So the Caravan is apparently still well over a thousand miles from the border, with less than two weeks before the election. In order to reach the border by the election, they would need to march the equivalent of at least four marathons a day, every day. Considering the average time it takes a trained runner to "run" a marathon is around 5 hours (slightly shorter for men, slightly longer for women), it would make it entirely impossible for anyone to "walk" this distance in 10 days... even if they did so without stopping and without sleeping.
But now it would appear that someone has been offering bus-rides to the caravan, presumably to allow them to pick up the pace and possibly create the "show down" at the border "before" election day comes and goes. The bigger problem "appears to be" that to the degree this is helping, it's probably helping the Republicans more than the Democrats. I suspect it may be helping someone like McSally in Arizona more than anyone else.
According to the most recent survey on the subject
51% of voters believe that the caravan should be stopped at the border and that nobody should be allowed into the country. 38% believe that they should be allowed to come into the country temporarily (and allow them all to have their say before a judge). I wonder out loud how those 38% break up in terms of where and how you house them all. Obviously that sort of longer term thinking is probably not their collective forte.
Anyways, both sides are now accusing the other of creating and exploiting the issue, with allegations flying that this has been organized, and that busing is being provided by both George Soros and Karl Rove... depending on who you believe might benefit from this.
One can probably get a better idea of how this is playing out by the simple fact that you hear very little talk at all from any of the candidates up for election (and pretty much none at all from the Democrats). I suspect that both sides are cautious about pushing their opinion on it right now, and that the Democrats realize that it's probably a big time stink pie loser for them either way.
57 comments:
According to the most recent survey on the subject 51% of voters believe that the caravan should be stopped at the border
And I wonder how many moose limbs are still traveling to the US????? I know CH is afraid of that hoard approaching the cold of Mn.....LOLOLOLOL
Migrant Admits On Video That 'Criminals Are Everywhere' In Caravan
https://www.mrctv.org/blog/migrant-admits-video-criminals-are-everywhere-caravan#.W9Euo5VJr8c.twitter
I wonder out loud how those 38% break up in terms of where and how you house them all. Obviously that sort of longer term thinking is probably not their collective forte.
you give them too much credit.
they know exactly what happens to these folks. they're given a date to appear at an immigration hearing, they ignore the hearing request, and they disappear into the american population of 335 million people.
a healthy dose of cynicism is helpful in understanding the goal of the 38%. they're not stupid. far from it. they're open borders advocates who see these folks not as illegal aliens but as undocumented democrats.
long term thinking? these fuckers have been playing the long game since teddy kennedy figured out back in '65 a steady stream of illegals latching on to the public tit meant democrats in power into perpetuity. and until trump, the occasional republican president or GOP majority in congress has not hampered that strategery.
This is a nation of immigrants and refugees. We could have the resources to properly screen the people, mostly are families of people who are attempting to escape murder rape and gangsters.
Both sides are playing politics and we know that. But to send the military to the border, which is Constitutionally debatable, is cruel and we are a better nation than what the President represents.
rather than succumb to your "we're a nation of immigrants" blather, we should look to europe; specifically sweden and germany, to see how well being bleeding heart, open arm, criminal-welcoming idiots has worked out for them.
things in germany are so fucked up due to the refugee invasion merkel could barely form a coalition government last time around. rape is the new national sport of sweden. the european continent, if you're paying attention, is swinging far right as a response to the dumb-fuckery of liberal politicians who let the invasion happen.
oh, and nice try with the posse comitatus bullshit. protecting our southern border with the military is ENTIRELY legal.
you see alky, i could be a little empathetic to these folks if they were to arrive politely, following the law, and sporting american flags.
instead they're marching under the flag of honduras, giving no indication that they're respectful of our border or our laws. and if they're going to act like that i'll call them what they are - invaders. and treat them as such.
For those who wondered about the hurricane season...another massive disaster no one is talking about....wonder where those caravan moose limbs are????
]
The worst U.S. storm landfall since 1935 leaves Northern Mariana Islands devastated
Residents are calling Yutu the worst storm they have ever experienced. It packed sustained winds of 180 miles per hour.
The use of the military for domestic political and is Unconstitutional. If he tries that tactic he will end up in court.
Nope, wrong again Mr Rogers.
and btw alky,
the US is under no legal obligation to accept these invaders and their claim(s) for asylum, and these invaders have no inherent legal right to asylum status.
from a purely legal perspective, the fact that your home country is a corrupt and violent third-world shithole is your problem, and no one else's.
"mostly are families of people who are attempting to escape murder rape and gangsters. "
The US immigration law does not allow "assylium" for the reasons you cited.
Mr Rogers, please do some research before posting.
My ancestor came to the British colony in 1759. To escape from a difficult life and start a family. It is no different from the people who are attempting to raise their families.
The only reason that rrb is opposed is because they are beaners. His words not mine.
It's simply racism at its worst.
Notice that Mr Roger doesn't know the applicable laws.
wrong again, alky:
As a caravan of migrants makes its way through Mexico towards the United States, Defense Secretary James Mattis is expected to sign an order Thursday that would deploy hundreds of active duty troops to the southern border, according to a U.S. official.
The initial estimate is that 800 to 1,000 service members could deploy in logistical support of Customs and Border Patrol, such as setting up tents for border authorities, the official said. Among their potential tasks, they would also be helping in the construction of fencing that is separate from the border wall.
There are already about 2,000 National Guard troops called up by the governors of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas to support the Trump administration's border security mission.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pentagon-send-active-duty-troops-border-logistical-support/story?id=58741906
and btw AGAIN, the posse comitatus act prohibits the military being used for LAW ENFORCEMENT.
we're being invaded by foreign nationals.
intelligent people can understand the difference.
Posse Comitatus Act
These active duty forces will not act in a law enforcement capacity, but strictly providing logistical support to CBP and therefore not covered Posse Comitatus Act, that prohibits the use of active duty forces in a law enforcement capacity.
Roger just stayed that the hoard are the same as our founding fathers.
Mr Rogers, did you really mean to state that?
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Posse Comitatus Act
try reading it.
and keep reading it until you understand it.
have mail order read it to you if necessary.
"Posse Comitatus Act" Roger
And inapplicable.
Please stop. Really. I am embarrassed for you.
"have mail order read it to you if necessary."
Lol.
They are not an armed force attempting to enter the United States.
Posse Comitatus Act.
The National Guard instead can be used in conjunction with local state law enforcement authorities.
Racism has rotted your mind beyond repair.
Mr Rogers how many Native Americans did your family since 1759?
Blogger Roger Amick said...
The use of the military for domestic political and is Unconstitutional.
no alky. the use of the military for domestic law enforcement is illegal.
posse comitatus makes no mention of politics.
none.
in fact, there does exist a loophole -
The act only specifically applies to the United States Army and, as amended in 1956, the United States Air Force. While the act does not explicitly mention the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps, the Department of the Navy has prescribed regulations that are generally construed to give the act force with respect to those services as well. The act does not apply to the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act either, primarily because although the Coast Guard is an armed service, it also has both a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency mission.
- from wiki.
so technically we could use the navy, marines, coast guard and nat. guard if we wanted to. but i fully expect trump to obey the law. unlike 0linsky trump respects the constitution.
The act only specifically applies to the United States Army and, as amended in 1956, the United States Air Force. While the act does not explicitly mention the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps, the Department of the Navy has prescribed regulations that are generally construed to give the act force with respect to those services as well. The act does not apply to the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act either, primarily because although the Coast Guard is an armed service, it also has both a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency mission.
The title of the act comes from the legal concept of posse comitatus, the authority under which a county sheriff, or other law officer, conscripts any able-bodied man to assist him or her in keeping the peace.
"And then there is Alky stupid" ®
Blogger Roger Amick said...
They are not an armed force attempting to enter the United States.
how do you know they're not armed?
and being armed is not a requirement. we can use the military to turn away an invasion ankle biting lilliputians if we wish.
but do what you always do when you're dead fucking wrong about something -
- invoke the invincible ignorance fallacy and dig your heels in.
Blogger KD said...
"And then there is Alky stupid" ®
oh yeah. and here comes an alky-lanche of copy/pastes he'll furiously google and post without reading or understanding.
happens every time. see the wiki post of his above.
REV, Mr Rogers goes into full blown spam mode when this wrong.
He called the World Series goes to LA Dodgers in 6 games. Currently LA is down 0-2.
If only Roger had even a hint of US law and History.
The Posse Comitatus Act, which passed after the Civil War to keep federal troops from policing the South, limits federal troops' deployment on U.S. soil and forbids using them to enforce domestic laws. The President can deploy troops if there's an insurrection or invasion on U.S. soil.
Therein lies the debate. The Congress has the authority to declare war. The debate on this proposal by the President is subject to judicial review if a suit is filed by a person or organization with standing.
He's on fragile legal grounds.
They are not an armed force attempting to enter the United States.
I am sure some of them are in fact armed but it really doesn't matter. An organized group of people crossing an international border without the host country's permission is called an invasion.
And the one of the armed forces legitimate function is to repel invasions.
There is no evidence of the families are organized and armed invaders.
You again have been proven stupid.
"And then there is Alky stupid" ®
CD, alky has the emotional stability of a 14 year old valley girl.
R
"An organized group of people crossing an international border without the host country's permission is called an invasion.
And the one of the armed forces legitimate function is to repel invasions."
Take that to court. Even this conservative court will be very wary of using the military for domestic political disputes.
No matter the Law, Roger is going to fight the truth and actual law.
I understand the Constitution and the law far better than you kput'z
Where are the tanks and artillery?
Take that to court. Even this conservative court will be very wary of using the military for domestic political disputes.
It not a domestic issue if they are on the other side of an international frontier.
The Trump administration is expected to deploy additional U.S. troops to assist in security operations at the southern border in response to a caravan of migrants traveling north on foot through Mexico, three U.S. officials confirmed Thursday.
The plan calls for about 800 more troops, including some active-duty forces primarily from the Army, to join a growing border mission called for by President Trump, one official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because an official announcement had not been made.
The new deployments, first reported by CNN, would add to the estimated 2,100 National Guard troops already involved in border operations. About 1,600 of those service members are in “border sectors,” with others in a headquarters units, officials said this week.
amazing. you would prefer to go to court and to take the side of an invading force AGAINST the united states.
you ARE a traitor, alky.
He's on fragile legal grounds.
and your law degree is from...?
you spent your life as a "tab A" into "slot B" assclown.
your 'legal' opinions are meaningless.
Roger, you're blaming the US.
Blogger KD said...
Roger, you're blaming the US.
indeed. and here's more alky hypocrisy for you -
a few days the alky was weeping about the saudi's carving up khasshogi because it was politically useful to him in a lame attempt to blame it on trump.
this past year over a dozen messican journalists have been butchered by messican drug cartels and other assorted gangsters and the alky couldn't give a shit less.
we have a damn good reason to engage on our southern border, as opposed to a moose-limb brotherhood, bin laden loving rag head who pushed propaganda for the amazon post.
Ten bombs and not one has detonated. Curious.
Obama's close Friend Bill Ayers did not make these bombs.
"bombs": 10
booms: 0
the authorities have identified a suspect:
https://www.throwbacks.com/content/images/2017/08/Screen-shot-2013-03-07-at-12-11-07.png
https://youtu.be/KylcRS6a38o
“It’s, I think, the most widespread attempt on the lives of high American officials since, and it may, in fact, exceed the scope since the assassination plot against Abraham Lincoln in 1865. The potential for disaster was enormous, the scope of it is fascinating and I think that what it tells us is that in every era of great political strife in this country there has been some manifestation of that strife in terms of violence,” Meacham said on “Morning Joe.”
indeed. and here's more alky hypocrisy for you -
Don't forget he was fine with cankles using an unsecured server in her bathroom that we know was hacked.
He and fatty's feigned outrage yesterday that Trump was using an unsecured iPhone which is fakenews
Very good point.
"bombs": 10
booms: 0
Which proves they were made by donks, since they don't work
Which proves they were made by donks, since they don't work
yup. that's the joke that's making the rounds.
and we must ask themselves that if the dangers in our society are so prevalent lately, and if we're being ruled under a totalitarian, authoritarian, "literally hitler" regime under trump...
...why on earth would we want to admit a single asylum seeker to a country that is so fucked up with all these deadly issues?
our military needs to turn back that beaner brigade caravan ASAP. for their sake. not ours.
Roger...
So it's now your expert legal position that the President's authority to call for short term (or emergency) military action is subject to Judicial view?
And that it's your personal opinion that the conservative members of the USSC would agree with you and declare the Presidential order to be unconstitutional?
Can I get some of what you are smoking, dude?
Roger should read the book Our Constitution. It's at seventh grade reading level so it shouldn't be too difficult for him.
As currently constituted, the military is a regiment size unit comprised of mostly medical and legal personnel. So the mission is mostly humanitarian in nature.
To be serious about defending the border you would need at least two infantry divisions.
can you imagine the alky's outrage if a right wing publication had published a set of assassination fantasy literature about 0linsky like the ny times did to trump?
He would have gone crazy
To be serious about defending the border you would need at least two infantry divisions.
if there was a democrat in the white house and those caravaners were guaranteed to vote GOP, you'd have 10 infantry divisions mobilized to the border by now.
Post a Comment