Kamala Harris major border policy speech

[Pogo]

Current Biden administration policy is to process those crossing and release them until a later court appearance which de facto don't happen. That is exactly what this bill would have streamlined and codified. That isn't "bull***"[sic] as you so rudely put it. It is the truth. The American people know it, too. This bill was never about fixing the border. It was about trying to give Kamala Harris a talking point cover during the election. But the people aren't buying it. That's probably the real reason you are so irritated.

Yes, because Congress won't give the border patrol and ancillary organizations the money and authorization to deal with the many people seeking freedom and a better life which we are legally obliged to consider, the overloaded system is obliged to use release on own recognizance as a method to avoid overpopulating our limited system lest we be guilty of inhumane practices.

Yeah, ultimately Trump's desperation for a talking point is not about fixing anything and you are supporting the continuation of the problem.

 

[Copernicus]

He is not grasping at straws, because voting against the procedural vote was not a vote to kill the bill. It was a vote to table it with the possibility of bringing it back later, possibly after the November election. You are merely jumping to the conclusion that those who voted against taking the bill forward to a vote actually opposed the bill itself. And the bill would not "flood the US with unlimited numbers of immigrants." That is blatant fearmongering.

It is tantamount to killing it. There are two possibilities are the election. Either the Republicans will regain the control or the Democrats will retain control of the Senate. In the case where the Republicans gain control they could either "fix" the bill or kill it outright. If Democrats retain control, assuming the unrealistic scenario where the get to 60% control, then the Republicans can still keep the bill table until the end of the Senate legislative year. At which point it must start all over again to be reintroduced. Which would kill its current form.

No, it is tantamount to keeping hope of reintroducing the bill alive. Going to a straight up or down vote would have killed it, because the bill would have been filibustered. The procedural bill was not being filibustered, because Donald Trump managed to block Republican support for it. Since the bill was acceptable to enough Republicans for passage before Trump's meddling, it could still be reintroduced and passed after the election, assuming that Trump would no longer be a factor in how Republicans voted. It was a bipartisan bill, not the bill that Democrats would have passed if they had full control of Congress. The only way to get anything done on this issue is through a bipartisan compromise in Congress.

The bill itself would codify the flooding of immigrants the Biden administration is already turning a blind eye to. That isn't fear mongering. It is a correct assessment.

Rubbish! The "flood of immigrants" language is your fearmongering rhetoric. If the bill contained anything to suggest that, Republicans would never have agreed to the draft of the compromise in the first place. It was only after Trump told Republicans to vote against their own bill that some Senators reluctantly agreed to withdraw support.

 

[Shaul]

so you are saying in late 2023 republican Senator Lankford wrote a bill specifically to help Vice President Harris in the 24 election....
Thanks for the laugh

No, I wasn't saying any such thing. I was referring to Senate bill 4361 which was introduced by Senator Murphy (D-CT). Which was the one I quoted. Senator Lankford's bill (Senate bill 1444) was a separate, different bill which was introduced in February 2024. I never mentioned it. Also that bill never had the authorization I was talking about. So if you are laughing it is over your own mistakes.

 

[Shaul]

Yes, because Congress won't give the border patrol and ancillary organizations the money and authorization to deal with the many people seeking freedom and a better life which we are legally obliged to consider, the overloaded system is obliged to use release on own recognizance as a method to avoid overpopulating our limited system lest we be guilty of inhumane practices.

Yeah, ultimately Trump's desperation for a talking point is not about fixing anything and you are supporting the continuation of the problem.

Wrong. Congress has provided the necessary funding to the Border to keep secure if the Biden administration would exercise policies similar as Trump did. We didn't have 10,000,000 people coming into the U.S. under Trump as we have under Biden with similar funding.

 

[Copernicus]

Yes, because Congress won't give the border patrol and ancillary organizations the money and authorization to deal with the many people seeking freedom and a better life which we are legally obliged to consider, the overloaded system is obliged to use release on own recognizance as a method to avoid overpopulating our limited system lest we be guilty of inhumane practices.

Yeah, ultimately Trump's desperation for a talking point is not about fixing anything and you are supporting the continuation of the problem.

Wrong. Congress has provided the necessary funding to the Border to keep secure if the Biden administration would exercise policies similar as Trump did. We didn't have 10,000,000 people coming into the U.S. under Trump as we have under Biden with similar funding.

Shaul, you are talking about encounters and expulsions, which jumped under the Biden administration at the end of the pandemic era. They had little to do with Trump's policies, but the lower pandemic era numbers of encounters. At present, if you combine conventional deportations with expulsions (i.e. border encounters), Biden's administration has been the largest (4.4 million), the largest since GW Bush's second term in office. Trump's and Biden's deportation numbers (not expulsions) will be essentially the same as Trump's--somewhere between 1 and 2 million--at the end of Biden's term. The statistics are a bit tricky, because of the difference between expulsions from border encounters and actual legal deportations. But we are really comparing apples and oranges with the numbers, because the conditions leading to border encounters have changed with the end of the COVID pandemic. Deportations per se have remained steady.

See:

The Biden Administration Is on Pace to Match Trump Deportation Numbers—Focusing on the Border, Not the U.S. Interior​

 

[Argentbear]

No, I wasn't saying any such thing. I was referring to Senate bill 4361 which was introduced by Senator Murphy (D-CT). Which was the one I quoted. Senator Lankford's bill (Senate bill 1444) was a separate, different bill which was introduced in February 2024. I never mentioned it. Also that bill never had the authorization I was talking about. So if you are laughing it is over your own mistakes.

oh I'm laughing at the ridiculous idea that an entire bill was written months before hand just to help a candidate that no one expected would be the candidate