Trump’s Wall Reportedly a Gimmick Campaign Aides Came Up With So He’d Remember to Talk Immigration

[homersapien 11,354]

President Donald Trump’s obsession with a border wall with Mexico has now kept the government partially shut for three weeks. But the commander in chief didn’t always think it was such an essential idea. In fact, it started out as a gimmick, or, as the New York Times calls it, “a mnemonic device of sorts.” During the time when Trump was weighing his presidential candidacy, aides wanted to come up with a way to help him remember to talk about getting tough on immigration, which was always seen as a key issue in his campaign.

Political advisers Sam Nunberg and Roger Stone apparently came up with the idea. “How do we get him to continue to talk about immigration?” Nunberg claims he told Stone. “We’re going to get him to talk about he’s going to build a wall.” The plan worked like a charm. Trump talked about immigration in his speeches, and the wall narrative got huge reactions from the crowd, which obviously thrilled Trump. So he kept pushing the idea harder and harder.

The laser focus on the wall, though, makes even some immigration hardliners nervous, because most don’t actually see it as the most important priority. And some who agree with Trump that immigration needs to be curbed worry that he’ll be willing to trade away things that are far more important in order to get his wall. “I’ve always thought it created a danger that he would trade almost anything in order to get the wall,” said Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. “I’m still worried about that now.”

Michael D’Antonio, a Trump biographer, says the wall is naturally appealing to Trump because of his background in real estate and the idea that he’d leave behind a legacy. “I think he’d like it being called the Great Wall of Trump,” D’Antonio said, noting he’d probably like it even more if there was a plaque honoring the president who built it “every mile or so.”

For now, it seems the wall remains an impasse, and negotiations to reopen the government aren’t really getting anywhere. “We didn’t make much progress at the meeting, which was surprising to me,” acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Saturday. In a meeting that included Vice President Mike Pence, the administration continued pushing for cash to build the wall. Negotiations are set to continue Sunday. Trump wrote on Twitter that “not much headway made today” before continuing with his message: “After so many decades, must finally and permanently fix the problems on the Southern Border!”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/trumps-wall-reportedly-a-gimmick-campaign-aides-came-up-with-so-hed-remember-to-talk-immigration.html

 

[KolchakAU85 430]

I wonder what happened to Trump's promise that Mexico would pay for the wall.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

36 minutes ago, KolchakAU85 said:

I wonder what happened to Trump's promise that Mexico would pay for the wall.

Um, anyone who actually believed that would happen should have their head examined.

[KolchakAU85 430]

1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said:

Um, anyone who actually believed that would happen should have their head examined.

Yeah, but how did he explain it away?  I can't remember.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Just now, KolchakAU85 said:

Yeah, but how did he explain it away?  I can't remember.

He's arguing that new trade agreements with Mexico will bring more dollars into our government, thus Mexico is "paying" for the wall.  Which is nowhere near what he said on the campaign.  But there are many who will eat it up like a fat man at the Golden Corrall.

[HVAU 673]

1 hour ago, Brad_ATX said:

He's arguing that new trade agreements with Mexico will bring more dollars into our government, thus Mexico is "paying" for the wall.  Which is nowhere near what he said on the campaign.  But there are many who will eat it up like a fat man at the Golden Corrall.

We are still borrowing money (from China, Japan, Brazil, etc.) to run the government, right?  So, in essence, Trump is attempting to build the wall and have China (or our other creditors) pay for it.  Of course, we'll need to pay them back with interest.

[SaltyTiger 7,764]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

President Donald Trump’s obsession with a border wall with Mexico has now kept the government partially shut for three weeks.

Well at least the animals at the zoo will be feed and the Mueller hunt will continue

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/government-shutdown-what-closed-open-affected-explained-post-office-irs-national-parks-2019-01-05/

 

 

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Not sure that I buy this one. If the man is as big a racist as individuals claim he is I don't think he would need aids to remind him to discuss immigration.

Now the part about the wall named after him as a legacy. Totally could see that. Which again why would he have to be reminded to talk about it.

Oh well, all in all its just another brick (que golf)

[KolchakAU85 430]

So, if we do end up building this wall...

Do you think there will be a push to eventually tear it down by future administrations?  I think people would try to paint it in the same light as the Confederate statues that are being torn down everywhere.

[homersapien 11,354]

White House claims about terrorism, border unravel in embarrassing fashion

 

One year ago this month, the Trump administration’s Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security issued a report with an unsubtle title: “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.” The document insisted, among other things, that three-quarters of the people convicted on international terrorism charges in the U.S. were foreign born.

In other words, if we want to stop terrorism, we’re going to have to stop dangerous immigrants.

It wasn’t long, however, before people started reading the report and noticing some rather flamboyant deceptions. In order to arrive at their conclusions, for example, Trump administration officials counted people accused of committing terrorist acts on foreign soil, but who were brought to the United States for prosecution. The administration also arbitrarily decided to exclude instances of domestic terrorism, despite their severity.

The Justice Department eventually acknowledged errors and deficiencies in the findings, but as the Washington Post  reported, “officials declined to retract or correct the document.”

That’s a problem, of course, but it’s an even bigger problem that Donald Trump and his team continue to use fear of terrorism as a justification for a giant border wall.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said Friday that Customs and Border Protection picked up nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists last year “that came across our southern border.”

But in fact, the figure she seems to be citing is based on 2017 data, not 2018, and refers to stops made by Department of Homeland Security across the globe, mainly at airports.

In fiscal 2017, the latest year for which data is available, according to agency data and the White House’s own briefing sheet, the Department of Homeland Security prevented nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists from “traveling to or entering the United States.”

According to Justice Department public records and two former counterterrorism officials, no immigrant has been arrested at the southwest border on terrorism charges in recent years.

When Sarah Sanders nevertheless tried again yesterday to suggest the wall would be a counter-terrorism tool, even Fox News couldn’t tolerate the deception.

This was the exchange yesterday between the White House press secretary and “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace. In context, Wallace showed a clip of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen claiming that Customs and Border Patrol has stopped “over 3,000 what we call ‘Special Interest Aliens’ trying to come into the country in the southern border.”

WALLACE: But Special Interest Aliens are just people who come from countries that have ever produced a terrorist. They’re not terrorists themselves. And the State Department says that there is, quote, their words: no credible evidence of any terrorist coming across the border from Mexico.

SANDERS: We know that roughly, nearly 4,000 known or suspected terrorists come into our country illegally, and we know that our most vulnerable point of entry is at our southern border.

WALLACE: Wait, wait, wait – I know the statistic; I didn’t know you were going to use it. But I studied up on this. Do you know where those 4,000 people come – where they’re captured? Airports.

SANDERS: Not always.

WALLACE: At airports.

SANDERS: Certainly a large number –

WALLACE: The State Department says there hasn’t been any terrorists that they’ve found coming across the southern border with Mexico.

SANDERS: It’s by air, it’s by land and it’s by sea. It’s all of the above. But one thing that you’re forgetting is that the most vulnerable point of entry that we have into this country is our southern border, and we have to protect it. And the more individuals that –

WALLACE: But they’re not coming across the southern border, Sarah. They’re coming and they’re being stopped at airports.

The White House is peddling a lie. The president himself pushed the bogus claim at his rambling press conference on Friday, and others on his team, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have done their best to get the public to believe it.

If Trump World is still capable of feeling shame, now would be an excellent time for some.

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/white-house-claims-about-terrorism-border-unravel-embarrassing-fashion

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

15 hours ago, KolchakAU85 said:

So, if we do end up building this wall...

Do you think there will be a push to eventually tear it down by future administrations?  I think people would try to paint it in the same light as the Confederate statues that are being torn down everywhere.

I could totally see future administrations comparing it to the Berlin wall for their own purposes.

[homersapien 11,354]

10 hours ago, Texan4Auburn said:

I could totally see future administrations comparing it to the Berlin wall for their own purposes.

  The whole problem with walls is that they are far more symbolic than effective.

We'd be better off upgrading the border defenses we have and applying the money that would go to the wall to address the source problems that are making these people abandon their countries.

[auburn41 492]

19 hours ago, Texan4Auburn said:

I could totally see future administrations comparing it to the Berlin wall for their own purposes.

Wow, I guess all those people in West Berlin were trying to gain entry into East Berlin, right?  But you make a great point that could be used against all the anti wall people.....the Berlin wall certainly worked for it's intended purpose.  It kept the poor souls in East Berlin from immigrating into West Berlin very effectively.  Anyway, I could bring up other places that walls and fences work (like the DMZ) but I am leaving myself open to being called anti-immigrant.  Before that charge is made I will tell you that my father was a first generation American.  His parents came to the US (legally) in 1919 and he was born in South Carolina in 1923.  I very definitely am against ILLEGAL immigration!

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

On 1/8/2019 at 7:29 PM, auburn41 said:

Wow, I guess all those people in West Berlin were trying to gain entry into East Berlin, right?  But you make a great point that could be used against all the anti wall people.....the Berlin wall certainly worked for it's intended purpose.  It kept the poor souls in East Berlin from immigrating into West Berlin very effectively.  Anyway, I could bring up other places that walls and fences work (like the DMZ) but I am leaving myself open to being called anti-immigrant.  Before that charge is made I will tell you that my father was a first generation American.  His parents came to the US (legally) in 1919 and he was born in South Carolina in 1923.  I very definitely am against ILLEGAL immigration!

I know exactly why the wall was built (politics, economics, ideology....especially trying to  keep western ideology out). I also know that it is considered one of the most oppressive symbols in history. I also know that the United States was very anti-wall and played it, and the enforcement of, as one of the most inhumane constructions in the world.  They actually have part of the wall as a monument at Eureka College in Illinois to Ronald Reagan and one in Chicago due to political aid from that city in tearing it down. Which is why I could see the left using said wall in future elections against the right.

The connection between E/W Berlin was also only 27 or 28 miles while the US wall will cover nearly 1900 miles of connection I believe. I would also suggest that a major part of the Berlin Wall's success was the 160 yard double wall area known as the "death strip". Which was heavily populated with guard towers, flood lights, dogs, and trip wire machine guns. Despite that 1000's still found their way into West Berlin. While not an expert, up until recently hasn't the DMZ also been littered with armed guard towers, dogs, and even landmines? Both those walls ran off fear with no issue killing individuals. I mean wouldn't it be cheaper to just use helicopters, boats, etc and just gun down people trying to come into America? Maybe some sharks with frigging laser beams on their heads in the Rio. Get that message of fear out there to stop people.

Remember that this wall will involve the seizing of land from United States citizens in Texas. It some instances it will divide communities, it will cut ranchers off from water supplies, it will put a huge wall feet from some people windows and remove their backyards, it will take away the homes of some Texans, and many other negative impacts.

Polls show that Texans are for increased security along the border and immigration enforcement. They just want it done through other methods beside a wall such as patrols, drones, etc. Just cause you don't agree with the wall doesn't mean you don't have concerns about illegal immigration.

Course one funny part about this wall shutdown is this. Right now 1000's of immigration cases are being cancelled and causing an even bigger build-up and back log. Also if the border is so dangerous, then shouldn't we still be paying the men/women that are on it right now enforcing the border? Instead we have them out there (they are still required to work) right now doing that job for free. Oh, and if they decide not to work, well they are subject to disciplinary action including termination.

 

[auburn41 492]

11 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

I know exactly why the wall was built (politics, economics, ideology....especially trying to  keep western ideology out). I also know that it is considered one of the most oppressive symbols in history. I also know that the United States was very anti-wall and played it, and the enforcement of, as one of the most inhumane constructions in the world.  They actually have part of the wall as a monument at Eureka College in Illinois to Ronald Reagan and one in Chicago due to political aid from that city in tearing it down. Which is why I could see the left using said wall in future elections against the right.

The connection between E/W Berlin was also only 27 or 28 miles while the US wall will cover nearly 1900 miles of connection I believe. I would also suggest that a major part of the Berlin Wall's success was the 160 yard double wall area known as the "death strip". Which was heavily populated with guard towers, flood lights, dogs, and trip wire machine guns. Despite that 1000's still found their way into West Berlin. While not an expert, up until recently hasn't the DMZ also been littered with armed guard towers, dogs, and even landmines? Both those walls ran off fear with no issue killing individuals. I mean wouldn't it be cheaper to just use helicopters, boats, etc and just gun down people trying to come into America? Maybe some sharks with frigging laser beams on their heads in the Rio. Get that message of fear out there to stop people.

Remember that this wall will involve the seizing of land from United States citizens in Texas. It some instances it will divide communities, it will cut ranchers off from water supplies, it will put a huge wall feet from some people windows and remove their backyards, it will take away the homes of some Texans, and many other negative impacts.

Polls show that Texans are for increased security along the border and immigration enforcement. They just want it done through other methods beside a wall such as patrols, drones, etc. Just cause you don't agree with the wall doesn't mean you don't have concerns about illegal immigration.

Course one funny part about this wall shutdown is this. Right now 1000's of immigration cases are being cancelled and causing an even bigger build-up and back log. Also if the border is so dangerous, then shouldn't we still be paying the men/women that are on it right now enforcing the border? Instead we have them out there (they are still required to work) right now doing that job for free. Oh, and if they decide not to work, well they are subject to disciplinary action including termination.

 

The US was not "anti-wall" as you stated above....The US was Anti-Communist/Socialist (or used to be) and wanted people to be FREE to make their own decisions within their own country.  That is why there are grave yards all over the world full of US troops!   There are US military cemeteries in France, Belgium, UK, Philippines, Panama, Italy, Luxembourg, MEXICO, Netherlands and Tunisia.

All the rest of your post is just fluff.....Put a wall where it makes sense and use other means where that makes sense.  The bottom line is the US needs to secure its borders, period.  This whole thing is just politics and frankly I'm tired of it.  BHO, Chuck and Nancy have all given speeches that I've seen recently replayed where they called for a wall at the southern border.  They are for it when the politics are right to be for it and against when the politics are right to be against it. 

While we are having this battle, lets shoot for term limits for the House and Senate.  All of the people in Washington, both R's and D's need to be changed.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

So what you're saying is that while the US was Anti-Communist, they supported the Berlin Wall and the measures GDR put into its enforcement? If you were anti-Communist you were anti-wall in regards to the Berlin wall.

Quote

“The Embassy of the United States presents its compliments to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and upon instructions of its government has the honour to direct the most serious attention of the government of the USSR to the following.

On August 13th East German authorities put into effect several measures regulating movement at the boundary of the western sectors and the Soviet sector of the city of Berlin. These measures have the effect of limiting, to a degree approaching complete prohibition, passage from the Soviet sector to the western sectors of the city. These measures were accompanied by the closing of the sector boundary by a sizeable deployment of police forces and by military detachments brought into Berlin for this purpose.

All this is a flagrant, and particularly serious, violation of the quadri-partite status of Berlin… The United States government has never accepted that limitations can be imposed on freedom of movement within Berlin. The boundary between the Soviet sector and the western sectors of Berlin is not a state frontier. The United States government considers that the measures which the East German authorities have taken are illegal. It reiterates that it does not accept the pretension that the Soviet sector of Berlin forms a part of the so-called “German Democratic Republic” and that Berlin is situated on its territory…

By the very admission of the East German authorities, the measures which have just been taken are motivated by the fact that an ever increasing number of inhabitants of East Germany wish to leave this territory. The reasons for this exodus are known. They are simply the internal difficulties in East Germany…

The United States government solemnly protests against the measures referred to above, for which it holds the Soviet Government responsible. The United States Government expects the Soviet Government to put an end to these illegal measures. This unilateral infringement of the quadripartite status of Berlin can only increase existing tension and dangers.”

US State Department
August 17th 1963

https://alphahistory.com/coldwar/us-ussr-respond-berlin-wall-1963/

Presidents like Kennedy and Reagan both spoke out against the wall and the oppression of it. Cause it was a symbol of oppression in the fight against Communism. I alive in the cold war and old enough to understand the rhetoric involving the Berlin wall that was being pushed.

Shouldn't Texans then, who are US citizens within the boundaries of the United States, be FREE to make decisions on what is done on their land then?

Thanks for the tidbit on soldiers. I will be sure to let my mother know we can probably find the uncle neither of us ever met in France.

 

[SaltyTiger 7,764]

On 1/8/2019 at 9:10 AM, homersapien said:

  The whole problem with walls is that they are far more symbolic than effective.

We'd be better off upgrading the border defenses we have and applying the money that would go to the wall to address the source problems that are making these people abandon their countries.

What about strategically constructed barriers, location-wise, in addition to the above?

 

[auburn41 492]

3 hours ago, Texan4Auburn said:

So what you're saying is that while the US was Anti-Communist, they supported the Berlin Wall and the measures GDR put into its enforcement? If you were anti-Communist you were anti-wall in regards to the Berlin wall.

https://alphahistory.com/coldwar/us-ussr-respond-berlin-wall-1963/

Presidents like Kennedy and Reagan both spoke out against the wall and the oppression of it. Cause it was a symbol of oppression in the fight against Communism. I alive in the cold war and old enough to understand the rhetoric involving the Berlin wall that was being pushed.

Shouldn't Texans then, who are US citizens within the boundaries of the United States, be FREE to make decisions on what is done on their land then?

Thanks for the tidbit on soldiers. I will be sure to let my mother know we can probably find the uncle neither of us ever met in France.

 

What are you talking about....I never said the US supported the Berlin Wall. I said the US was anti-communist. The wall was a manifestation of Communism and trying to keep all the people in East Berlin from leaving the hell that was/is communism.  

I mentioned the US cemeteries only to point out that for all 200 plus years of the US we have given our young men and blood along with money to help other countries be as free as possible and to beat back tyrants and dictators. 

Communism and Socialism are responsible for the deaths of 100’s of million people. If it were not for the US there would have been 100’s of millions more dead. 

Texans do have the freedom to choose weather to put a wall up. That choice is called an election which Trump won. If Texans don’t like his policies they can vote him out in 2020.  Too bad the people of East Germany didn’t have a say in their wall huh??

Lastly, I’m glad you are old enough to remember the Cold War and that you seem to think highly of Pres Reagan. I am old enough to have been in the military while he was President.  My oldest daughter is even named after him.  I thought highly of him as well. 

[alexava 6,973]

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/01/10/trump-wagner-graduation-2004-concrete-wall/23639621/

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

10 minutes ago, auburn41 said:

What are you talking about....I never said the US supported the Berlin Wall.

Lol so you admit then that the United States (as shown by documents and leaders speeches) was anti-Berlin wall.

Or, are you claiming they were neutral in regards to it?

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

36 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

What about strategically constructed barriers, location-wise, in addition to the above?

 

Problem is, they have proven they will go under with tunnels. Border Patrol even pointed that out and showed him multiple walled areas that have tunnels yesterday and today.

[SaltyTiger 7,764]

10 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

Problem is, they have proven they will go under with tunnels

"barriers" a PC way of saying a deep foundation Trump wall

[auburn41 492]

55 minutes ago, Texan4Auburn said:

Lol so you admit then that the United States (as shown by documents and leaders speeches) was anti-Berlin wall.

Or, are you claiming they were neutral in regards to it?

LOL, I’m typing this extra slowly so you can understand it.....I’m saying the US was anti-communist.  I don’t know how else to say it. If the Berlin Wall was a wall put there because the people of East Berlin had voted to build it, the US would not have an issue with it. That is what I’m saying. 

[homersapien 11,354]

On 1/8/2019 at 8:29 PM, auburn41 said:

Wow, I guess all those people in West Berlin were trying to gain entry into East Berlin, right?  But you make a great point that could be used against all the anti wall people.....the Berlin wall certainly worked for it's intended purpose.  It kept the poor souls in East Berlin from immigrating into West Berlin very effectively.  Anyway, I could bring up other places that walls and fences work (like the DMZ) but I am leaving myself open to being called anti-immigrant.  Before that charge is made I will tell you that my father was a first generation American.  His parents came to the US (legally) in 1919 and he was born in South Carolina in 1923.  I very definitely am against ILLEGAL immigration!

Not really.  And it ultimately became a symbol of failure.

[homersapien 11,354]

15 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

What about strategically constructed barriers, location-wise, in addition to the above?

 

I have no problem with using physical barriers of an appropriate design in strategic locations as a part of a total package of border security - just as we do now. 

I think the entire issue of border security should be considered rationally, and holistically, starting with actual facts about the nature of the problem, instead of the blatant lies we get from this administration.

(see post above):

White House claims about terrorism, border unravel in embarrassing fashion