this as an election issue. Kill the bill. Of course, in his clumsy way he has actually screwed the usefulness of having this as an election issue because now the Dems can all shout back "We had it solved and you said no!" Further. More than a million more people will come into the US because of this. Which means some people will die because of this. Some people will die crossing the border. Some Americans will be killed by those crossing the border. Because Trump, in his clumsy way, wanted to use this as an election issue he could hammer Biden with. But now it's no good. Hang on there dum dum, I was absolutely correct. The Dems don't want this solved or it would have been solved millions of illegal immigrants ago. In fact, they would have been millions of illegal immigrants ahead if they just did nothing when Biden got into the WH. As usual, he put his stupid, dementia-victim hands on something and turned it to crap. I guess you could say has the Mid-ass touch. FYI their bill doesn't fix anything. It's a white elephant. Spend billions, achieve nothing. Quote Just like people are dying in Ukraine right now because they don't have the ammunition and weapons Trump is holding up to please his master, Putin. Human beings, men and women are dying and will die all year because of Trump's venal political hopes and corruption. Blah, blah, blah. People are dying in Ukraine because Biden got "elected". This guy's talkin' to you, Groot: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deluge Posted February 9 Author Report Share Posted February 9 (edited) 5 hours ago, I am Groot said: You have no idea what's going on on the Texas border. Nor how much it's costing Texas (billions). There's no evidence it's working. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/record-number-migrant-border-crossings-december-2023/ Better to make an attempt than to roll out the red carpet, which is what the sack of shit Biden is doing. No, Texas is doing it right. When Trump gets back into office, he'll continue his work while the hair sniffer dies in some rest home. Edited February 9 by Deluge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 9 Report Share Posted February 9 42 minutes ago, Deluge said: Better to make an attempt than to roll out the red carpet, which is what the sack of shit Biden is doing. No, Texas is doing it right. When Trump gets back into office, he'll continue his work while the hair sniffer dies in some rest home. I suspect that's kind of the point - the news papers were being pretty silent about the whole issue. Now they're finally covering it at least a little bit and the difference between biden and trump in this regard is being spoken about. He's just increased trump's election chances by a not-insignificant amount and if trump gets in he'll owe him some real action on the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deluge Posted February 9 Author Report Share Posted February 9 9 hours ago, CdnFox said: I suspect that's kind of the point - the news papers were being pretty silent about the whole issue. Now they're finally covering it at least a little bit and the difference between biden and trump in this regard is being spoken about. He's just increased trump's election chances by a not-insignificant amount and if trump gets in he'll owe him some real action on the border. Biden let a lot of criminal invaders in, so Trump will definitely have his work cut out for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted February 10 Report Share Posted February 10 19 hours ago, Deluge said: Better to make an attempt than to roll out the red carpet, which is what the sack of shit Biden is doing. No, Texas is doing it right. When Trump gets back into office, he'll continue his work while the hair sniffer dies in some rest home. The bill Trump told the Republicans to turn down - which was mostly a Republican bill - would have paid for more detention facilities so they didn't have to release asylum claimants into the country, would have paid to hire more border patrol officers, to hire more asylum officers and immigration judges to speed up asylum claims so they didn't have to just catch and release them, and it would have raised the bar for what qualified for asylum. It also would have given the president the legal authority to close the border, to summarily remove people who cross into the US illegally. Now, suppose you tell me what about any of that you don't like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 10 Report Share Posted February 10 32 minutes ago, I am Groot said: would have paid for more detention facilities so they didn't have to release asylum claimants into the country Putting remain back in place would eliminate the need for more detention facillities and STILL not allow people into the country. You're not very good at this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godzilla Posted February 10 Report Share Posted February 10 On 2/8/2024 at 4:05 PM, WestCanMan said: Hang on there dum dum, I was absolutely correct. The Dems don't want this solved or it would have been solved millions of illegal immigrants ago. In fact, they would have been millions of illegal immigrants ahead if they just did nothing when Biden got into the WH. As usual, he put his stupid, dementia-victim hands on something and turned it to crap. I guess you could say has the Mid-ass touch. FYI their bill doesn't fix anything. It's a white elephant. Spend billions, achieve nothing. Blah, blah, blah. People are dying in Ukraine because Biden got "elected". This guy's talkin' to you, Groot: no cites. no break down of logic. just name calling. you and @Delugeional are a lovely pair on this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.