How President Trump can convince dems to build the wall

Why do dems oppose protecting our border?

About the wall

The Dems try every excuse to oppose the wall. The most idiotic is to complain about the cost ( 5 billion).

Nancy's border security plan

It seems logical to me to analyze the Nancy Pelosi border security proposal. She has emphatically stated that she will not vote for any expenditure for a barrier along the southern border. So it is crystal-clear that she is demanding that illegal aliens, drug dealers, terrorists, and criminals be provided unimpeded entrance into America. Without any kind of physical barrier, it is virtually impossible to prevent their illegal entry into our country.

Nancy’s demand is that only high-tech monitoring of the border be implemented. So it is crystal-clear that she wants to have “blanket” high-tech surveillance of the people who are illegally entering our country. I suppose that she MIGHT permit the border patrol to place signs along the border stating that the illegal entries are being recorded, and requesting that the criminals, terrorists, gang members and drug dealers voluntarily turn themselves into American authorities within some reasonable time frame. I would suppose that Nancy would want to ensure that the “reasonable time frame” would be less than 10 years. What do you think? Does this seem to be a logical procedure?

It is crystal-clear that high-tech surveillance CAN NOT block entry into our country, so one can only assume that Nancy’s intent is that illegal entry into our country should proceed without resistance. Given that, it is quite obvious that the illegal entry into our country by minors will continue under Nancy’s plan, and there will therefore be deaths of some of these children in the perilous trek. So it is only obvious that Nancy intends to demand that we initiate measures to ensure that there will be no deaths experienced by the illegals as they illegally invade our country. So it becomes further obvious that Nancy will be tempted to use the high-tech surveillance to identify illegals who-need assistance “to avoid an injury or death”. So it seems likely that Nancy will want our border patrol to provide assistance to the illegals in the form of food, water, and directions to the nearest “rest area” which Nancy will probably insist provide food, water, medical services, legal services, and temporary housing. Of course, Nancy will insist that all of this be provided for the illegals free of charge.

So, to summarize the consequences of implementing Nancy’s plan. There will be unchecked illegal entries into our country. There will be extensive and expensive surveillance using high-tech equipment to produce extensive documentation to be buried in some government report and subsequently ignored. There will be billions of dollars paid to Nancy’s high-tech companies in Silicon Valley to greatly increase their already grossly inflated profits. Nancy will be handsomely rewarded by her Silicon Valley cohorts. There will be billions of dollars spent “protecting the illegals from health hazards”. The border patrol’s function will be modified from defending our borders to providing welcome services for illegals. MS-13 and similar gangs will proliferate greatly to create mayhem and expand their criminal activities. And best of all, the over-inflated price of this will be paid for by YOU, the overtaxed, underappreciated, and underserved taxpayer.

What do you think? Does this sound like a plan you can support?

About Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts in the democrat leadership do not care about helping the average American citizen. They are dead set against providing President Trump any kind of financing for any kind of a physical barrier on our border regardless of the disastrous consequences which occur to American citizens for their actions. What is the REAL REASON that they will not support building the needed barrier on our southern border?

Don’t look to the “reasons” that Nancy and her cohorts are claiming is their basis for denying money to defend our borders. You know and I know that just a short few years ago, Nancy and her cohorts were claiming that we needed a WALL on our southern border. So, you know as well as I that all of Nancy’s resistance is a manufactured resistance. The main reason is as obvious as the nose on your face. Nancy and her cohorts SIMPLY HATE TRUMP'S GUTS. They will do ANYTHING within their power to hurt Trump, and I reiterate the fact that they DO NOT care who gets hurt in the process.

However, there is another facet in the puzzle that you also must understand. The physical barrier (wall or fence) is a low-tech solution. It is obvious and undeniably true that a good physical barrier combined with adequate manpower (read that as border guards) WILL reduce the number of illegals who can get into our country. But just stop and think about something else. When Nancy does mention “border security” the only solution which she will agree to MUST BE HIGH-TECH. She claims that High-Tech surveillance combined with High-tech response will work. Why is she so adamant that border security must be predominately High-Tech when anyone with a brain has to know that high-tech can only provide surveillance. It DOES NOT provide a barrier to entry by illegals. So, why is she so adamant?

Have you stopped to think how many billions of dollars of high-tech expenditures it would take to monitor our border? The cost would probably be billions of dollars PER MONTH! If Nancy has her way, which companies would be making these billions of dollars of profit? Do I have to draw you a picture? Nancy’s resistance to building a physical barrier is probably directly proportional to how much money is going to flow to Nancy’s pocket if the silicon valley companies in California get the lion’s share of the profits, and the border security provided will be notably inferior to what could be provided for far less money with more border agents and a physical barrier.

To put it more directly, Nancy wants to serve the desires of her cohorts in the high-tech companies to make billions of dollars (and profit handsomely herself). She does not care about the American citizens who are harmed by inadequate border security, only about making money for herself and her cronies. You must know that she has zero concerns about who is being hurt by the “shutdown”. For the entire period of time of the shutdown, Nancy and her cohorts have been spending lavish amounts of money on parties in Hawaii, and Puerto Rico and elsewhere. Those parties have been paid for by you, the American taxpayer. Nancy does not care who is hurt by the shutdown, she is only concerned about using the shutdown for political leverage to accomplish her twisted objectives.

Defining a crisis

The democratic leaders are making the statement that illegal immigration in this country is not a crisis. There have been over 4000 murders committed in recent years by illegal aliens. Chew on that statement for a little while. The democratic leaders are telling you and me that murdering over 4000 American citizens is no big deal. Oh yes, if you put them on the spot, they will make the appropriate noises to appear to care that Americans are being murdered by illegal aliens, but look at their actions. Since Trump has been president, the democrats have fought against any kind of effort to prevent illegals from entering our country. They have managed to cut the number of border agents, totally prevent any increase in money allocated to border security, demean the ICE agents in every way possible, and generally do everything in their power to prevent border security from doing its job. However, while they are destroying our border security, they lie constantly by claiming that they want to have improved border security. The plain truth is as obvious as the nose on your face. The democratic leaders flat don’t care about providing for the security needs of American citizens

.

So if the ongoing wholesale murder of thousands of American citizens is not a crisis, just how do the democratic leaders define a crises? Perhaps the democrats consider millions of cases of identity theft or identify fraud to be a crises. We know that illegal aliens use fake ID to obtain jobs or otherwise hide from authorities in America. Certainly, if there were millions of citizens using fake ID’s, the democrats would launch extensive investigations to find and punish the perpetrators. However, in regards to illegal aliens, the democrats shrug and make excuses for the illegal activities. They certainly do not consider it to be a crisis, (unless it were American citizens committing the crimes). How about the tens of thousands of sex crimes committed by illegal aliens? Could this be a crisis in the democrat’s eyes? Obviously, they don’t think so because they are too busy covering up the reporting of these crimes. How about the senseless violence perpetrated by gangs such as MS13? To quote the democratic leadership, we must consider MS13 gang members to be “human” and treated with the utmost human respect. Obviously, this is not a crisis either. The latest crisis which I have heard identified by the democrats (liberals) is the danger of plastic straws. What do you think?

An article by Marc Thiessen of the Washington Post

President Trump did something Tuesday night that he has rarely done since taking office: He used the presidential bully pulpit to reach beyond his hardcore base of supporters to make his case to the American people as a whole.
Speaking from the Oval Office for the first time during his presidency, Trump embraced our country’s tradition as a nation of immigrants, declaring “America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation.” He then offered a cogent explanation why he believes we face what he called “a humanitarian crisis — a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul” along our southern border.
He pointed out the human cost of our broken system to illegal migrants themselves, expressing compassion for the “children [who] are used as human pawns by vicious coyotes and ruthless gangs” and the “women [who] are sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek up through Mexico.” He shared heartbreaking stories of Americans killed by criminal aliens who had no right to be here — including a police officer in California who was murdered, a 16-year-old girl who was brutally stabbed in Maryland, and an Air Force veteran who was raped and beaten to death.
“I’ve held the hands of the weeping mothers and embraced the grief-stricken fathers,” Trump declared. “I will never forget the pain in their eyes, the tremble in their voices, or the sadness gripping their souls.”
And he laid out his solution, which he explained was “developed by law enforcement professionals and border agents” and includes funds for cutting-edge technology, more border agents, more immigration judges, more bed space and medical support — and $5.7 billion for a “physical barrier” that he called “just common sense.” Without naming her, Trump responded to the absurd charge from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that a wall is “immoral.” Democrats voted repeatedly for physical barriers until he was elected president, he noted. If a wall is immoral, Trump asked, “why do wealthy politicians build walls, fences and gates around their homes? They don’t build walls because they hate the people on the outside, but because they love the people on the inside.”
The president did not unilaterally declare a national emergency. Instead, he called for compromise and said, “To those who refuse to compromise in the name of border security, I would ask: imagine if it was your child, your husband, or your wife, whose life was so cruelly shattered and totally broken?”
He was, in short, presidential.
Democrats insisted on equal time, which is highly unusual. for presidential addresses other than the State of the Union. It was a mistake. In contrast to Trump, Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) came across as small and intransigent.
While Trump spoke calmly and rationally from behind the Resolute Desk, the Democratic leaders accused him of “pounding the table” and having a “temper tantrum.” While Trump told human stories, they complained about process. They accused him of arguing that the women and children at the border were “a security threat” when he had just explained to the American people that they were victims, too. They charged him with using the “backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis, stoke fear and divert attention from the turmoil in his administration.” They were partisan and petty, while Trump came across as reasonable and even compassionate.
To normal Americans watching in the heartland, and who are not steeped in Trump hatred, the president must have seemed like the adult in the room.
And, most important, Pelosi and Schumer failed to use the one word that millions of Americans were longing to hear — compromise. But Trump did. That is why the president won the night. Schumer and Pelosi appealed to their base, while Trump made an effective appeal to persuadable Americans.

Until now, Trump has owned the 18-day government shutdown that prompted this address, because he’s the one who started it. But if Democrats continue to attack him, and won’t entertain any compromise, soon the shutdown will be all theirs — because they’re the ones who have refused to end it.

Click on the linkTranscript of Trump's speech for the full transcript of Trump's speech:

Do something

Click on the link below to read the story.

Triple Amputee Vet's Wall Campaign Passes $17M Amid Attacks

The real story

I really enjoyed the holidays by taking two full months off, but it feels good to be writing again, and I am going to take the obvious route and talk about the shutdown. Let’s start by asking the obvious question, “Why a government shutdown?” The obvious answer is, “Because the democrat leaders refuse to compromise.” Nancy Pelosi summed up the situation quite clearly by stating that she will only provide one dollar for “The Wall”. If you are astute, you know that every few days there is another instance where an illegal alien kills someone, assaults someone, robs someone, ad nauseam. The main stream media tries to cover up or minimize these events, but there are so many stories that some of them even make it into the liberal media reporting. The violent actions of the illegal aliens trying to force their way into America are constantly minimized by the main stream media, but if you have a brain, it is obvious that violent people who totally disrespect our laws should not be allowed into our country. However, all of this is simply a red herring.

What is the real reason that the democrat leaders have reversed their agenda? Just a few years ago, the democrat leaders were expounding on the need to stifle the onslaught of illegal aliens. The answer is simple and obvious, they are now opposed to controlling the illegal aliens because it is a way of harming President Trump. It is an expression of their HATRED of President Trump. Their words and actions are being dictated by their hatred, and the democrat leaders are willing to sacrifice anything on the altar of hatred, including the welfare of America or the welfare of American citizens. The democrat leaders have zero interest in addressing the problem of the invasion of America by illegal aliens. Instead, their efforts will be to oppose President Trump in all matters, and use their liberal media cohorts to blame all of the negative, destructive consequences on President Trump.