They got the memo...

[homersapien 12,215]

15 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Ummmm no. Everyone of those clips ABC, MSNBC,, CNN was them talking about it and calling her that. Not sure if you are intentionally trying to be dishonest or just didn't realize the Fox banner is covering the original one. 

Did you miss that or trying to be dishonest?

How's that propaganda on the left doing?

 

What do you expect the media to be doing?  They are going to hype whatever meme that can be derived from it.  "Border czar" did not come from the white house, it came from the media.

Now whether or not the white house handled the assignment appropriately is up for discussion.  But this is not that. This is nothing more than focusing criticism on Harris for not "solving" the border situation, for obvious reasons.

Meanwhile, no mention of Trump stopping a bipartisan bill that would have at least made the situation better - again for purely political reasons.

[homersapien 12,215]

13 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

If I didn’t see this in person I wouldn’t believe the democrats would try to rewrite history regarding Harris and the border assignment. It is mind boggling that they now blatantly lie about her assignment/title. What this means is that the border is an absolute massive failure of epic proportions. They can’t have her connected to this failure in any way, even though we all know she never wanted the job, refused to do the job, resisted to visit the border except one token visit, but was trumpeted by Joe as the best person for the job. She failed in every aspect of the assignment, even the limited diplomatic problem solving she admits to. Let’s see, what are the root causes? Well, the border is wide open, there are no limits, no security or patrols, everybody gets in, the government is handing out free money, food, supplies, and lodging without strings, hearings, edonation, vetting, or even vaccines ( all of them not Covid). And yet Harris failed to identify the “root” cause of the mass migration.

So, why do you think Trump "vetoed" the bipartisan border bill?

[homersapien 12,215]

1 hour ago, Cardin Drake said:

This attempt from the media to disassociate Harris from the border disaster won't work.  It hurts the media's credibility to the extent that they actually have any.  Also hilarious is the left's insistence that the border is just fine while simultaneously trying to distance Kamala from the fallout of the failure. 

Why did Trump "veto" the bipartisan border bill that would have at least helped immediately?

 

[homersapien 12,215]

51 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

I see what you are saying, but it doesn’t really hurt them.   They don’t care.   Never have and never will.   What’s really sad is you have fellow Auburn fans on here who seem to want to think that in this particular case that Harris was not put in a position to fix the border problem.   They want to get hung up on a media word but fail to see that she did absolutely nothing other than visit a few countries.   Sad!  Just sad!   

Well, cheer up.  Harris will get another crack at it as POTUS.

[homersapien 12,215]

44 minutes ago, Cardin Drake said:

It's worse than that. She is in complete support of the open border policy and will continue it as President.  She didn't do anything to fix it as border czar because she doesn't want it fixed. 

Got any direct evidence for supporting that claim?

("Direct" meaning coming from her, not someone else's opinion or characterization of her.)

[Tigermike 3,692]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I honestly don't know what - if anything - was accomplished.  

Do you think that was by design or did she just ignore the problem and do nothing?

[homersapien 12,215]

2 minutes ago, Tigermike said:

Do you think that was by design or did she just ignore the problem and do nothing?

Like I said, I don't know and I am not particularly interested in researching it.

As far as I am concerned, the whole issue of the border now resides in the maelstrom of electoral politics.  Trying to sort out the truth at this point is useless.

[Cardin Drake 2,076]

50 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Why did Trump "veto" the bipartisan border bill that would have at least helped immediately?

 

Because it would have enshrined into law some very bad policies and it's quite questionable whether it would have helped at all. 

[DKW 86 7,892]

17 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Every one of those clips is someone being interviewed on Fox.  There is one CNN reporter calling her that.  I simply don't remember her being called that. 

You have to be able to hear the slant Fox puts on this and EVERYTHING.  Supposedly everyone lies but FOX, the network that has shelled out a billion and counting for actually lying.

Fox operates like a right wing funded propaganda machine, because that is what they are.

Dude, that was way too weak...OMG. There were dozens of other people saying she was the point person, or straight-up czar, etc. Not that we actually have czars in the US, we do not. 

Axios had her called a czar for three ******* years!!! Do you understand this? 1000+ days it was up on their website AND NO ONE SAID A WORD.

[homersapien 12,215]

1 hour ago, Cardin Drake said:

Because it would have enshrined into law some very bad policies and it's quite questionable whether it would have helped at all. 

Questionable? Wouldn't have helped at all? 

That's not what the Republicans who voted for it thought, much less Congressman James Lankford R-Okla who was co-author.*

And seriously, do you really think Trump opposed it for that reason?

Anybody with a brain understood Trump's motivation:  He didn't want to see any progress on the border "questionable" or not.  He didn't want to see a bipartisan bill passed period. He's a malignant narcissist, and didn't want any progress on the border on Biden's watch, even if it helped the country. He's a malignant narcissist.

* "The $118 billion package includes a series of provisions aimed at reducing record high crossings at the southern border and tightening an asylum system that has been overwhelmed by migrants fleeing their homes to seek refuge. It also includes critical aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, which Republicans have said they’ll only support if it is paired with significant new U.S. immigration restrictions.

The agreement — reached by Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz. — would be the most aggressive border security and migration overhaul bill in decades if it passes Congress. It would raise the standard to get asylum, send away those who don't qualify and expedite cases for those who do."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/new-immigration-asylum-reform-bill-released-senate-text-rcna136602

Incremental progress is better than no-progress at all.  (Don't be such a mindless MAGA )

Edited July 27 by homersapien

[Tigermike 3,692]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Why did Trump "veto" the bipartisan border bill that would have at least helped immediately?

 

Why did that bill have money for Ukraine?

Why did that bill provide amnesty for Illegals in the country?

[Cardin Drake 2,076]

37 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Questionable? Wouldn't have helped at all? 

That's not what the Republicans who voted for it thought, much less Congressman James Lankford R-Okla who was co-author.*

And seriously, do you really think Trump opposed it for that reason?

Anybody with a brain understood Trump's motivation:  He didn't want to see any progress on the border "questionable" or not.  He didn't want to see a bipartisan bill passed period. He's a malignant narcissist, and didn't want any progress on the border on Biden's watch, even if it helped the country. He's a malignant narcissist.

* "The $118 billion package includes a series of provisions aimed at reducing record high crossings at the southern border and tightening an asylum system that has been overwhelmed by migrants fleeing their homes to seek refuge. It also includes critical aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan, which Republicans have said they’ll only support if it is paired with significant new U.S. immigration restrictions.

The agreement — reached by Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz. — would be the most aggressive border security and migration overhaul bill in decades if it passes Congress. It would raise the standard to get asylum, send away those who don't qualify and expedite cases for those who do."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/new-immigration-asylum-reform-bill-released-senate-text-rcna136602

Incremental progress is better than no-progress at all.  (Don't be such a mindless MAGA )

We have been over the details of this horrible bill several times before in this forum.  It has been thoroughly exposed for the trojan horse bill that it is both in this forum and elsewhere. Mindless deep state puppets just can't be convinced so there is no point reprinting it here.  I am very happy to see that the left is continuing to cling to your position though.  Democrats would have a much better chance of winning this election if they would admit that open borders was a mistake and they will change things up in the future.  75% of the country is not buying the three pronged approach of insisting that there is no new border problem under Biden, while simultaneously blaming the border problem on Republicans and claiming it's not Kamala's fault anyway. 

[homersapien 12,215]

3 minutes ago, Tigermike said:

Why did that bill have money for Ukraine?

Why did that bill provide amnesty for Illegals in the country?

1. That's the way politics is played in this country.  So are you against aiding Ukraine?

2. What illegals are you referring to?  Please cite that part of the bill.

[homersapien 12,215]

1 hour ago, Cardin Drake said:

We have been over the details of this horrible bill several times before in this forum.  It has been thoroughly exposed for the trojan horse bill that it is both in this forum and elsewhere. Mindless deep state puppets just can't be convinced so there is no point reprinting it here.  I am very happy to see that the left is continuing to cling to your position though.  Democrats would have a much better chance of winning this election if they would admit that open borders was a mistake and they will change things up in the future.  75% of the country is not buying the three pronged approach of insisting that there is no new border problem under Biden, while simultaneously blaming the border problem on Republicans and claiming it's not Kamala's fault anyway. 

Blah, blah, blah.

The bill had bipartisan support. At least, until Trump gave it a "thumbs down" for the reasons I stated.

Apparently, you would also rather see nothing happen than any progress at all.

And there is no new border problem under Biden.  That's just (casual) political rhetoric, as is the bulk of this post.

Edited July 27 by homersapien

[Tigermike 3,692]

47 minutes ago, homersapien said:

1. That's the way politics is played in this country.  So are you against aiding Ukraine?

2. What illegals are you referring to?  Please cite that part of the bill.

Ukraine could have had a negotiated settlement at least a year ago.  Why hasn't it been?

[Cardin Drake 2,076]

51 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And there is no new border problem under Biden. 

Lol.  If you D's insist on that story (which it appears you will), you are going to have to manufacture a LOT of mail-in ballots to win this election.  

[homersapien 12,215]

19 minutes ago, Tigermike said:

Ukraine could have had a negotiated settlement at least a year ago.  Why hasn't it been?

Why did it require "negotiation" in the first place? 

And again, do you agree with supporting Ukraine?

Edited July 27 by homersapien

[homersapien 12,215]

2 minutes ago, Cardin Drake said:

Lol.  If you D's insist on that story (which it appears you will), you are going to have to manufacture a LOT of mail-in ballots to win this election.  

So, you think that's ever happened? Do you think it can happen? Do you think it will happen?

 

 

[Cardin Drake 2,076]

Yes, yes, and yes. 

[auburnatl1 6,108]

The mistake Biden made was during the 20 election he made many many statements that he’d be much more humane about the border. Though potentially well meaning, it was interpreted in Latin America as softer. And the massive waves began almost immediately. Candidly once 10s of thousands started overwhelming the border per month it became problematic.

The mistake Harris made was the appearance of total lack of interest.

[jj3jordan 2,169]

4 hours ago, homersapien said:

So, why do you think Trump "vetoed" the bipartisan border bill?

I didn’t read the bill but I did hear that it had some poison pills and the language would hamstring further administrations. And Trump has absolutely nothing to do with vetoing any bill as he is not involved. Blaming Trump for the current administrations failures is ludicrous. 

[homersapien 12,215]

8 minutes ago, Cardin Drake said:

Yes, yes, and yes. 

So, that makes you a true cult conspiracist.

I should have known I was wasting my time with you. 

 

[homersapien 12,215]

Just now, jj3jordan said:

I didn’t read the bill but I did hear that it had some poison pills and the language would hamstring further administrations. And Trump has absolutely nothing to do with vetoing any bill as he is not involved. Blaming Trump for the current administrnations failures is ludicrous. 

Uh....., that's why I put quotes on "veto".

He gave it a "thumbs down" (figuratively speaking) and the bill died.

And it wasn't and Biden administration bill, it was a bipartisan bill. Republicans helped write it.

But Biden would have signed it.  Unlike Trump, he considers what's in the best interest of the country, instead of just himself.

[jj3jordan 2,169]

Just now, homersapien said:

Uh....., that's why I put quotes on "veto".

He gave it a "thumbs down" (figuratively speaking) and the bill died.

And it wasn't and Biden administration bill, it was a bipartisan bill. Republicans helped write it.

But Biden would have signed it.  Unlike Trump, he considers what's in the best interest of the country, instead of just himself.

Trump was hamstrung by a democrat senate, a weak house full of never Trumpers, most of whom are gone now, and everything he tried to do ended up stopped by a federal judge or delayed until appeals or the clock ran out. Please don’t pretend democrats care about slowing the border invasion.

[homersapien 12,215]

1 minute ago, jj3jordan said:

Trump was hamstrung by a democrat senate, a weak house full of never Trumpers, most of whom are gone now, and everything he tried to do ended up stopped by a federal judge or delayed until appeals or the clock ran out.

Thank God!!

He won't have those restraints if he wins the next one.  I almost hope he does just to see you folks finally appreciate what the "never-Trumpers" do.