Third Party & Independents Archives

Trump Will Now Have to Bear the Burden of 'America First'

You can consider the latest frantic back ‘n forth between Trump and Congress on the border wall and the remaining funding bills as somehow lurching the country towards a Christmas crisis, in the words of The Hill’s John Bennett. Or you can see this as Trump finally taking on, in a way he hasn’t really yet, the way business is done in Washington. That is, it’s a case of Trump finally implementing policy the way he sees fit.

If you believe process is fundamental to how deals are struck in DC, then yes, it's easy to get hysterical about what will be a shutdown of maybe a few weeks. But Trump ran on a tough immigration policy with a real wall across the Southern border. Washington feels he should do the math, play the game, strike a compromise and forget about the voters who sent him to the White House.

But Trump has refused.

Apparently, the President listened to the calls of his critics who actually agree with him on border security. So, now we will have a shutdown, which is hardly a real crisis. Some government employees will stay home. Some government services will be limited. So what?

There's of course another part to this Christmas tale: one that has sent the foreign policy establishment into fits of fury. Trump's withdrawal of around 2,000 troops from Syria and his announcement of a withdrawal of most of America's force in Afghanistan - around 7,000 troops. Which has resulted in Defense Secretary Mattis' resignation.

This is not merely a lurch by a showboating celebrity president, however. As much as most media - conservative included - are viewing it that way.

This is a change in how America views its role in the world. One that Trump has been advocating since before he ran for president and one which he has actually done little to implement since assuming office, in part because of the influence of people like Mattis and Kelly. People who are now both gone.

The foreign policy establishment would have - and mostly do have - America's armed forces in nearly every corner of the globe (save Latin America for the most part) wherever there is instability or Islamic terrorism. From Yemen to Nigeria, from Central Europe to the Korean peninsula. From the Artic circle to North Africa. From the Eastern Pacific to the South China Sea. American military forces spend resources and lives to try and solve the world's problems.

This is big government writ large with blood and treasure on the front lines. So the question is:

In whose interest is this? How does this help America?

The answer, of course, is the global trading system. And the prosperity it has distributed rather unevenly in the financial, high-tech, and entertainment capitals of the world.

And the political analogy that is repeated over and over again is that of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany's rehabilitation after WW II. An analogy that plunged the Middle East into war and division beyond anything seen before the Second Iraq War. It's as if all these aging baby boomer hawks are trying to capture what their (our) parents did during WW II. And so far, failing for the most part.

America has never wanted to assume the mantle of imperial power the way Rome, Spain and Great Britain did. They were powers that were convinced of their role as civilizers and willing to conquer and kill and die to prove their point. But more than that, they were willing to stay for generations or even centuries in order to civilize other states and cultures. This is something that's not a part of America's DNA even as it has fulfilled the role of an imperial power in many ways over the last century.

And it is precisely this ambivalence about America's role abroad that is being exploited by Russia and China. So, America has to decide how it will move forward. As one of several "great" powers? Or as the lone, civilizing superpower? A much more comfortable term than imperial power.

Trump has pushed this question onto center stage just as we are about to celebrate Christmas and its message of peace, renewal and forgiveness. And Trump may not be the president to solve this question of America's role in our troubled globe. But the question had to be asked forcefully. And Trump has now done that.

He has in fact, assumed more rather than less responsibility in so doing. History will likely show that this is now the case, even if he does not at the moment realize it. Or is unwilling to assume that responsibility.

By breaking with the foreign policy establishment Trump now has to stand alone and justify his America First foreign policy with a limited cadre of experts to back him up. This may very well have been needed, especially in places like Afghanistan. But he's unleashed a process which may devour his presidency in the end.

Posted by AllardK at December 24, 2018 11:31 AM
Comments
Comment #436109

For most of my seventy-eight years of life on the planet, the United States has been at war, or in a foreign police action, in a peace-keeping role, or in some other excuse for military intervention. War grabbed two years of my life.

I am tired of war and military adventures in “shit-hole” parts of the world that are best left alone.

Politicians beat the war drum with regularity. They want war. War is good for politics. War is good for the military industry.

But, war is hell for the rest of us. And war rarely brings lasting peace.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2018 4:04 PM
Comment #436111

Royal Flush, I agree.

The U.S. has been at war for 93% of the time (225 of 242 years as of 2018), and the U.S. has military bases in over 70 countries, and a military presence in 150 (of 195) countries (not including the Navy or Marine Corps at sea).
There are still 40,000 U.S. Troops and 179 U.S. bases in Germany alone.
There are still 50,000 U.S. troops and 109 U.S. bases in Japan.
How long can the U.S. afford all of that?
The U.S. cannot afford to be the world’s police.

I am OK with pulling 2,000 troops out of Syria, because ISIS has been diminished significantly, and Syria should be able to handle it from here.
Staying longer is endangering U.S. troops unnecessarily.

The U.S. should also reduce or eliminate some of the military bases in over 70 countries, and reduce our military presence in 150 (of 195) countries (not including the Navy or Marine Corps at sea).

The U.S. cannot afford to be the world police.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 4:19 PM
Comment #436112

I agree d.a.n. We must diminish our military presence all over the world. Our troops in Japan and Germany are a total misuse of military force and assets; as they are in many other parts of the world.

I am sad for the innocent folks caught between opposing bullies in many of these places.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 24, 2018 4:32 PM
Comment #436114

I am in favor of a new, short war. I agree with pulling our troops out of countries that can take care of themselves. I’m in favor of pulling our troops out of countries who don’t want us there. But I think there is one war that would be in our best interest of conduct. The optimistic view of this is that we have already defeated this country. So, within limits, this should be a cake walk.

We should go to war with Mexico. We should step across the border, secure the northern states of Mexico from the drug cartels, ally with the friendly Federal military and create a buffer our military can secure.

We would accomplish three things. 1) we would secure our southern border without using the military within our borders, avoiding the Posse comitatus laws. 2)we would be protecting the citizens and military personnel of the northern Mexico states and the citizens of the southern U.S. states by eliminating the criminal cartels that dominate these states. 3) we would eliminate the human, drug, and $ex trafficking that is staged in these northern states.

Let’s use our military to protect our own country by creating a buffer zone between our country and our aggressors by occupying the northern states of Mexico. They are mostly desert and not highly populated. We can establish a border hundreds of miles wide to prevent the tunnels and extend the wilderness routes to make them impossible to utilize.

We’re not afraid to wage war. We just want our wars to be worthwhile and have a positive outcome. A war with Mexico can be won to both country’s benefit.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 5:20 PM
Comment #436117

Weary Willie, Do you think Mexico might agree to let our military help Mexico fight the cartels, without pre-emptively invading Mexico? The U.S. is already sending a lot of money to Mexico to help fight the drug cartels.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 24, 2018 7:07 PM
Comment #436128

They don’t appear to be making any headway. Police and politicians are being murdered by the dozens. Dismembered heads appear in the street and mass graves turn up frequently. It’s worth opening a dialog. They scratch our back, we scratch theirs.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 9:49 PM
Comment #436130

We have DEA in Columbia. They work in an intelligence gathering capacity. They’ve been there since 2000 and have spent 7 billion dollars. If there, why not in Northern Mexico?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 24, 2018 10:02 PM
Comment #436181
Or you can see this as Trump finally taking on, in a way he hasn’t really yet, the way business is done in Washington. That is, it’s a case of Trump finally implementing policy the way he sees fit.

What an illogical thought. The right wing would have us believe that the President is the King and the Congress is the court that nods approval to the King. But lets not forget it is Congress that makes laws and the president either signs the bill into law or vetos the legislation. Seems to me Congress should put the bill forth as they see fit and then Trump either signs or vetos it. All this finger pointing could be avoided.

But Trump ran on a tough immigration policy with a real wall across the Southern border. Washington feels he should do the math, play the game, strike a compromise and forget about the voters who sent him to the White House.

If only he had won the majority of voters, but he didn’t by millions. The rest of us deserve representation not just “Trump voters”. The border wall was promised by Trump to be a wall paid for by Mexico. Now he is trying to stick the taxpayer with it, talk about big government. To bad the twit cut taxes and blew up the deficit so bad. IMHO we need infrastructure bills passed that rebuild our out of date bridges, road, sewer and water lines. Not Trump’s ego wall at the border.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 26, 2018 6:43 PM
Comment #436182

Weary Willie, I do not think invading Mexico is a good idea, when the U.S. is buying the vast majority of drugs flowing into the U.S. from Mexico. Also, the U.S. should reduce or eliminate some of the military bases in over 70 countries, and reduce our military presence in 150 (of 195) countries (not including the Navy or Marine Corps at sea).
There are still 40,000 U.S. troops and 179 U.S. bases in Germany alone.
There are still 50,000 U.S. troops and 109 U.S. bases in Japan.
How long can the U.S. afford all of that?

I think the following is a better approach:

  • [1] Secure and continuously monitor the borders; the cost to do so will be far less than the $279 -to- $296 Billion in annual net losses due to illegal immigration (source#1: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jan/23/donald-trump/does-immigration-policy-impose-300-billion-annuall/ ; source#2: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/21/mass-immigration-costs-govt-296-billion-year-natio/ ; source#3: fairus.org/search?keywords=cost+of+illegal+immigration );
  • [2] Pass laws to require eVerify (and/or similar services) to verify eligibility for employment in the U.S., and harshly prosecute greedy illegal employers with harsh fines that double, triple, or quadruple for subsequent violations, with jail-time for the administrators and/or owners of companies who are repeat offenders, and despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for profits;
  • [3] Arrest and deport ALL criminal illegal immigrants that have committed felonies; some criminal illegal immigrants are too dangerous to release since they could return; many illegal immigrants will self-deport when all of the magnets that attract illegal immigrants to the U.S. are eliminated;
  • [4] Protect U.S. citizens’ benefits and privileges, and deny those benefits and privileges to all illegal immigrants (i.e. welfare; food stamps; free healthcare; Medicaid; free housing; free education; jobs; driver licenses; voting; voter registration; etc.); Source#1: www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/010179.html#434193 ; Source#2: http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/010179.html#434260 ;
  • [5] Also, amend the 14th amendment to remove birthright citizenship; Also, pass a law that makes the first illegal trespass of the U.S. border a felony (not merely a misdemeanor); 2nd and subsequent illegal border trespasses are already a felony; also pass a law to end “catch and release”, and incarcerate illegal immigrants (who have already violated U.S. law(s)) until their disposition is decided by the court(s); also ensure that there are sufficient resources to house and maintain illegal immigrants until their dispostion is decided by the court(s);
  • [6] ONLY after the above are implemented, consider a pathway to citizenship (not amnesty) for illegal immigrants who can prove that they were brought to the United States by a parent when very young (when less than age X1-to-X2), have been living in the U.S. for Y1-to-Y2 years, have attended U.S. schools for Z1-to-Z2 years), have no parents or gaurdians that support them, can pass a basic English test, and have little or no connection to the nation in which they were born. That privilege does not extend to any other members or acquaintances of their family. This will be an expensive and painful process, and it won’t be perfect, but it will only get much worse the longer we wait to do it. The amnesty of 1986 quadrupled the number of illegal immigrants within the U.S.A.;
  • [7] Then, after [3] is mostly complete, deport ALL illegal immigrants that have committed misdemeanor crimes (i.e. assault; using fake ID; driving without a driver license, which they should not have anyway, and is therefore probably a fake license; speeding; reckless driving; disorderly conduct; vandalism; identity theft; illegal working in the U.S.; using fake Social Security numbers; etc.);
  • [8] Carefully scrutinize all requests for asylum, and change the asylum laws to prevent catch-and-release; and then enforce the laws required to obtain asylum in the U.S.;

Posted by: d.a.n at December 26, 2018 6:45 PM
Comment #436183

j2t2, I’ve figured it out. You’re watching too much Game of Thrones. However,

Seems to me Congress should put the bill forth as they see fit and then Trump either signs or vetos it. All this finger pointing could be avoided.

I can’t agree with this more!

The major population centers have spoken and they have control of the purse of this nation. Democratics have gone from dominating the federal government for decades, to blindly following an ancient and bitter group of white people trying to embarrass their opposition into submission.

Congratulations, j2t2! Hurrah!

What are your ancient and outdated leaders preparing for us now that they have been reduced to control of the most inconsequential branch of the federal government? Are they reaching for the stars, or are they reaching for Trump’s genitalia? They’re trying to grab him by the ..what? Either that, or cut them off entirely, right j2t2? It seems you have no problem watching it happen. To the end, justify the means, right, j2t2?

The left, while controlling the dialog from the House for the next two years, will demonstrate why the Democratic party has gone from dominating the federal government for decades to controlling the least important branch of our federal government. They will show us by using that last grasp of control to do investigations and entertaining impeachment proceedings against the most influential president of this country in a century.

Way to go, j2t2! Do you still feel like you’re on the winning side?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 26, 2018 7:57 PM
Comment #436185

Hopefully, Weary, they are doing their job.

“The most influential president of this country in a century”! Whatever on earth are you on Weary? Let’s face it Weary nepotism and foreign influence is…oh wait… is that what you are saying? Putin’s B**ch is influenced by the Russian oligarchs at the bequest of Putin and you…great line Weary…Could be in the Onion. The most influenced president I will give you. If it isn’t Putin on Global politics it is Sean Hannity and Faux News telling him what to do on domestic affairs.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 27, 2018 12:40 AM
Comment #436207

It is either naivete, stupidity, and/or hypocrisy for some Democrats (and others on the left) to keep saying “Mexico will pay for the wall”.

Mexico will pay for the wall, indirectly, via:

  • (a) renegotiation of NAFTA;
  • (b) temporary border closings;
  • (c) reduction of illegal immigrants successfully trespassing the border;
  • (d) fewer illegal immigrants sending money back to Mexico;
  • (e) a reduction in monetary losses due to illegal immigrant estimated to be $296+ Billion (or more) per year;
  • etc.

Mexico is already paying in lives, blood, and treasure due to the drug cartels throughout Mexico, who easily trespass the U.S. border on a daily basis.

According to a 2018 Congressional Research Service report, many sources indicate that about 150,000 intentional homicides since 2006 (over 27 homicides per day) were by Mexican drug cartels and related organized-crime, who take in between $19 billion and $29 billion annually from drug sales in the U.S.

The Mexican government reports 9,635 deaths in 2009 in the drug war. (Mexican government, April 2010).

In 2008, 6,844 people are killed in Mexico’s drug war. (Mexican government, April 2010).

The Mexican government says that 34,612 citizens have been killed during the four-year drug war (DEC-2006 to DEC-2010).

January 11, 2012 - The office of Mexico’s Attorney General releases a statement saying that nearly 13,000 people were killed (over 35 per day) in drug violence in the 9 months between January and September 2011.

Voilence hit a peak in Mexico in 2017 with over 30,000 murders (up to 2,890 in one month) in the lead-up to 01-JUL-2018 election.
There were assassinations of 133 politicians in 22 of Mexico’s 31 states from September-2017 to July-2018.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 27, 2018 5:51 PM
Comment #436208

Just for grins, Google search “walls around the Clinton and Obama homes”. We wonder why they need walls, but deny the nation protective walls.

I didn’t bother googling other Dem leaders.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 27, 2018 6:00 PM
Comment #436224
Mexico will pay for the wall, indirectly, via:


What a line of BS D., Stop making excuses for the broken campaign promises of Trump. Were this the truth Trump could have clarified this during the campaign but he didn’t he said Mexico would pay for the wall. We chose to cut taxes on the wealthy and hike the military budget instead of paying for a wall we don’t need.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 28, 2018 12:21 AM
Comment #436237

j2t2 is complaining about broken campaign promises? Really? He will blindly kneel before the Democratic party that complained obsessively about a ficticous failing economy for 6 years before finally getting control of all three branches of government and then completely forgets about said economy in favor of bribing and threatening senators during a 2 year debate over healthcare the American people didn’t want knew would fail.

Projecting much, j2t2?

j2t2 obediently tows the party line claiming health insurance costs were going to be reduced by 2500$ a year when it actually increased that much for the average person. He is more than willing to march in lock step with a person who repeatedly claimed your doctor and your insurance policy were safe if you wanted to keep them. He routinely criticizes and slanders anyone who disagreed with the truth that Obama was a liar when making campaign promises concerning the nation’s health care industry.

And now he claims d.a.n’s comments are a line of BS?!

Again, projecting much, j2t2? j2t2’s blinders prevent him from seeing his hypocrisy. He hasn’t got a leg to stand on when it comes to moral judgement of the people he supports. He’s an automaton spouting nonsense because it let’s him think he’s purchasing the favor of his Masters in the Democratic party.

Do us all a favor, j2t2. Snap a selfie of your face for us when you find out your gods are empty baskets of campaign promises piled up among the rubble your party is creating out of this country.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 28, 2018 8:47 AM
Comment #436240
j2t2, complains about what he believes are broken promises and lies, as j2t2 wrote: What a line of BS D., Stop making excuses for the broken campaign promises of Trump.
but j2t2 provides more proof of hypocrisy by j2t2 and many Democrats, who so conveniently ignore these numerous lies by Obama and these numerous violations, and corruption by Democrats.
Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 9:59 AM
Comment #436242

D., The subject is the broken promise Trump told the American people not the history of broken campaign promises by others. Hypocrisy is using such a diversion to claim others are hypocritical. Using your logic, which is the famous “well they did it to” fallacy, everything would be justified because someone did it earlier.


Hey how many of those “violations, and corruption by Democrats” resulted in actual charges? I would expect nothing compares to the repub voter fraud case in NC. Or for that matter the Trump administrations record of the past 2 years. But you go ahead and use the silly they did it to deflection to defend corruption in the present adminostration.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 28, 2018 11:04 AM
Comment #436243

j2t2, Do you not know the difference between “to” and “too” ?

The issue is not “they did it too”.
The issue is that lies by Obama and violations and corruption by Democrat are far, far worse, and there should have been many indictments for those crimes.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 11:14 AM
Comment #436244

“I would expect nothing compares to the repub voter fraud case in NC.”

This case is important because it reveals what the reich wing has been doing all along, not just in this particular instance. Voter fraud has been standard operating procedure with them for decades now.

Posted by: ohrealy at December 28, 2018 11:17 AM
Comment #436245

j2t2 and ohrealy complain about alleged voter fraud (since it might benefit Republicans) in North Carolina,
but (as usual), prove their hypocrisy again, as they hypocritically ignore that rampant voter harvesting in California.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 11:27 AM
Comment #436247

Sorry grammar Nazi I will try harder.

Look D., your wrong on what you think the issue here is. As is typical you have taken over the thread with your illegal immigrant spiel. Trump wants a wall and you want a wall. Trump told the American people “Mexico will pay for the wall”. Many times. Now you guys are ignoring this and demanding billions from the American taxpayer to build this wall. Hypocrisy at it’s finest. Becuase you have no reral answer to this you deflect and divert with propaganda about the Obama administration. Unfortunately it has nothing to do with the real issue.

What the Obama adminsitration said is simply not relevent to this discussion. You use it to justify Trumps lies. Not to mention it is mostly made up far right propaganda. Zero indictments in the Obama administration. Non issue. The real hypocrisy is you and your fellow conservatives rambling about with all this nonsense trying to deflect for Trump.


The same can be said for your nonsensical “voter harvesting” line of BS. None of those OC ballots were illegal or fraudulent. Unlike the voter fraud in NC. This type of apple and orange comparison is the worst kind of propaganda D., have you no decency?


Posted by: j2t2 at December 28, 2018 12:07 PM
Comment #436248

Democratics are great at the “you do it too” argument. j2t2 says we shouldn’t look at past Democratic’s flaws, just look at the Republican flaws. Then, in the very next comment, ohrealy makes a “you do it too” argument!

j2t2, you need to get your peons in line. They are making you look foolish and, guess what, hypocritical!

d.a.n, we should ask ourselves why we give these two any consideration, but then again, they’re the only ones on the left left! There is no one on the left who can make a positive argument for their side. All they can do is criticize. They have nothing but hate in their logic, thought process, in their hearts. They’re haters and that’s all they have to fall back on. It’s sad. I can’t imagine why anyone would want to be ruled over by people with nothing but hate in their heart.

The saying goes, “You can fool some of the people all of the time.” This is demonstrated by the Democratic party still hanging on by their greedy fingertips. They’ve gone from owning the federal government, to hanging on to a sliver of power in the HOR. They will demonstrate more clearly their lack of morals and character with the laser focus they have placed upon themselves by presiding over only half of one branch of government. They will demonstrate their ineffectiveness by focusing their hate into investigations and evil slander to demonize their opponents. Their support will continue to dwindle and whither away at the local level, much like it did in my home county. The Democratic party, once a half century institution, has been totally replaced. They are where they belong in my county. They are the minority in every branch of my government. That’s where they belong, a minority at the local level.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 28, 2018 12:24 PM
Comment #436249
None of those OC ballots were illegal or fraudulent.

Prove it. I’ll bet you can’t even prove what house the ballot came from. They went door to door collecting ballots. How did they end up with ballots in the household in the first place? Who filled out the ballot? We’re poll watchers in the home guaranteeing the ballots are legitimate? The California law allowing the harvesting of ballots smacks of blatant fraud, but there is no one to enforce a legitimate system. The only tactic Democratics can rely on is obstruction. They will obstruct anything that threatens their power.

Claiming there were zero indictments is not a moral argument, j2t2. Not when you have people being charged with contempt of Congress and pleading the fifth to avoid answering questions. That’s called obstruction, j2t2. That’s the only thing the Democratics can rely on, obstruction.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 28, 2018 12:33 PM
Comment #436250
j2t2 wrote: Look D., your wrong on what you think the issue here is. As is typical you have taken over the thread with your illegal immigrant spiel.

Nonsense, because AllardK wrote in the very 1st sentence of thread:

AllardK wrote: You can consider the latest frantic back ‘n forth between Trump and Congress on the border wall …
… which has a LOT to do with illegal immigration.

As for the $5.7 Billion requested for physical barriers, $5.7 Billion would be equal to a mere 3.99 days of interest on the national debt (for 2018). That is, 3.99=$5.7B/$1.43B

FISCAL Year End Interest on National Debt:
2018: $523,017,301,446.12 (1.43 Billion per day)
2017: $458,542,287,311.80
2016: $432,649,652,901.12
2015: $402,435,356,075.49
2014: $430,812,121,372.05
: : : : : : : : : : : : :
2000: $361,997,734,302.36

So, putting things in perspective (and proving the ridiculousness and hypocrisy j2t2’s disdain of the cost of $5.7 Billion; or even $25 Billion), it is nonsensical to complain about the cost of $5.9 Billion to fund the building of more physical barriers. Especially, when it has been proven repeatedly that barriers work; especially in highly populated areas where thousands of people in a caravan may try to storm across a border, simultaneously.

The real issue here is, what are the true motives of Democrats?

Unfortunately, many Democrats care more about acquiring more power (for THEIR party via more votes), than securing the U.S. borders, and reducing crime (i.e. an average of about 2 thousand homicides per year by criminal non-citizens; source: www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf).

j2t2 wrote: Now you guys are ignoring this and demanding billions from the American taxpayer to build this wall. Hypocrisy at it’s finest.
More nonsense and despicableness by j2t2, many Democrats, and similar ilk, who have clearly demonstrated that they have nefarious and despicable motives, to acquire more VOTES:
  • (01) because many Democrats, most of the Main Stream Media, others on the left, and similar ilk who (despicably) pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes, by pandering to illegal immigrants for 30+ years for more votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship;
  • (02) because many Democrats are also fighting against a check-box on the CENSUS, despite the check-box being totally inadequate to prove citizenship. Democrats disguise their desire for power (for THEIR party) as compassion for illegal immigrants, while despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.
  • (03) because many Democrats (and most of the main stream media) lie about crime by illegal immigrants, and refuse to report over about 2 thousand homicides per year by criminal non-citizens; 32% of everyone in federal prison is a criminal non-citizen (source: Source#3: cis.org/Huennekens/32-Federal-Inmates-Are-Aliens);
  • (04) because many Democrats (and most of the main stream media) lie about how massive illegal (or legal) immigration is costing U.S. tax payers $296+ Billion (or more) per year in net losses (which does not include all costs, and does not include the cost of crime by illegal immigrants);
  • (05) because many Democrats are calling for open borders;
  • (06) because many Democrats are calling to abolish I.C.E. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement);
  • (07) because many Democrats want another shamnesty, like the shamnesty of 1986;
  • (08) because many Democrats refuse legislation to require employers to use eVerify (to verify eligibility for employment);
  • (09) because many Democrats essentially prove that they seemingly care more about illegal immigrants than they care about U.S. citizens, but the Democrats real motiviation is more votes (which is despicable).
  • (10) because many Democrats want more mayors like Libby Schaaf (Oakland, CA), who warns illegal immigrants (including criminal illegal immigrants) before an ICE raid to arrest criminal illegal immigrants;
  • (11) because many Democrats want more sanctuary cities and states, like California, where Democrats have passed sanctuary city and sanctuary state laws that protect criminal illegal immigrants (i.e. an illegal immigrant by the name of Garcia Zarate (who had already been deported 5 times) can shoot and murder Kate Steinle, and be (www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/us/kate-steinle-murder-trial-verdict/index.html)for that murder, despite Zarate admitting to shooting the weapon that killed Kate Steinle (which should have been, at the very least, manslaughter);
  • (12) because many Democrats want to abolish the 2nd amendment, but many Democrats and many on the left call for restricting or eliminating 2nd Amendment rights, and say it is worth it “even if it saves only ONE life”, but conveniently ignore the thousands of people killed per year by criminal non-citizens (source: www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf);
QUESTION: Why do Democrats do all of that (above)?
ANSWER: For the votes.
Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 1:08 PM
Comment #436251
Weary Willie wrote: d.a.n, we should ask ourselves why we give these two [3, including j2t2, ohrealy, and phx8] any consideration, but then again, they’re the only ones on the left left! There is no one on the left who can make a positive argument for their side. All they can do is criticize. They have nothing but hate in their logic, thought process, in their hearts.

Yeah, I know it is probably a waste of time, because I don’t think logic works on some people. I consider an experiment, of sorts.
I know a few other people like j2t2, phx8, and ohrealy, who are so consumed by hate that they cannot and/or will not ever consider for one moment how irrational, weak, or lame that their arguments are, despite repeatedly being proven wrong, and rarely offering evidence to back up their twisted beliefs.

Regarding the wall (one of the subjects of this thread), it is obvious why j2t2, phx8, ohrealy, and many Democrats are against it.
QUESTION: Why do Democrats do all of that (above)?
ANSWER: For the votes.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 1:24 PM
Comment #436252
j2t2 repeated asks: … D., have you no decency?
However, …
  • j2t2 wrote: I am proud of each and every one of my comments you have listed here.
  • j2t2 wrote: Now you [Roy Ellis] act surprised and try to deflect the blame! Go f**k yourselves. Point the finger at yourselves for buying into the stupid propaganda you have bought into.
  • j2t2 wrote: Jeezus what a bunch of f**ktards these repubs are.”
  • j2t2 wrote (comparing conservatives on Watch Blog to “Beastialists” or those that like to watch Beastiality): I didn’t imply anything of the sort. This is what I said “What’s the difference between the Gringo tourist at the Tijuana Donkey Show (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donkey_show) and the conservatives on WB [Watchblog] that believe the repubs on the intelligence committee actually have something of substance to show the American people?”
  • j2t2 wrote: In fact right now I’m rather proud that you have spent the time going through the archives hunting for my words of wisdom.
  • j2t2 wrote: The only hypocrisy on this thread is yours.
  • j2t2 wrote: WTF does it take for you to realize the cognitive dissonance is yours?
Yep . . . clearly, we should all take “decency” lessons from j2t2.
Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 1:38 PM
Comment #436272

While my previous comment is languishing in the “waiting on the editor” queue I will offer this.

D., You claim the Dems are not wanting to fund the wall because of votes but what exactly do you think Trump is shutting down the government for? All this talk of illegal immigration and the attempt to paint it as a crisis is nothing but pandering to his base. The wall, build the wall is a frequently heard chant at Der Fuhrer’s rallies. You guys are wound so tight over building the wall you have forgotten Trumps promise to have Mexico pay for it. Wound so tight you will let the American taxpayer borrow money from China to pay for the wall to be built. If you think it isn’t about right-wing votes you are only kidding yourself.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 28, 2018 5:58 PM
Comment #436274

j2t2’s arguments are all weak and lame (as usual), because j2t2 is so consumed by hate of Trump and supporters, who j2t2 often refers to as Facists, Nazis, Racists, etc.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 28, 2018 6:06 PM
Comment #436275

Hey! Can I interject here?

I have a problem, a legal problem. Can we suspend the partisan bickering to find an answer to a legal question?


Posted by: Weary Willie at December 28, 2018 9:46 PM
Comment #436277

Are there any takers on this?

Does anyone want to help me with my legal problem?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 28, 2018 11:13 PM
Comment #436295

Weary Willie,
What is the legal issue?
I am not a lawyer.
I worked at a law firm (in the IT department), which was enlightening. I have hired a few lawyers, and I can’t say they were too great. The last one charged $350 per hour and required a $3500 retainer.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 29, 2018 11:05 AM
Comment #436297

An acquaintance I bailed someone out of jail for. Then she stole my identity and spent some of my money. I filed charges against her for identity theft to have her arrested and returned to jail to guarantee my money.

She got a plea deal and showed up for court. She was ready to accept the deal and be on probation. She should have been sentenced and I should have got my money back, but the judge combined the second case I filed against her and suspended the sentencing on the first trial. He then released her on OR. My bail money is still held by the court but he released her. I feel my obligation is over and I should receive my money back, but the court won’t release the money until the first trial is over.

I’m wondering if this is a standard operating procedure, or am I being taken for a ride?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 29, 2018 6:06 PM
Comment #436298
j2t2’s arguments are all weak and lame
Wow D.. Such an example of cognitive dissonance for all of us to witness. Is the problem you cannot face the fact Trump is playing you for votes? You insist the Dems do it but think the Repubs are above it..hahaha. When you have to resort to bunching all my comments into one and falsely labeling them as you did it tells us you don’t have a leg to stand on. Seems the fear and anger you feel has got the best of you. Posted by: j2t2 at December 29, 2018 7:12 PM
Comment #436299

Weary I’m not a lawyer and this isn’t legal advice.

It sounds like the court kept your money on the original charges and gave her a PR bond for those you brought against her. So I would think you have to wait until sentencing to get your bond money back.

Better not pi** her off to much. She could take off and you would forfeit your bond money. Of course, she would also get new charges for not showing up and probably not get another PR bond. Of course, if she is getting some jail time over all of this she may not care.

But the issue seems to be what is required to get her bond revoked. If you feel she has become a flight risk perhaps you could petition the judge to get her put in jail and your bond money back. Ask a cop you may be able to take her directly to the jail and ask to turn her in if you have your reasons.

Anyway good luck. Happy Holidays.

Posted by: j2t2 at December 29, 2018 7:22 PM
Comment #436302

You wrote that:

  • (a)the court won’t release the money until the first trial is over,
  • (b)but you also wrote that the judge combined the two charges, and suspended sentencing.
  • (c)and you wrote that she appeared at court, and was ready to accept a plea deal, but that plea deal was only for the 1st charge.
However, you should get your bail money back when she is sentenced or all charges are dismissed (regardless of whether she is found guilty, or not), and provided she does not jump bail.

Apparently, the 1st plea deal was rescinded, and that is probably due to the 2nd subsequent crime.
So, the judge temporarily suspended sentencing on the 1st crime, because of the subsequent 2nd crime of identity theft.
The judge has the power to lump multiple charges into one trial.
Therefore, the trial for the 1st and 2nd crime has not been settled yet.

Now that she is a repeat offender, the judge may not be so lenient, and she may not get off with only probation.
At any rate, the trial is not over, and she is still expected to return to court for trial and/or sentencing for both crimes.
IF she jumps/skips bail by failing to appear in court, the bond you paid will be forfeited, and a warrant will be issued for her arrest.
The only way to get your bail money released then is to hire a bounty hunter to apprehend her before the police arrest her.
A bounty hunter may not be worth the cost.
Once a defendant has jumped bail once, the likelihood of bail again are small, and jumping bail is also crime, and the defendant can expect more fines and jail-time added to their final sentencing. Especially if she has a long rap sheet of previous crimes.

Since she stole your identity and some money after you bailed her out of jail, she may not care whether the bail bond is forfeited.
You could get the advice of a lawyer, but I think you would be throwing your money away.
I am not sure how much the bail was, or whether it was borrowed from a bail bondsman, but a lawyer at $300 per hour for 5 hours is $1,500.

IF you borrowed the money from a bail bondsman, the refund may be reduced (usually by 10%).
It sounds like the woman doesn’t have any money, and may possibly be looking at some time in jail (being a repeat offender).
While you could get a judgement against her for money owed, stolen, or the cost of the bail bond, you may never be able to force her to pay it.

Posted by: d.a.n at December 30, 2018 12:26 PM
Comment #436303
j2t2 wrote: Wow D.. Such an example of cognitive dissonance for all of us to witness.
Funny. What people here are witnessing are j2t2’s own comments and lessons on decency (such as these).
It definitely makes many people wonder how j2t2 has the temerity to question others’ decency.
j2t2 wrote: Is the problem you cannot face the fact Trump is playing you for votes?
Nonsense. Trump is not up for re-election.
The fact is, either you are ignorantly complicit, or willfully complicit in the way Democrats despicably pit U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other for votes.
j2t2 wrote: You insist the Dems do it but think the Repubs are above it..hahaha.
Nonsense. Mueller is draining some of the swamp, and that is a good thing.
The only problem is that Mueller’s investigations are partisan, and there is a LOT of swamp that needs to be drained on the left side too.
j2t2 wrote: When you have to resort to bunching all my comments into one and falsely labeling them as you did it tells us you don’t have a leg to stand on. Seems the fear and anger you feel has got the best of you.
You [j2t2] like that, eh? Those are your own comments, are they not?
QUESTION: Seriously, IF you [j2t2] do not like your own comments, then why do you not refrain from making such comments?
Especially when your comments and name-calling make the repeated questioning of others’ decency look like the epitome of hypocrisy?
Posted by: d.a.n at December 30, 2018 1:01 PM
Comment #436313
Nonsense. Trump is not up for re-election.
Neither are the Dems yet that doesn’t stop you from telling us they are against the wall because of votes.


QUESTION: Seriously, IF you [j2t2] do not like your own comments, then why do you not refrain from making such comments?

QUESTION: WTF does this have to do with my comment. You have used them as a deflection D., instead of dealing with the issue you have pointed out into Lala land and shouted squirrel look over there. HAve you no decency?

I have told you several times I am rather proud of those comments, a bit disappointed you stopped collecting them, and consider them to be an accurate reflection of the facts. Truthful comments are decent D.. A continuation of the big lie isn’t. The McCarthy type propaganda you continue to spread just reminds me of the question “Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

Posted by: j2t2 at December 30, 2018 11:17 PM
Comment #436328
j2t2 wrote: Neither are the Dems [up for re-election now] yet that doesn’t stop you from telling us they are against the wall because of votes.
That is because it is the truth.
Based on these 12 reasons, Democrats have clearly demonstrated that they have nefarious and despicable motives, by despicably pitting U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants against each other to acquire more power, by pandering to illegal immigrants for 30+ years, for more votes (via more representation in the House, via more U.S. House representatives, via re-apportionment of representatives (and electoral votes), based on population, based on the decennial CENSUS, which does not verify U.S. citizenship.
The truth hurts.
j2t2 wrote: QUESTION: WTF does this have to do with my comment?
Which comment?
About Mexico paying for the wall?
ANSWER: Only a simpleton would interpret “Mexico will pay for the wall” to mean that Mexico is going to pay for the wall directly.

What was clear to most people of average intelligence is that Mexico will pay indirectly for the wall, via:

  • (a) renegotiation of NAFTA;
  • (b) temporary border closings;
  • (c) reduction of illegal immigrants successfully trespassing the border;
  • (d) fewer illegal immigrants sending money back to Mexico;
  • (e) a reduction in net monetary losses due to illegal immigrantion estimated to be $296+ Billion (or more) per year; etc., etc., etc.

j2t2 wrote: You have used them as a deflection D., instead of dealing with the issue you have pointed out into Lala land and shouted squirrel look over there. Have you no decency?
Ha ha. You like that, eh?
Again, IF you [j2t2] do not like your own comments, then why do you not refrain from making such comments? Remember, only a fool can make a fool of themself.
j2t2 wrote: I have told you several times I am rather proud of those comments, …
Thou doth protest too much.

Calm down. Why get so upset if you are so proud of your comments?

Posted by: d.a.n at December 31, 2018 10:34 AM
Post a comment