The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[AZGrizFan]

That already happened with Clinton, and Obomba..What goes around, comes around.

And it's coming around again.

Isn't this fun??

[Ivytalk]

Well, if you were in power and the opposition party in the House was launching numerous obviously politically motivated investigations, including on issues that had already been throughly investigated in exhaustive detail the previous 2 years by a special counsel, would you just sit there and cave, or fight it though denial, stonewall and delay?

Then again, I can laugh at myself and i'm not a arrogant, egotistical cunt like Trump.

[Ibanez]

Then again, I can laugh at myself and i'm not a arrogant, egotistical cunt like Trump.

Fo sho

Sent from my KFKAWI using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

The donks want to rehash what has already been covered in Mueller’s 2 year investigation.

What they want is to have what was documented by the investigation played out on television. Trump does not want that because he knows it would make him look very bad. The Democrats do want that because they know it would make Trump look very bad.

[JohnStOnge]

You cannot use their formula because a removal order in absentia is not issued in most no show cases (another way our immigration system is broken).

Do you have some basis for saying that beyond your personal experience and perception? Can you document your claim that, globally, "a removal order in abstentia is not issued in most no show cases?"

[CID1990]

You cannot use their formula because a removal order in absentia is not issued in most no show cases (another way our immigration system is broken).

Do you have some basis for saying that beyond your personal experience and perception? Can you document your claim that, globally, "a removal order in abstentia is not issued in most no show cases?"

Well, John - since I am one of those "experts" in the field, my personal experience actually does matter..

In ten years of viewing literally tens of thousands of cases for 9A and 9B ineligibilities, a good chunk of them from El Salvador, I can count on one hand how many failures to show resulted in an actual deport order on the first sitting.

Feel free to research the dockets of our immigration courts and you'll see it as well.

Also - OF COURSE people show up for asylum hearings. asylum claims are a small portion of the catch and release population. AND - when they show up for an asylum hearing and are found to be frivolous or having a no claim, they are THEN released again, pending an actual status hearing, for which they do not show up.

Bad data is what you posted.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Well, if you were in power and the opposition party in the House was launching numerous obviously politically motivated investigations, including on issues that had already been throughly investigated in exhaustive detail the previous 2 years by a special counsel, would you just sit there and cave, or fight it though denial, stonewall and delay?

I wouldn't make it look like i've got something to hide. And when the report says I didn't commit treason, I'd welcome it and let that be that. I wouldn't act like a child or a bitch for most of my presidency.

Then again, I can laugh at myself and i'm not a arrogant, egotistical cunt like Trump. I can take criticism as long as it's constructive.


And unlike him, I don't think Russian interference de-legitimizes his win in 2016.

Dont sell yourself short, youre an incredible cunt.........

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[mainejeff]

And then it'll happen again and again. And you all will bitch about it.


Or, our "leaders" can step up and not pull this sort of crap. This tit for tat crap. But that means we need to elect leaders and actually hold them accountable.

Well, if you were in power and the opposition party in the House was launching numerous obviously politically motivated investigations, including on issues that had already been throughly investigated in exhaustive detail the previous 2 years by a special counsel, would you just sit there and cave, or fight it though denial, stonewall and delay?

I wouldn't be doing shady deals with Russia so I wouldn't even have to deal with it.

[Ibanez]

I wouldn't make it look like i've got something to hide. And when the report says I didn't commit treason, I'd welcome it and let that be that. I wouldn't act like a child or a bitch for most of my presidency.

Then again, I can laugh at myself and i'm not a arrogant, egotistical cunt like Trump. I can take criticism as long as it's constructive.


And unlike him, I don't think Russian interference de-legitimizes his win in 2016.

Dont sell yourself short, youre an incredible cunt.........

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I've been called an asshole plenty. But never arrogant or egotistical. Or a cunt. A dickhead, sure.

I accept my faults and try to change them.

[Ibanez]

Do you have some basis for saying that beyond your personal experience and perception? Can you document your claim that, globally, "a removal order in abstentia is not issued in most no show cases?"

Well, John - since I am one of those "experts" in the field, my personal experience actually does matter..

In ten years of viewing literally tens of thousands of cases for 9A and 9B ineligibilities, a good chunk of them from El Salvador, I can count on one hand how many failures to show resulted in an actual deport order on the first sitting.

Feel free to research the dockets of our immigration courts and you'll see it as well.

Also - OF COURSE people show up for asylum hearings. asylum claims are a small portion of the catch and release population. AND - when they show up for an asylum hearing and are found to be frivolous or having a no claim, they are THEN released again, pending an actual status hearing, for which they do not show up.

Bad data is what you posted.

Yeah, but Trump!

[JohnStOnge]

Do you have some basis for saying that beyond your personal experience and perception? Can you document your claim that, globally, "a removal order in abstentia is not issued in most no show cases?"

Well, John - since I am one of those "experts" in the field, my personal experience actually does matter..

In ten years of viewing literally tens of thousands of cases for 9A and 9B ineligibilities, a good chunk of them from El Salvador, I can count on one hand how many failures to show resulted in an actual deport order on the first sitting.

Feel free to research the dockets of our immigration courts and you'll see it as well.

Also - OF COURSE people show up for asylum hearings. asylum claims are a small portion of the catch and release population. AND - when they show up for an asylum hearing and are found to be frivolous or having a no claim, they are THEN released again, pending an actual status hearing, for which they do not show up.

Bad data is what you posted.

Well, you'll have to excuse me but I'll go with what appears to be going on with the guy who wrote the article at https://cis.org/Report/Courting-Disaster. He is a former immigration court judge. Also, he was arguing that the failure to appear rate is higher than Justice Department statistics suggest. But he argued that the rate is 37%. Also, as far as I can tell, he is accepting the in abstentia rate as the "failure to appear" rate. His argument is data based. Not a general impression based on his personal experience. And though he is arguing that the failure to appear rate is high the rate he is talking about, if anywhere close to accurate, means the statement that most illegal aliens don't show up for their hearings is false.

His big argument isn't about the in abstentia rate as reported by the Department of Justice not being a good metric for failure to appear. It's about counting detained aliens in the equation. In other words, he wrote that the problem is dividing the in abstentia rate by ALL illegals with hearings when it should be dividing it just by those who are released prior to their hearings. I think that makes perfect sense.

But it still appears to contradict your point of view. If it does not please explain.

[SDHornet]

JSO using cooked stats to argue against an industry expert. This should end well.

[CID1990]

Well, John - since I am one of those "experts" in the field, my personal experience actually does matter..

In ten years of viewing literally tens of thousands of cases for 9A and 9B ineligibilities, a good chunk of them from El Salvador, I can count on one hand how many failures to show resulted in an actual deport order on the first sitting.

Feel free to research the dockets of our immigration courts and you'll see it as well.

Also - OF COURSE people show up for asylum hearings. asylum claims are a small portion of the catch and release population. AND - when they show up for an asylum hearing and are found to be frivolous or having a no claim, they are THEN released again, pending an actual status hearing, for which they do not show up.

Bad data is what you posted.

Well, you'll have to excuse me but I'll go with what appears to be going on with the guy who wrote the article at https://cis.org/Report/Courting-Disaster. He is a former immigration court judge. Also, he was arguing that the failure to appear rate is higher than Justice Department statistics suggest. But he argued that the rate is 37%. Also, as far as I can tell, he is accepting the in abstentia rate as the "failure to appear" rate. His argument is data based. Not a general impression based on his personal experience. And though he is arguing that the failure to appear rate is high the rate he is talking about, if anywhere close to accurate, means the statement that most illegal aliens don't show up for their hearings is false.

His big argument isn't about the in abstentia rate as reported by the Department of Justice not being a good metric for failure to appear. It's about counting detained aliens in the equation. In other words, he wrote that the problem is dividing the in abstentia rate by ALL illegals with hearings when it should be dividing it just by those who are released prior to their hearings. I think that makes perfect sense.

But it still appears to contradict your point of view. If it does not please explain.

Ok - I see where the disconnect is here.

In absentia orders make up 75% percent of all orders of removal. That is different from the total number of aliens with orders to appear who do not appear. So I'll concede that point.

The numbers I deal with are the bad actors, and therefore I see that 75% in my line of work. In fact, it is probably higher than that.

However, I agree completely with the author on his remedies. Especially the barring of waiver relief for people who have been given deport orders in absentia.

One final note- did you know that CIS is a SPLC designated hate group?

[CID1990]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

French nailed it. I never read NR, I may have to throw it into the rotation.

[BDKJMU]

“US economy grows by 3.2% in the first quarter, topping expectations

....best growth to start a year in four years. First-quarter GDP expanded by 3.2%, the Bureau of Economic Analysis said in its initial read of the economy for that period. Economists polled by Dow Jones expected the U.S. economy increased by 2.5% in the first quarter. It was the first time since 2015 that first-quarter GDP topped 3%.....”
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/26/gdp-q1- ... -read.html

[AZGrizFan]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That Graham, or ANY evangelical, is stupid enough to put their words/weight behind ANY politician just shows how dumb they really are. Here's a hint, you religious types: If a politician's lips are moving, he's lying. The fact that the person may proclaim to agree with you (until it's politically expedient NOT TO) on a couple of fringe social issues doesn't make them a better person. And when you DO put your weight behind one while flame spraying another, your hypocrisy gets pointed out like in this article and any semblance of credibility you had left is eroded even further.

Honestly, the church should just stay the fuck out of the political arena altogether.

[JohnStOnge]

One final note- did you know that CIS is a SPLC designated hate group?

No but I am not surprised. The SPLC is a little broad in the way it does that.

[JohnStOnge]

“US economy grows by 3.2% in the first quarter, topping expectations

....best growth to start a year in four years. First-quarter GDP expanded by 3.2%, the Bureau of Economic Analysis said in its initial read of the economy for that period. Economists polled by Dow Jones expected the U.S. economy increased by 2.5% in the first quarter. It was the first time since 2015 that first-quarter GDP topped 3%.....”
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/26/gdp-q1- ... -read.html

Now, see, when you quote that one wonders why one thinks that means things are better now under Trump. It's saying that it's the best 1st quarter growth rate since the one that happened during Obama's second to last year. And if you look it up you find that the 1st quarter growth rate during Obama's second to last year was slightly higher than 3.2% at 3.3%.

So...like...the fact that it was the highest first quarter rate since it happened under Obama is supposed to make everybody thing "OH WOW! THINGS ARE REALLY A LOT BETTER NOW!"

[Chizzang]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/

The Church has been shoveling their moral high ground into this dumpster fire for 2 years now...
Proving that their faith in their book is bullsh!t - it's just a tool to be used against others
Proving that their morality is more posturing than any actual belief system

Proving by their own actions and words
that American Christianity is a actually just a well run money grab

[JohnStOnge]

Good News! The Gold Standard poll has issued a report and it suggests Trump is still way under water on job approval. Also only 31% of respondents thought the Mueller report cleared Trump while 53% thought it did not.

Did not show support for impeachment but that's OK at this point. Impeachment would be a waste of time because Republicans in Congress including the Senate have zero integrity. They're all in with the Trump corruption.

I'm talking about the ABC News/Washington Post poll.

Another interesting and encouraging thing: As I've noted before only 6 of the more than 300 polls rated by 538 are rated A+. Two show up on the current Real Clear Politics average of polls for Trump's job approval right now. The ABC News/Washington Post poll is one. The Monmouth poll is the other. Trump is 12 percentage points under water in the ABC News/Washington Post poll and 14 percentage points under water in the Monmouth poll.

It's good to see that the majority is still not buying it.

[Ivytalk]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/

The Church has been shoveling their moral high ground into this dumpster fire for 2 years now...
Proving that their faith in their book is bullsh!t
Proving that their morality is more posturing than a belief system

Proving by their own actions and words
that American Christianity is a actually just a well run money grab

Mainline Protestant denominations have been losing members and money for years, although that may have levelled off recently. Evangelicals holding their own but not surging. Fastest growing group over past 20 years is the “unchurched”/ “Nones”/ Chizzangs.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

“US economy grows by 3.2% in the first quarter, topping expectations

....best growth to start a year in four years. First-quarter GDP expanded by 3.2%, the Bureau of Economic Analysis said in its initial read of the economy for that period. Economists polled by Dow Jones expected the U.S. economy increased by 2.5% in the first quarter. It was the first time since 2015 that first-quarter GDP topped 3%.....”
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/26/gdp-q1- ... -read.html

Just shows that Trump really is smarter than everyone else commenting on him.

TRUMP did this against everyone else, its why hes Americas President and its why we voted for him.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

Clitz will love this one -

French is spot on

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/ ... l-witness/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That Graham, or ANY evangelical, is stupid enough to put their words/weight behind ANY politician just shows how dumb they really are. Here's a hint, you religious types: If a politician's lips are moving, he's lying. The fact that the person may proclaim to agree with you (until it's politically expedient NOT TO) on a couple of fringe social issues doesn't make them a better person. And when you DO put your weight behind one while flame spraying another, your hypocrisy gets pointed out like in this article and any semblance of credibility you had left is eroded even further.

Honestly, the church should just stay the **** out of the political arena altogether.

Or start paying taxes, like I do.

[AZGrizFan]

“US economy grows by 3.2% in the first quarter, topping expectations

....best growth to start a year in four years. First-quarter GDP expanded by 3.2%, the Bureau of Economic Analysis said in its initial read of the economy for that period. Economists polled by Dow Jones expected the U.S. economy increased by 2.5% in the first quarter. It was the first time since 2015 that first-quarter GDP topped 3%.....”
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/26/gdp-q1- ... -read.html

Now, see, when you quote that one wonders why one thinks that means things are better now under Trump. It's saying that it's the best 1st quarter growth rate since the one that happened during Obama's second to last year. And if you look it up you find that the 1st quarter growth rate during Obama's second to last year was slightly higher than 3.2% at 3.3%.

So...like...the fact that it was the highest first quarter rate since it happened under Obama is supposed to make everybody thing "OH WOW! THINGS ARE REALLY A LOT BETTER NOW!"

You’re right, John. Because economic conditions in 2015 were EXACTLY like they are today. Obama achieved 3.3% in a zero rate environment after THREE massive QE’s. Trump achieved 3.2% in the face of NINE rate increases and the Fed unwinding their balance sheet, but you already knew that. You seriously need to just STFU when it comes to economic discussions.