Smugglers are sawing through new sections of trump’s border wall

[Vigilante]

@Hexenbiest

In the countries in Hungary and Israel yes, in America no its not even started and maybe never will.

One can simply gloss over the facts of the effectiveness of walls but the stats tell a different story. From the Hungarian Police website look at that drop in in illegal immigration after a set of two border fences were put up, it does have an effect. It went from 140,000 crossings a month to like 100 a month.

Is that a map on how to get over the wall. I heard they were just cutting through with battery operated recip saws from Home Depot on sale for $69.99

[Guvnah]

@DMK

What is a business to do when someone comes in with falsified documents only to later find out they were had?

I have always held that a business can only go by the documents presented. If E-Verify approves, the business has no further liability on that.

[Tim]

@WuWei

I’m going to laugh when this turns out to be horse ■■■■■

What I find amusing about this “gotcha” OP is that this “bollard” design (it’s not a bollard fence) is the less effective option demanded by Dems during budget negotiations. Secondly, if the wall isn’t needed because few people sneak across the boarder, why are people cutting through it?

[mollyBrown]

@conan

Does this pleasing libs?

Proving Donald either wrong and or lying is pleasing for me. It happens so often, but never gets old.

[DMK]

@FloridaYankee

That’s exactly the kind of proof I’m talking about. If they do some due diligence, you can’t come down too hard, but those that knowingly hire illegals need to do ten days in jail, regardless of how big a corporate team of lawyers might back them up or whatever. Simple, effective.

What is too hard? A guy who paves driveways is supposed to understand all of this? It just is not reasonable.

IMO, however, if that guy hires an illegal and it can be proven he did so intentionally? 10 days does not suffice for me. Loss of licence and inability to form a new corporation for a 5 year minimum would be okay with me.

[calirepub]

If Trump had gotten the moat filled with alligators that he wanted this wouldn’t be happening. Yet another thing we can blame the Dems for.

[LucyLou]

@calirepub

If Trump had gotten the moat filled with alligators that he wanted this wouldn’t be happening. Yet another thing we can blame the Dems for.

So tell me why the good people of Texas haven’t already stocked the Rio Grande with alligators?

[WorldWatcher]

@DMK

@FloridaYankee

You don’t have to take their damn business away to slap them upside the head, sheesh. That really would be fascist.

A rather ignorant statement of the poster you quoted. What is a business to do when someone comes in with falsified documents only to later find out they were had?

.^
.
.
Part of holding businesses responsible is putting a system in place that would catch such things and the current I-9 system ain’t it.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS

[WorldWatcher]

@DMK

@FloridaYankee

They had better be able to prove that they were had of course.

At what cost to a small business? An business that employs 10 people isn’t that sophisticated.

IMO, if e-verify gives you the go ahead then e-verify should be responsible for all fines and penalties that result in the hiring of an illegal with falsified documents.

.^
.
.
We run background checks on 100% of our employees (we have 3000-4000 employees) and it costs us a one time fee of about $40 per new hire for a background check.
.
.
Before E-verify will become a real option a couple of things need to change/be incorporated.

1. States need to integrate their DMV/Tax Records/Vital Records (births, deaths, etc.) into the system.

2. E-verify needs to be integrated into IRS records based on current tax receipts from employers.

3. E-verify responses need to be tiered such as (a) not eligible and (b) warning. Not eligible being that the person being hired is dead or doesn’t exist in the system. A warning might be a flag that says this person applying for a job in New Mexico is currently employed by a company in Texas. Which would be fine as people can change jobs. But if payroll is received for the same individual in multiple pay locations from different geographic areas, then the employers should be notified and required to determine a status.

4. E-verify needs to be mandatory for any business subject to federal tax law. The business will receive electronic notification which they would be required to keep on file for the life cycle of the employee (hire to term or retirement + 3-years) and the E-verify system of course would retain their own electronic copies of transactions. Failure to comply should result in a minimum fine for each willful violation equal to 2 times the wages paid per employee per year to make hiring illegal aliens economically unfeasible. Willful violation being (a) not processing an EE through E-verify or (b) ignoring a not-eligible response. Such fines to be applied for a small scale violation, large scale organized violations should be treated as felonies.

5. The “system” also needs to incorporate an appeals type system to be address individual case-by-case issues that might arise. I can see this needing to be a two tiered system. “Priority Corrections” that allows for someone to review a case quickly, determine if their is a problem, and initiate corrections. Then a “Board of Corrections” for more difficult situations with board able to issue legally binding replacement documents if needed.
   .
   .
   .
   .WW, PHS

[WorldWatcher]

@DMK

At what cost to a small business? An business that employs 10 people isn’t that sophisticated.

Oh and BTW - for small companies that aren’t that sophisticated there are Security Companies already that perform such services as background checks at reasonable fees.

If E-verify becomes accurate and mandatory companies will add E-verify processing as part of the services they offer.
.
.
.
.WW, PHS

[Yossarian]

@Tim

What I find amusing about this “gotcha” OP is that this “bollard” design (it’s not a bollard fence) is the less effective option demanded by Dems during budget negotiations.

Link?

Thanks in advance.

[DMK]

@WorldWatcher

We run background checks on 100% of our employees (we have 3000-4000 employees) and it costs us a one time fee of about $40 per new hire for a background check.
.

I’m completely on board with e-verify and I speak to this as a small business owner.

Are you speaking to over 50 employees? What about those with less? Loopholes?

@WorldWatcher

E-verify needs to be mandatory for any business subject to federal tax law. The business will receive electronic notification which they would be required to keep on file for the life cycle of the employee (hire to term or retirement + 3-years) and the E-verify system of course would retain their own electronic copies of transactions. Failure to comply should result in a minimum fine for each willful violation equal to 2 times the wages paid per employee per year to make hiring illegal aliens economically unfeasible. Willful violation being (a) not processing an EE through E-verify or (b) ignoring a not-eligible response. Such fines to be applied for a small scale violation, large scale organized violations should be treated as felonies.

[LouC]

@Apocalypto

Meanwhile, companies and individuals are still hiring illegal immigrants at a record pace with no repercussions whatsoever.

Mexico was smart not to pay for the wall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/smugglers-are-sawing-through-new-sections-of-trumps-border-wall/2019/11/01/25bf8ce0-fa72-11e9-ac8c-8eced29ca6ef_story.html?outputType=amp#click=https://t.co/goqEgophsg

I also heard they invented something called a ‘ladder’ that also appears to work.

FAKE NEWS

Donny reassured us that the border wall, aka bollard style steel fencing, was “virtually impenetrable” and built like a “Rolls Royce” that bad folks can’t get “over, under, or through”!!!

FAKE NEWS

[thinkingman]

@Apocalypto

Meanwhile, companies and individuals are still hiring illegal immigrants at a record pace with no repercussions whatsoever.

Mexico was smart not to pay for the wall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/smugglers-are-sawing-through-new-sections-of-trumps-border-wall/2019/11/01/25bf8ce0-fa72-11e9-ac8c-8eced29ca6ef_story.html?outputType=amp#click=https://t.co/goqEgophsg

I also heard they invented something called a ‘ladder’ that also appears to work.

ok so not going through ports of entry then?

[Mountain_Soldier]

@AlexMcAlpine

@merickson

Given a bucket with a hole in 1% of the bottom, how much water will it hold?

False analogy. Why ignore the statistics Hexenbiest cited?

But the real way to have illegal immmigrants stop coming is to punish businesses that hire them. As in take their businesses away. Slaps on the wrist are never going to work.

Make it a felony to be in the country illegally. Prison time. Have a felony on their record, make them unhirable.

[LouC]

@Tim

@WuWei

I’m going to laugh when this turns out to be horse ■■■■■

What I find amusing about this “gotcha” OP is that this “bollard” design (it’s not a bollard fence) is the less effective option demanded by Dems during budget negotiations. Secondly, if the wall isn’t needed because few people sneak across the boarder, why are people cutting through it?

The fence is a bollard style steel fence, that is what it has been called all along until Obese Donald made it be known to call it a “wall”.

It is of a design that DHS and CBP requested.

What OP “gotcha”?

It certainly isn’t of any design idiot Trump came up with.

The $11 Million he wasted having 8 Trump “big beautiful wall” prototypes built in the dessert east of San Diego resulted in “0” designs fitting DHS-CBP requirements, all 8 prototypes “failed”.

The prototypes were subsequently bulldozed and removed because they had been built in the path of the bollard style steel fencing that had already been planned to be built in that area.

[LouC]

@Mountain_Soldier

@AlexMcAlpine

@merickson

Given a bucket with a hole in 1% of the bottom, how much water will it hold?

False analogy. Why ignore the statistics Hexenbiest cited?

But the real way to have illegal immmigrants stop coming is to punish businesses that hire them. As in take their businesses away. Slaps on the wrist are never going to work.

Make it a felony to be in the country illegally. Prison time. Have a felony on their record, make them unhirable.

Make it a felony to knowingly hire illegal aliens, I agree, Some prison time and having a felony on their records just might keep it from happening again!

[FloridaYankee]

@LouC

@Mountain_Soldier

@AlexMcAlpine

@merickson

Given a bucket with a hole in 1% of the bottom, how much water will it hold?

False analogy. Why ignore the statistics Hexenbiest cited?

But the real way to have illegal immmigrants stop coming is to punish businesses that hire them. As in take their businesses away. Slaps on the wrist are never going to work.

Make it a felony to be in the country illegally. Prison time. Have a felony on their record, make them unhirable.

Make it a felony to knowingly hire illegal aliens, I agree, Some prison time and having a felony on their records just might keep it from happening again!

I still think a mere ten days for first offenders, automatic if they are found to have knowingly hired an illegal, is sufficient. Automatic, mandatory, no lawyers can save you.

[LouC]

@calirepub

If Trump had gotten the moat filled with alligators that he wanted this wouldn’t be happening. Yet another thing we can blame the Dems for.

Not really! Donny is the master at the art of the deal, he should have made the Dems head spin with his deal making abilities in getting budget money for his moat with alligators. Hell he is so artful at deal making the moat should have been made of real Italian marble and the gators come with gold capped teeth!

You can’t tell me a bunch of dumb ol’Dimocrats kept Artful Donald from getting what he wanted now!

[SottoVoce]

It looks like Trump’s monument to himself will still be more effective than he has been. Although having a slip and slide as a border wall would still be more effective than his presidency. And less disgraceful.