[Hoot Gibson]

I think the question of who would be tougher on immigration - Trump, Cruz, or Rubio - has been answered. Nobody in this country illegally deserves a path to citizenship. This is a pathetic opening position for negotiating an immigration deal with Democrats.

This would be a bad deal no matter how much money Congress agreed to spend on a wall.

Trump offers to triple Obama’s amnesty number in exchange for tougher security laws
Generous legalization is trade for wall, more deportations

[jetpilot]

I think the question of who would be tougher on immigration - Trump, Cruz, or Rubio - has been answered. Nobody in this country illegally deserves a path to citizenship. This is a pathetic opening position for negotiating an immigration deal with Democrats.

This would be a bad deal no matter how much money Congress agreed to spend on a wall.

Disagree. Cruz was never going to get any deal done, thus no wall. Let's give it some time to shake out.

No way to get 60 votes on a conservative position on immigration. Hell, probably couldn't get 50. I blame McConnell for not using nuclear option. At any time in the future that Dems retake control of Senate, they will immediately go nuclear. Then McConnell will look like one of the biggest fools in the history of the country when they reverse anything resembling conservative policy.

[TheRealThing]

The taxpayer wants a wall, and IMHO, year number one of the Trump era has shot by us like a bullet. 25% of his first term gone. If McConnell sticks by his old and rusty guns, and for little more than nostalgia's sake continues to honor an arcane rule (which time BTW has rendered absurd) over the collective good of the voting public, he may well have done as much to destroy conservatism as any one man on the left ever could. But the situation is actually worse. Because this blind adherence to a rule, which is not mentioned in any founding document, actually usurps the rule of law and the right of the people to self govern themselves.

We send representatives to the Hill to govern on our behalf. And those representatives we send, along with the people who elected them, are being sacrificed on an altar constructed of McConnell's own fond but flawed remembrances of days gone by. Chuck Schumer is the real string puller in the US Senate, make no mistake. My fear is that owing to age, Mitch has fallen inextricably into a fantasy in which everybody wakes up and comes out shaking hands and working together again. It won't happen.

Frankly I am beginning to believe more and more, that the irresistible forces pushing mankind towards globalism, and a one world government under the autonomous control of AntiChrist, may in fact be unstoppable. It was my hope that in having elected D J Trump President, the people of the US had demonstrated a willingness to turn from their rejection of the sovereignty of God. And in so doing, extended our time of living in the calmer waters at the extremities of the vortex which is drawing history into it's depths like the mother of all black holes. I continue to trust The Lord as far as the interface of world events and His omniscient revelation of the unfolding of history. So it may yet prove to be the case and we do have more time than it would presently seem.

Current events would seem to be funneling men into a stricture where time and opportunity to choose for or against Him is lessened. One way or another, we rail against governmental inequities and immoralities not only on this forum, but the thousands of professionals whose job it is to analyze matters of national import. In the end it all boils down to one thing though, what will each of us do with Christ? Friends, time has to be short.

[Hoot Gibson]

Disagree. Cruz was never going to get any deal done, thus no wall. Let's give it some time to shake out.

No way to get 60 votes on a conservative position on immigration. Hell, probably couldn't get 50. I blame McConnell for not using nuclear option. At any time in the future that Dems retake control of Senate, they will immediately go nuclear. Then McConnell will look like one of the biggest fools in the history of the country when they reverse anything resembling conservative policy.

I agree about the nuclear option and McConnell, but a bad deal would be worse than no deal. Democrats don't want secure borders and will continue to refuse to enforce immigration laws at every opportunity.

I would prefer that Republicans enforce existing immigration laws and focus on ending chain immigration rather than give up the farm in exchange for a wall. Democrats want to import millions of new voters and when they get into power again, laws and a wall will not stop them from succeeding.

Trump and the Republicans should do all that they can to stop illegal aliens from becoming citizens and Democratic voters, while they have the power to do so.

Maybe Democrats will shoot themselves in the feet and refuse the great deal that Trump has offered. I hope that will be the case because it would remove immigration as a serious issue in the 2018 campaigns and allow Republicans to spend more time touting the tax cuts and success of Trump's tax cuts.

[TheRealThing]

I agree about the nuclear option and McConnell, but a bad deal would be worse than no deal. Democrats don't want secure borders and will continue to refuse to enforce immigration laws at every opportunity.

I would prefer that Republicans enforce existing immigration laws and focus on ending chain immigration rather than give up the farm in exchange for a wall. Democrats want to import millions of new voters and when they get into power again, laws and a wall will not stop them from succeeding.

Trump and the Republicans should do all that they can to stop illegal aliens from becoming citizens and Democratic voters, while they have the power to do so.

Maybe Democrats will shoot themselves in the feet and refuse the great deal that Trump has offered. I hope that will be the case because it would remove immigration as a serious issue in the 2018 campaigns and allow Republicans to spend more time touting the tax cuts and success of Trump's tax cuts.

Fingers crossed.

[hitter]

Trump done this to make the democrats on capital hill look stupid. He gave them what they said they wanted and they will still vote against it because it's trump. Good political move

[TheRealThing]

Trump done this to make the democrats on capital hill look stupid. He gave them what they said they wanted and they will still vote against it because it's trump. Good political move

If Dems accept Trump's proposal they still lose because as you say, "it's Trump."

How about a little 'define irony' drill of the day? 6 days ago Chuck Schumer said the following:
Claiming President Donald Trump "can't take yes for an answer," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., delivered a scathing review of the cause of Congress' government shutdown, blaming "a dysfunctional president."

"Our democracy was designed to run on compromise," Schumer told the Senate floor Sunday. "The Senate was designed to run on compromise. We are no dictatorship, subject to the whims of an executive – just as we're not a one-party system where the winner of an election gets to decide everything and the minority nothing.
Read Full Article Here Sen. Schumer: 'Political Catch-22' Stems From 'Dysfunctional President' | Newsmax.com

In framing the argument in the way he has, Mr Trump just put Schumer into a box from which there is no escape. If he says yes Trump gets reelected, if he says no, Trump gets reelected.

[Hoot Gibson]

If Obama had offered Republicans the deal that Trump just offered Democrats, very, very few Republicans would have supported it because it is a horrible immigration policy. This will not be a win if Democrats accept the deal that is on the table. This is exactly the kind of immigration deal that Trump's primary opponents warned us about.

[TheRealThing]

^^ The illegals are already here, are they not? Short of deportation teams out rounding up millions of them to remove by force, what is left? The true motivation driving the recently outed Democrats is revealed. Their concern isn't the DACA recipients, it's open borders.

Whatever the final agreement looks like, it will not be in the exact form Trump has presented. I don't like this kind of stuff because I don't know where it's going, but I don't like being held prisoner to the supermajority rule for the next three years either.

[Hoot Gibson]

^^ The illegals are already here, are they not? Short of deportation teams out rounding up millions of them to remove by force, what is left? The true motivation driving the recently outed Democrats is revealed. Their concern isn't the DACA recipients, it's open borders.

Whatever the final agreement looks like, it will not be in the exact form Trump has presented. I don't like this kind of stuff because I don't know where it's going, but I don't like being held prisoner to the supermajority rule for the next three years either.

This is an amnesty bill. When did you decide to support amnesty, including citizenship for 1.8 million illegal aliens? If Obama had proposed the same thing, would you have supported it?

I am not even sure that Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and John McCain have ever supported such a generous amnesty bill that included citizenship - with no requirement to leave the country and apply for re-entry.

This is not what Trump promised - it is not even close. This is a very generous offer of amnesty for criminals who have broken federal immigration laws. This is a plan that Jeb Bush could enthusiastically support.

[TheRealThing]

I said I didn't like it, and I don't support citizenship even if they are allowed to stay. I don't think Dems will accept the offer but in lieu of that, I asked what you think should be done if not what Trump has offered?

[Hoot Gibson]

I said I didn't like it, and I don't support citizenship even if they are allowed to stay. I don't think Dems will accept the offer but in lieu of that, I asked what you think should be done if not what Trump has offered?

If the alternative to what Trump has offered is nothing, then nothing is a much better alternative. Trump got elected by convincing voters that he would be tough on the illegal immigration problem. Granting amnesty and citizenship to ANY illegal immigrants is not being tough on illegal immigration.

If I was Trump, I would have offered a bill that would have granted the so-called "dreamers" legal status that does not include a path to citizenship, provided that said dreamers have not already committed felonies. In exchange, I would have held firm on funding for the wall.

Finally, I would have courted moderate Democrats like Manchin and pressured the RINOs to support the bill and demanded that the Senate suspend the cloture rule.

Given the state of the economy and Trump's improving job approval ratings, he had some leverage to negotiate a good immigration deal. That leverage is gone.

[TheRealThing]

If the alternative to what Trump has offered is nothing, then nothing is a much better alternative. Trump got elected by convincing voters that he would be tough on the illegal immigration problem. Granting amnesty and citizenship to ANY illegal immigrants is not being tough on illegal immigration.

If I was Trump, I would have offered a bill that would have granted the so-called "dreamers" legal status that does not include a path to citizenship, provided that said dreamers have not already committed felonies. In exchange, I would have held firm on funding for the wall.

Finally, I would have courted moderate Democrats like Manchin and pressured the RINOs to support the bill and demanded that the Senate suspend the cloture rule.

Given the state of the economy and Trump's improving job approval ratings, he had some leverage to negotiate a good immigration deal. That leverage is gone.

Sounds great to me! I did see where Trump has been asking McConnell to end the rule of cloture though.


May of 2017
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday thoroughly rejected President Donald Trump’s call to nuke the legislative filibuster.

“That will not happen,” the longtime lawmaker told reporters Tuesday when asked if he would lower the Senate’s 60-vote threshold needed to end debate on legislation to a simple 51-vote majority. “There is an overwhelming majority … not interested in changing the way the Senate operates [on legislation].”
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/02...filibuster

August 2017
President Trump on Wednesday called for Senate Republicans to get rid of the legislative filibuster.

"If Republican Senate doesn't get rid of the Filibuster Rule & go to a simple majority, which the Dems would do, they are just wasting time!" Trump tweeted Wednesday.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...filibuster

January 2018
The White House on Sunday called for Senate Republicans to change the chamber’s rules to resolve the funding impasse as the government shutdown continued into its second day.

President Donald Trump tweeted his call for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to invoke the so-called nuclear option and thereby remove leverage for Senate Democrats.
Read more: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/trump-c...z55RGd18CL

[Hoot Gibson]

Sounds great to me! I did see where Trump has been asking McConnell to end the rule of cloture though.


May of 2017
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday thoroughly rejected President Donald Trump’s call to nuke the legislative filibuster.

“That will not happen,” the longtime lawmaker told reporters Tuesday when asked if he would lower the Senate’s 60-vote threshold needed to end debate on legislation to a simple 51-vote majority. “There is an overwhelming majority … not interested in changing the way the Senate operates [on legislation].”
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/02...filibuster

August 2017
President Trump on Wednesday called for Senate Republicans to get rid of the legislative filibuster.

"If Republican Senate doesn't get rid of the Filibuster Rule & go to a simple majority, which the Dems would do, they are just wasting time!" Trump tweeted Wednesday.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administrati...filibuster

January 2018
The White House on Sunday called for Senate Republicans to change the chamber’s rules to resolve the funding impasse as the government shutdown continued into its second day.

President Donald Trump tweeted his call for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to invoke the so-called nuclear option and thereby remove leverage for Senate Democrats.
Read more: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/trump-c...z55RGd18CL

I know that Trump has asked McConnell to change the Senate rules and that McConnell has refused - but that is no excuse for caving on immigration the way that Trump has done. I do not subscribe to the "do something even if it is wrong" theory of governance.

Republicans need some legislative accomplishments to run on this fall, but I don't think that passing an amnesty bill will drive GOP voters to turn out in large numbers. Trump's proposal is a huge unforced error, IMO. I hope Democrats bail him out by refusing it outright.

We both know how the negotiating process works. If Congress sends Trump an immigration bill to sign, it will be no better than what Trump outlined in his opening position.

[TheRealThing]

I know that Trump has asked McConnell to change the Senate rules and that McConnell has refused - but that is no excuse for caving on immigration the way that Trump has done. I do not subscribe to the "do something even if it is wrong" theory of governance.

Republicans need some legislative accomplishments to run on this fall, but I don't think that passing an amnesty bill will drive GOP voters to turn out in large numbers. Trump's proposal is a huge unforced error, IMO. I hope Democrats bail him out by refusing it outright.

We both know how the negotiating process works. If Congress sends Trump an immigration bill to sign, it will be no better than what Trump outlined in his opening position.

No argumemt here. Like I said, I don't know where this is going.

[TheRealThing]

Still can't really say I know where the offer of amnesty is going. Although I can say this; If Trump et-al really do at this point, understand the nature of those who are their political opponents well enough to have known ahead of time the reaction of those opponents to the 4 pillars of Trump's DACA fix, he has learned the ways of DC at something approaching political light speed. And further, this is no ploy. The DACA fix is a serious proposal that he will drive to push through. So if Trump's base thinks otherwise they're in for a bit of a wakeup.

And not that I support the plan, but in offering same he has completely laid bare the duplicity and hypocrisy of the hard left. Trump's plan far surpassed the DACA demands that Obama eventually made real with yet another illegal stroke of his magical pen. The only reason the things that Trump has offered Dems could become legal, is they would have to be run through Congress. But legal these days seems not to be necessarily right. So can we finally realize that there is no getting along with Dems? They're either going to be steamroller fodder, or they're going to win with ridiculousness. Which of course means the right will have to lay down everything we fought so hard to win back last election and just give up.

I have heard a lot of folks saying Trump's base will have to prepared to meet the left halfway. Really now? Trump's base elected him in no small part because he said he would force aliens who're here illegally, to go back and do it the right way and go to the end of the line. Which of course is not meeting the demands of the hard left at the half way point. Rather it is we on the right meeting the hard left where they stand. So we're the ones compromising even MORE in this case than 100%. And things only get worse from there.

The problems; Half of government are the conservative right's sworn enemies. So you know that 49 NO votes for anything McConnell drops the hammer on, are as sure as the sunrise. Even Joe Manchin (D) WV, who wears the mask of reason as well as anybody presently in the Congress, was a NO vote against ObamaCare Reform and tax legislation. Newt Gingrich on good ol Joe... "He talks like us but he votes like them." LOL

So a 51 vote simple majority (as is outlined in the US Constitution) is attainable only on best-case scenario basis. But throw into the mix about 5 notable RINO Senators who are odds-wise on any subject, 50/50 on voting with Dems anyway, and things go south in a hurry. I know I for one, will never forget "the show" John McCain put on in single handedly voting to kill the ObamaCare reform bill. See, the true showman votes absolute last to remove any doubt that it was his vote that derailed that important issue "for the people." Throw in one Libertarian scrambled-egg-omelet who won't vote for anything of which he is not the author and things are in a word, tenuous. Now, to pour battery acid over the aforementioned governmental soufflé-on-a-rock-crusher, we have a Senate Leader in one Mitch McConnell, whose entire reason for life seems to be an inexplicable death grip on the rule of cloture. But it all makes perfect sense I suppose to him. Since odds for the 51 vote threshold are already lottery-esque, why not up the ante? Let's just hold out, (against the will of the people BTW,) for a 60 vote supermajority. That way the legislative prospects of "we the people," go from being merely tenuous to completely impossible. Asking 20% of the Democrat opposition to join their Republican enemies in what would surely constitute for each, a career ending roll call. Brilliant.

[hitter]

It doesn't matter if republicans gave everything democrats wanted in a bill or vise versa they still wouldn't vote for each other. It's like a bunch of grade schoolers running the country

[TheRealThing]

It doesn't matter if republicans gave everything democrats wanted in a bill or vise versa they still wouldn't vote for each other. It's like a bunch of grade schoolers running the country

Yes you are correct to a large extent. But our freedoms are being tag-teamed here by the Dems and some of the more prestigious of the Republican aristocracy who are arrogant and combative to a fault. Senators John McCain, Jeff Flakey, Susan Collins, Rand Paul, Lindsay Graham and Ben Sasse are the mainstay of the Republican opposition. But don't ever kid yourself about Marco Rubio, Shelly Moore Capito, Bob Corker, Dean Heller, Lisa Murkowski, and bringing up the somewhat distant rear is Rob Portman. Many of these guys would happily bury the hatchet in Trump's back if opportunity presented itself. In all there are an even dozen rats in the Republican woodpile, and these guys/gals are no friends of the administration. No matter what the basis or how cleverly characterized, any sort of government conceived and prosecuted resistance that may take root in defiance of the people, is tyranny. When we're talking about people in government overturning the will of he people, that means our form of representative government is gone.

But from among the 100 'Kings' of the Senate, you have 49 Dems who're sworn oppositionists along with the 12 Republican RINO's, and the ratio of the disloyal opposition becomes 61-39. Mitch McConnell likes those odds so much that he's staking the entirety of his political legacy on the rule of cloture, which of course requires a supermajority of 60 votes to pass legislation. But in saying that I digress.

The dirty tricks, the fake dossiers and the 'resistance' if you will, all come from the Dems. But with the help of those RINO's listed above, all of whom participating in their occasional treacheries, and you get the composition of the swamp. And I contend, (owing to the obvious layers of pie-scum), that nobody emerging from a room where a food fight rages continually can escape blame, whether they participate or not. And that's the strategy here. Dems are being exposed daily for their lies and offenses, so their only hope is to drag down into the ditch with them any and all who would dare to expose them. It's a case of character/witness assassination, pure and simple. An unfair deceit we see played out in the courtroom every day in this country. Lawyers know the likely guilt or innocence of their clients, but their win/loss case ratio is important if they want to make money.

I say when we hear the media types trying to say this thing is merely a back and forth between Dems and Republicans, we know that even though exposed, they are still in the throes of advancing the liberal agenda. Funny how if all this supposedly goes both ways, why the raging hope for the coming midterms is nonetheless, for a Democrat sweep. I guess I must be confused about that because if both sides are guilty, why will only one side take it's lumps with the voting public? Hillary tried to steal the election just like she stole the nomination. And she had PLENTY of help doing it.