Do you have a source for this claim? According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, the total number of DACA requests that have been approved since inception in 2012, is just shy of 800,000. The number of current (as of 2017) approval recipients is less than 700,000. Why would the Dems ask for 1.8M deferrals if there were only 800,000 to begin with?Trump offered 800K DACA, Dems countered with 1.8 mil,
So you have a source for this as well because that's not the information I've seen. In January, 2018, Trump and Schumer agreed to a deal that gave Trump ~$5B for the wall in exchange for the DACA program. Trump left the meeting and was told that Republicans wouldn't support it (plus the right-wing talking heads resumed calling Trump "Amnesty Don"). Trump then reneged on the deal so Schumer took the wall off the table.Trump said yes but to get GOP senate approval there would need to be immigration reforms closing loopholes included. Dems let it die.
Wow. That Vote #3 looks, on the surface, to be an outstanding compromise.The bill failed only because of last-minute White House opposition.
This article states the four votes on this Senate bill last Feb., 2/2018, and how each Senators voted.
Here's how your senators voted on failed immigration proposals
My state has one Dem. senator and one Rep.. They both voted yes on the first and third proposals. That's compromise.
The article you linked to is From January, 2018. Do you have anything showing Trump and the GOP are agreeable to DACA protections in exchange for wall funding now?I posted a NYTs article I believe up thread. Yes DACA has always been on the table.
No Democrat has ever won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. When 3,000,000 more people vote for the person who loses the election than voted for the winner, something is wrong.We have a little provision in the US Constitution called the "Electoral College." When the Democrats win the presidency via the EC, it's a vital and fundamental Constitutional provision that prevents the most populous states from leaving the less populous states irrelevant. When the Democrats lose the electoral college, it's an obsolete, antique anachronism that thwarts The Will Of the People.
Hillary Clinton was convicted of a felony? When did that happen?I guess, to go with that, you could also add that Hillary was a felon... so you should just wipe the board clean and start from scratch.
Probably right before she became a witch!Hillary Clinton was convicted of a felony? When did that happen?
So we should just let mother die to allow the baby to be born?Check this:Hillary Clinton hides behind ‘health’ of the mother, defends partial-birth abortion in final debate
Hillary Clinton defended the practice of partial-birth abortion in the final presidential debate on Wednesday, obscuring her belief that appeals to the “health” of the mother would make any abortion legal at any point during a pregnancy.
You really don't get sarcastic jokes, do you?I don't think any "practicing Christian" that I know of, would ever do this at all. Not even to get funding or votes or anything...
Yes, it seems so. Here’s the headline: “Last Night, The Wing Welcomed Hillary Clinton Into Their Coven.”
She was on April 3rd awarded “an honorary lifetime Wing membership,” which comes, we are told, with free cosmetics. It’s unclear whether Hillary viewed that as an insult. Most likely not. She tweeted of her time at the coven that she was “inspired by [their] passion and commitment.”
The group is called The Wing. It was started by Audrey Gelman and Lauren Kassan in 2016. It is not a woman’s club, Gelman said. “We’re a coven, not a sorority.” Gelman’s mother is actress Lena Dunham’s therapist, and the younger Gelman was reportedly the inspiration for Dunham’s show Girls.
Yeah, well, if Trump would compromise and the Dems something on DACA, he'd get his funding for a wall the majority of Americans don't want. Especially since Trump is holding the government hostage to get what he wants.Well ya, if they would cooperate and fund the wall there would be no shutdown.
Not really. 48.2% of voters wanted Clinton and 46.1% of voters wanted Trump. SourceBecause the dems who just want to oppose him no matter what the issue Won't negotiate any funding for the WALL---which the people who voted for the President want.
And the women that said Trump raped them?I see no where , anyone denied that "once someone becomes President of the USA that means he's not supposed to be criticized for the things he's doing wrong."
That was not your point you were making at in the post I quoted. It was to slyly flip Jack's sentence around and imply that the POTUS was a confessed sexual predator and worse then Clinton. Many would disagree with you , like the women who said clinton raped them, or his aid.
IOW, "I can't support my claim so I'm going to deflect." Common is these here parts.No I don't have to. This is just the typical case of a dem giving Hillary a pass and making excuses for her. No snake oil , thanks.
so it's okay to criticize him? Good to hear.I see no where , anyone denied that "once someone becomes President of the USA that means he's not supposed to be criticized for the things he's doing wrong."
uhmmm...I don't think there was any "sly" about it. One of the things JacksBratt had against Sec Clinton was "Supporting a husband who is known to be a sexual predator." I was asking him "Is it better to vote for someone who supports her husband (who is an alleged sexual predator because as far as I can tell he's never been convicted of being one) or of supporting someone who is a confessed sexual predator?".That was not your point you were making at in the post I quoted. It was to slyly flip Jack's sentence around and imply that the POTUS was a confessed sexual predator and worse then Clinton.
That's fine, agreeing with me isn't required.Many would disagree with you ,
...do you hold President Trump to that same standard?like the women who said clinton raped them, or his aid.
Okay.On the advice from scripture I'm done with this dialogue. (snip)
The deal has not changed.The article you linked to is From January, 2018. Do you have anything showing Trump and the GOP are agreeable to DACA protections in exchange for wall funding now?
No that is not the case. I've witnessed these views before and this thread has run its' course with me , it is redundant now. Have a nice day.IOW, "I can't support my claim so I'm going to deflect." Common is these here parts.
...I thought you were done with this dialog? On the advice of Scripture no less.No that is not the case. I've witnessed these views before and this thread has run its' course with me , it is redundant now. (snip)
You have a nice one as well.Have a nice day.
Do you have any evidence of that? I have searched high and low and can't find anything about Trump offering DACA protection in exchange for wall funding in the last two months.The deal has not changed.