If Republicans don't want border enforcement then WHY did Texas do what they did?

[Zippy]

@Eagle-Keeper

Actually that’s not the case. All this bill does is say that there’s the authority to partially suspend asylum (remember the border NEVER actually closes) if phony asylum seekers reach ridiculously high levels.

It really must suck to hold onto a philosophy that you continually must lie to defend.

[STODR]

Someday maybe they will learn watching The View for their news might be a mistake…

[tnt]

@STODR

@tnt

What does that have to do with the asylum threshold enshrined in law?

An effective process was already in place Biden cancelled it.

OK.

But it has nothing to do with this bill raising the threshold for asylum.

@STODR

@tnt

Why don’t we give the border it’s own budget instead of taking money from other departments?

It already does have a budget. If it needs more prioritizing it over other budgets is the answer not adding more debt. Libs say all the time cut DoD budget for example. Not to mention it should be a stand alone bill . If libs were being an honest broker they would put it out there. Or bote on the one sitting on Schumer desk.

Then it must need more funding if they have to take money from DoD to get what they need.

Maybe a well funded border would be more secure…

@STODR

@tnt

Huh?

If they pas a law allowing the executive that power, then the executive can exercise it. Just like we have done with foreign drug lords, and countries hostile to the US

Really you think congress can pass a power to authorize the president to go into another country and seize property?

Who said anything about ‘going into another country and seizing property’?

You know we seize property all the time, right? From drug lords, and sanctioned countries oligarchs.

Of course it’s US based properties and assets - bank accounts, real estate, yachts, cars…

@STODR

@tnt

No he doesn’t.

Wow, he can by EO, maybe you should move on because you obviously don’t know ■■■■ about this subject. For example

Read your link:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) and section 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 8 U.S.C. 1185(a)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

Go ahead and google one of those laws and see what the authorize the president to do.

[Zippy]

@STODR

Someday maybe they will learn watching The View for their news might be a mistake…

Doubtful. They are drawn towards echo chambers for their narrative.

You see how they can’t handle someone disagreeing with them just from the nonsense they post here.

[Camp]

[STODR]

@tnt

But it has nothing to do with this bill raising the threshold for asylum

What is shows we don’t need a new law.

@tnt

Then it must need more funding if they have to take money from DoD to get what they need.

Maybe a well funded border would be more secure

They might but the money is out there, use that we don’t need to print more.

@tnt

Who said anything about ‘going into another country and seizing property’?

Sorry. I assumed from your post below you meant forgien property because I didn’t know you actually thought the executive doesn’t already have that power here. That is what I get for giving you some credit.

@tnt

THe president does not have the authority to seize foreign fenteynal dealer’s properties or to sanction them without legislation.

[tnt]

@STODR

@tnt

But it has nothing to do with this bill raising the threshold for asylum

What is shows we don’t need a new law.

You don’t want it to be harder for people to claim asylum?

I do. I think it will take pressure off the system. Fewer people waiting in the US or in Mexico should that system be put back in place.

@STODR

@tnt

Then it must need more funding if they have to take money from DoD to get what they need.

Maybe a well funded border would be more secure

They might but the money is out there, use that we don’t need to print more.

How do you know DoD didn’t need the money diverted to the border?

@STODR

Sorry. I assumed from your post below you meant forgien property because I didn’t know you actually thought the executive doesn’t already have that power here. That is what I get for giving you some credit.

@tnt

THe president does not have the authority to seize foreign fenteynal dealer’s properties or to sanction them without legislation.

Instead of turning a mistake into an insult, you could try just saying "i misread your post’. but then that wouldn’t be you, would it?

Have you read those laws that give the president authority to seize property yet?

[Oldandtired]

What you’re failing to admit is that the democrats are liars. They have shown over and over that what they say is not what they are going to do once they get what they want. Plus, the bill does nothing to shut down the border. If the President can shut down the border after 5,000 plus a day enter. He can shut down the border so no one enters.

[Zippy]

@tnt

do. I think it will take pressure off the system. Fewer people waiting in the US or in Mexico should that system be put back in place.

LOL.

Claiming that they want to fix the same situation that they have caused.

[DMK]

@Rodeo

Imho Biden’s border disaster amounts to criminal negligence.

I agree. If those parent’s can be charged with involuntary manslauter for their neglegence in buying their son a gun that murdered people, why can’t Biden be held liable when an illegal kills a US citizen?

[tnt]

@Oldandtired

What you’re failing to admit is that the democrats are liars.

It was the republicans who said they wanted Ukraine and Isreal aid linked to the boarder.

Turns out they lied.

[Tguns]

Three years of ignoring the border issue, claiming there is no crisis…suddenly replaced by a sense of urgency when the polls begin to sour.

That’s what 80 some odd million voters electing a drooling imbecile results in.

[Zippy]

@Tguns

That’s what 80 some odd million voters electing a drooling imbecile results in.

Including dead people

[RTchoke]

@tnt

@Oldandtired

What you’re failing to admit is that the democrats are liars.

It was the republicans who said they wanted Ukraine and Isreal aid linked to the boarder.

Turns out they lied.

Turns out your being a little dishonest as to why. Imagine that.

[WuWei]

@Eagle-Keeper

@leomax

and it’s essential to consider a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of migration.

That’s what VP Harris was tasked with very early on in their term.

And didn’t even attempt.

[johnrandolph]

@Adam

@SixFoot

Lots of bots lately. Great way to drive up the page loads.

Have you ever actually looked at the number of people who actually visit and post here? It is interesting to see it over time.

A few short years ago this was a very active place with many, many more people participating. It is now just a small shadow of itself. I think this was done intentionally.

[SixFoot]

Now that’s juicy!

[SixFoot]

@Camp

That’s how they deal with US citizens now.

[Smyrna]

@tnt

Instead of turning a mistake into an insult, you could try just saying "i misread your post’. but then that wouldn’t be you, would it?

Have you read those laws that give the president authority to seize property yet?

You keep ignoring that you’re a Russian collusion, Mueller illusional, BLM delusional…Brandonite that has no credibility left regarding their opinion. You’ve proven yourself to be wrong over and over. Now this comes up and guess what? @tnt has another opinion.

[Smyrna]

@johnrandolph

A few short years ago this was a very active place with many, many more people participating. It is now just a small shadow of itself. I think this was done intentionally.

The good news for me is, thanks to the popularity of our host, libs still come projecting their useless thoughts regarding the issues of the day and I love spanking them with their Brandonite stupidity.

IOW…