The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[JohnStOnge]

I asked you if you thought the increase in oil production n the United States is because of Trump. There was nothing in the post to which I responded about the extent to which fossil fuel jobs would be replaced by Green jobs. Donald Trump is not the reason for anything going on with oil production in the United States. Donald Trump is not the reason for why the economy is relatively good right now. So on and so forth. The only thing Donald Trump is the reason for is the United States being the laughing stock of the planet.

America (the United States) is substantially "less great" right now than it was two years ago. And that's because we had a sufficient number of dumbasses in the electorate to end up in a situation where somebody like that is the President.

My original response already addressed your long winded, reiteration of the same statement I responded to.

Thanks for playing.

No, it did not. It's a "yes" or "no" question. do you think that the increase in US oil production is because of Trump? "Yes" or "No."

[CAA Flagship]

My original response already addressed your long winded, reiteration of the same statement I responded to.

Thanks for playing.

No, it did not. It's a "yes" or "no" question. do you think that the increase in US oil production is because of Trump? "Yes" or "No."

Why does it have to be Yes or No? Why can't SOME of the increase be because of Trump?

[∞∞∞]

He's here legally now. You won't find too many people against that.
Yes it's the same person as the one that was here illegally, but that doesn't make it right to be here without permission.

Like I've said, I'm ok with sending illegal immigrants back, after their due process.

However people like Trump, BDK, and others advocate completely turning away illegal immigrants without ever giving them a chance to make their case. And building walls. On the other hand I want a border that's patrolled, but a nation that listens to someone's story before making a judgment call. It's not a perfect system, some will take advantage of it, but it's also a system that speaks of America's values.

In Trump and company's "perfect" world, the man I met today...a man who knew zilch about the US immigration process, just that getting to America was his best chance in life...would have been caught and immediately sent back home, possibly to a death sentence.

To me, this is a perfect example as to why someone should be able to claim asylum no matter if it's at an official border crossing or in the middle of the desert.

[CID1990]

He's here legally now. You won't find too many people against that.
Yes it's the same person as the one that was here illegally, but that doesn't make it right to be here without permission.

Like I've said, I'm ok with sending illegal immigrants back, after their due process.

However people like Trump, BDK, and others advocate completely turning away illegal immigrants without ever giving them a chance to make their case. And building walls. On the other hand I want a border that's patrolled, but a nation that listens to someone's story before making a judgment call. It's not a perfect system, some will take advantage of it, but it's also a system that speaks of America's values.

In Trump and company's "perfect" world, the man I met today...a man who knew zilch about the US immigration process, just that getting to America was his best chance in life...would have been caught and immediately sent back home, possibly to a death sentence.

To me, this is a perfect example as to why someone should be able to claim asylum no matter if it's at an official border crossing or in the middle of the desert.

We give everyone an opportunity to make their case at U.S. Consulates and Embassies around the world. It's called a "visa interview".

Due process, when it comes to border hoppers, is called "catch and release". Which is demonstrably broken, and the cause of the millions of illegals within our borders now. What you are arguing for is for the status quo - catch and release, and the perpetual stream of undocumented people across our borders that catch and release policies encourage. It is a de facto open borders policy.

[UNI88]

Like I've said, I'm ok with sending illegal immigrants back, after their due process.

However people like Trump, BDK, and others advocate completely turning away illegal immigrants without ever giving them a chance to make their case. And building walls. On the other hand I want a border that's patrolled, but a nation that listens to someone's story before making a judgment call. It's not a perfect system, some will take advantage of it, but it's also a system that speaks of America's values.

In Trump and company's "perfect" world, the man I met today...a man who knew zilch about the US immigration process, just that getting to America was his best chance in life...would have been caught and immediately sent back home, possibly to a death sentence.

To me, this is a perfect example as to why someone should be able to claim asylum no matter if it's at an official border crossing or in the middle of the desert.

We give everyone an opportunity to make their case at U.S. Consulates and Embassies around the world. It's called a "visa interview".

Due process, when it comes to border hoppers, is called "catch and release". Which is demonstrably broken, and the cause of the millions of illegals within our borders now. What you are arguing for is for the status quo - catch and release, and the perpetual stream of undocumented people across our borders that catch and release policies encourage. It is a de facto open borders policy.

Why do we use "catch and release?" Why not take their report, schedule the follow-up hearing and send them back into Mexico with instructions to come back for their hearing? I understand that it's now a political minefield and changing existing policy is difficult but what was the genesis for it?

[Skjellyfetti]

send them back into Mexico with instructions to come back for their hearing?

I assume those instructions would include a visa for them to enter the country? Or we instruct them to enter illegally?

[UNI88]

send them back into Mexico with instructions to come back for their hearing?

I assume those instructions would include a visa for them to enter the country? Or we instruct them to enter illegally?

Hold the hearing at facilities at the border.

[CID1990]

We give everyone an opportunity to make their case at U.S. Consulates and Embassies around the world. It's called a "visa interview".

Due process, when it comes to border hoppers, is called "catch and release". Which is demonstrably broken, and the cause of the millions of illegals within our borders now. What you are arguing for is for the status quo - catch and release, and the perpetual stream of undocumented people across our borders that catch and release policies encourage. It is a de facto open borders policy.

Why do we use "catch and release?" Why not take their report, schedule the follow-up hearing and send them back into Mexico with instructions to come back for their hearing? I understand that it's now a political minefield and changing existing policy is difficult but what was the genesis for it?

That would require a change of law. Something Congress is bad at.

If people really understood how our immigration laws work (and the flaws an loopholes the INA contains) we'd have a real reform bill in the very next session of Congress - or else)

[SDHornet]

My original response already addressed your long winded, reiteration of the same statement I responded to.

Thanks for playing.

No, it did not. It's a "yes" or "no" question. do you think that the increase in US oil production is because of Trump? "Yes" or "No."

I've already answered this in a previous post.

Thanks for playing.

[SDHornet]

I met a fascinating person today, and a great example of why many of us fight Trump's immigration policies. He's a 29 year-old male from Sri Lanka who lived in Tamil Tiger controlled territory. When the group was defeated, the Sri Lankan gov't rounded up his entire village and threw them into camps. Since he was the right age, and male, they accused him of being part of the organization. Feeling an arrest and false charges coming, he fled Sri Lanka and eventually made it to Mexico, after which he worked odd jobs and saved up enough money to get smuggled into the United States.

Border patrol caught him and he ended up being detained by the US gov't for 2 years until his asylum case was worked out, which it did. In the three years since being released, he moved from Texas to Georgia and now lives in DC working as a bouncer, lifeguard, and dishwasher. However he wants a more stable job and was absolutely fascinated by the construction site he saw today. He said he wanted a well-paying job that's not in an office environment, but light on educational requirements (which he says he can't afford). I told him the construction industry is a perfect fit and easy to get into, although you have to work your way up, work hard, and prove yourself. We exchanged info and it's now my personal mission to get this guy a job.

But his story is the America I love. It's not an America that closes itself from the world; it's an America that celebrates the human spirit and our shared love of freedom.

He's here legally now. You won't find too many people against that.
Yes it's the same person as the one that was here illegally, but that doesn't make it right to be here without permission.

Just curious if he legally immigrated to Mexico...cause if not and had he been caught, the penalties and jail time would have been significantly worse than what he had to go through to gain legal entry into the US.

[∞∞∞]

We give everyone an opportunity to make their case at U.S. Consulates and Embassies around the world. It's called a "visa interview".

Due process, when it comes to border hoppers, is called "catch and release". Which is demonstrably broken, and the cause of the millions of illegals within our borders now. What you are arguing for is for the status quo - catch and release, and the perpetual stream of undocumented people across our borders that catch and release policies encourage. It is a de facto open borders policy.

Put a tracking chip on them, or catch and don't release until they've gone through the process like this story. However, make it as fairly quick as possible for the detainee(s).

And I get what you're saying about consulates and embassies, but I think it's too much to expect people who are poor, poorly educated, or don't have the infrastructure to obtain that knowledge. Often times it's humanitarian organizations that help refugees go through the legal process.

For others like this dude from a small village in Sri Lanka, all he knew was that America was the land of hope and opportunity. And ultimately, it lived up to its reputation.

[CID1990]

We give everyone an opportunity to make their case at U.S. Consulates and Embassies around the world. It's called a "visa interview".

Due process, when it comes to border hoppers, is called "catch and release". Which is demonstrably broken, and the cause of the millions of illegals within our borders now. What you are arguing for is for the status quo - catch and release, and the perpetual stream of undocumented people across our borders that catch and release policies encourage. It is a de facto open borders policy.

Put a tracking chip on them, or catch and don't release until they've gone through the process like this story. However, make it as fairly quick as possible for the detainee(s).

And I get what you're saying about consulates and embassies, but I think it's too much to expect people who are poor, poorly educated, or don't have the infrastructure to obtain that knowledge. Often times it's humanitarian organizations that help refugees go through the legal process.

For others like this dude from a small village in Sri Lanka, all he knew was that America was the land of hope and opportunity. And ultimately, it lived up to its reputation. That's what America is about to me.

Well Trip - you just identified the same solution the Trump admin tried a few weeks ago... catch and don’t release... if you recall, you and others went on a general freak out

You can’t detain children with adults - unless you want to overturn a century of humanitarian law on the subject

Adults caught with children are automatically detained then paroled into the country- so they can stay together

Adults caught without children are, in the case of *most* Mexicans, kicked right back across the border

That’s why these people come with kids... they are a get out of jail free card and an entry card all rolled into one

It’s a great human trafficking story that CNN would be covering ... if that wouldn’t upset the Trump narrative

So you tell me- since you just arrived at exactly the same conclusion as the Trump Admin..... (catch and don’t release)... what do you do with the kids?

*additional note: I see millions of poor, uneducated people all over the world... they can’t add two plus two and can’t afford to eat but they know EXACTLY where the US Embassy is (they can recite the address) and they know EXACTLY what we do there. Some of them understand US immigration laws better than you and 85% of the rest of the American public

[∞∞∞]

I'd tag the family and release them. I'd certainly not break up parent/child though.

Unfortunately there's no easy solution to any of this. I'd like a cyber-style wall, but where due process is granted to all those that claim asylum. If you're here simply to find a job, then you're sent back.

[CID1990]

If you're here simply to find a job, then you're sent back.

That’s about 99% of them, Trip

The legit asylum seekers are not in the Western Hemisphere


BTW over/under on how many minutes it would take for CNN and MSNBC to be comparing those tags to Stars of David on the jacket? Camp tattoos?

[Ibanez]

If you're here simply to find a job, then you're sent back.

That’s about 99% of them, Trip

The legit asylum seekers are not in the Western Hemisphere


BTW over/under on how many minutes it would take for CNN and MSNBC to be comparing those tags to Stars of David on the jacket? Camp tattoos?

I'm glad you said that...because that was my first thought.

[CAA Flagship]

Bank of Ibanez CEO, Brian Moynihan:

"We feel good about the U.S. economy," Moynihan told "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer in an interview, saying that business-friendly policies of tax reform and deregulation led his company's researchers to make their prediction.

While the analysts anticipated that full-year GDP — the total value of goods and services a country produces — would be around 2.93 percent, they figured higher consumer spending could drive a 4 percent or near 4 percent result this quarter.

"There’s always an unknown, but right now, the people are employed, they’re making more money, tax reform has benefited them, tax reform has benefited companies, and you’re seeing that flow through the economy," Moynihan said.

Moynihan, whose tenure as chief of the country's second-largest lender has been punctuated by his motto of "responsible growth," emphasized how quickly consumer spending has multiplied in recent years.

"We get good insight into the consumer," he told Cramer. "So for the first six months of the year, our consumer spending, which is checks written, cash out of the ATMs, cash out of the tellers, bill payments, debit and credit cards, wires, ACH, Zelle payments, is up 9 percent over the first six months of last year."

In 2017, consumer spending was up 6 percent; the year before that, it was up only 3 percent, Moynihan said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/17/bank-of ... eform.html

America is getting Great again.

[Chizzang]

Bank of Ibanez CEO, Brian Moynihan:

"We feel good about the U.S. economy," Moynihan told "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer in an interview, saying that business-friendly policies of tax reform and deregulation led his company's researchers to make their prediction.

While the analysts anticipated that full-year GDP — the total value of goods and services a country produces — would be around 2.93 percent, they figured higher consumer spending could drive a 4 percent or near 4 percent result this quarter.

"There’s always an unknown, but right now, the people are employed, they’re making more money, tax reform has benefited them, tax reform has benefited companies, and you’re seeing that flow through the economy," Moynihan said.

Moynihan, whose tenure as chief of the country's second-largest lender has been punctuated by his motto of "responsible growth," emphasized how quickly consumer spending has multiplied in recent years.

"We get good insight into the consumer," he told Cramer. "So for the first six months of the year, our consumer spending, which is checks written, cash out of the ATMs, cash out of the tellers, bill payments, debit and credit cards, wires, ACH, Zelle payments, is up 9 percent over the first six months of last year."

In 2017, consumer spending was up 6 percent; the year before that, it was up only 3 percent, Moynihan said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/17/bank-of ... eform.html

America is getting Great again.

Who to believe... I just don't know
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/this-is ... lainternal

[Ivytalk]

Bank of Ibanez CEO, Brian Moynihan:



https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/17/bank-of ... eform.html

America is getting Great again.

Who to believe... I just don't know
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/this-is ... lainternal

It’s Ron Fvcking Paul. The ultimate crazy uncle. Chill.

[JohnStOnge]

No, it did not. It's a "yes" or "no" question. do you think that the increase in US oil production is because of Trump? "Yes" or "No."

Why does it have to be Yes or No? Why can't SOME of the increase be because of Trump?

Ok. That's fair. But I think it's been clear for a while that the US was headed to becoming the leading producer due to the new technologies.

[Ibanez]

Bank of Ibanez CEO, Brian Moynihan:

"We feel good about the U.S. economy," Moynihan told "Mad Money" host Jim Cramer in an interview, saying that business-friendly policies of tax reform and deregulation led his company's researchers to make their prediction.

While the analysts anticipated that full-year GDP — the total value of goods and services a country produces — would be around 2.93 percent, they figured higher consumer spending could drive a 4 percent or near 4 percent result this quarter.

"There’s always an unknown, but right now, the people are employed, they’re making more money, tax reform has benefited them, tax reform has benefited companies, and you’re seeing that flow through the economy," Moynihan said.

Moynihan, whose tenure as chief of the country's second-largest lender has been punctuated by his motto of "responsible growth," emphasized how quickly consumer spending has multiplied in recent years.

"We get good insight into the consumer," he told Cramer. "So for the first six months of the year, our consumer spending, which is checks written, cash out of the ATMs, cash out of the tellers, bill payments, debit and credit cards, wires, ACH, Zelle payments, is up 9 percent over the first six months of last year."

In 2017, consumer spending was up 6 percent; the year before that, it was up only 3 percent, Moynihan said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/17/bank-of ... eform.html

America is getting Great again.

BMoney!!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

On the GDP thing:

The maximum quarterly real GDP growth during the Obama Administration was 5.2%. There were three other quarters during which real GDP growth was 4% or more. When you are saying that GDP growth for a quarter will be near 4% you are not talking about something that didn't happen during the Obama Administration.

Now, if the 2018 annual real GDP growth does reach 2.93 percent that WOULD exceed annual real GDP growth during any year during the Obama Administration as the maximum during that Administration was 2.77 percent.

[CAA Flagship]

On the GDP thing:

The maximum quarterly real GDP growth during the Obama Administration was 5.2%. There were three other quarters during which real GDP growth was 4% or more. When you are saying that GDP growth for a quarter will be near 4% you are not talking about something that didn't happen during the Obama Administration.

Now, if the 2018 annual real GDP growth does reach 2.93 percent that WOULD exceed annual real GDP growth during any year during the Obama Administration as the maximum during that Administration was 2.77 percent.

Again, Obama had the wind at his back for much of his time in office. With QE(s) and low interest rates, an anteater could have guided the economy higher. But the Donks deployed an anchor on that ship known as the ACA and over-regulation (the problem being the refusal to de-regulate when it was safe to do so). Many people suffered from the recession much longer than they should have had to. The fact that the economy is doing as well as it is in an environment of rising interest rates, Fed Reserve balance unwinding, and now, Trade Wars, is remarkable.

[houndawg]

No, it did not. It's a "yes" or "no" question. do you think that the increase in US oil production is because of Trump? "Yes" or "No."

Why does it have to be Yes or No? Why can't SOME of the increase be because of Trump?

This. Demand for energy is up and alternatives are out of favor for as long as this administration remains solvent.

[houndawg]

On the GDP thing:

The maximum quarterly real GDP growth during the Obama Administration was 5.2%. There were three other quarters during which real GDP growth was 4% or more. When you are saying that GDP growth for a quarter will be near 4% you are not talking about something that didn't happen during the Obama Administration.

Now, if the 2018 annual real GDP growth does reach 2.93 percent that WOULD exceed annual real GDP growth during any year during the Obama Administration as the maximum during that Administration was 2.77 percent.

Again, Obama had the wind at his back for much of his time in office. With QE(s) and low interest rates, an anteater could have guided the economy higher. But the Donks deployed an anchor on that ship known as the ACA and over-regulation (the problem being the refusal to de-regulate when it was safe to do so). Many people suffered from the recession much longer than they should have had to. The fact that the economy is doing as well as it is in an environment of rising interest rates, Fed Reserve balance unwinding, and now, Trade Wars, is remarkable.

There is a lag time between having the wind at your back and seeing the results we're seeing now.

All praise be upon Obama, the compassionate, the merciful...

[kalm]

Bank of Ibanez CEO, Brian Moynihan:



https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/17/bank-of ... eform.html

America is getting Great again.

Who to believe... I just don't know
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/this-is ... lainternal

Peter Schiff was just on Rogan basically predicting the same thing. A massive recession on par with if not greater than the last probably happening before the end of Trump's 1st term or shortly thereafter.

Of course guys like Schiff and Paul will see bubbles continuously until government is completely eliminated.