Trump: 'We're going to be guarding our border with the military' until wall complete

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics/trump-border-wall-military/index.html

Trump says US has no border. Mexico has powerful border.

No details on his idea were provided.


President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he's calling on the military to guard the US-Mexico border until his long-promised border wall is complete.

"I told Mexico, and I respect what they did, I said, look, your laws are very powerful, your laws are very strong. We have very bad laws for our border and we are going to be doing some things, I spoke with (Defense Secretary James) Mattis, we're going to do some things militarily. Until we can have a wall and proper security, we're going to be guarding our border with the military. That's a big step," he said during a luncheon with leaders of the Baltic states.

He continued: "We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing up for court."

Asked to clarify his comments during a joint news conference, Trump said he is "preparing for the military to secure our border" and he would be attending a meeting on the topic of border security with Mattis and others "in a little while."

Trump has privately floated the idea of funding construction of a border wall with Mexico through the US military budget in conversations with advisers, two sources confirmed to CNN last week. His remarks Tuesday come on the heels of multiple days of hardline immigration rhetoric from the Trump White House, with the President calling on Congress to pass strict border laws in a series of tweets beginning Sunday.

This isn't the first time there's been talk of sending US troops to the border.

Under President George W. Bush, a border deployment of the National Guard known as Operation Jump Start started in 2006 and lasted two years. The operation sent more than 6,000 troops to California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to repair secondary border fence, construct nearly 1,000 metal barriers and fly border protection agents by helicopter to intercept immigrants trying to enter illegally.

In 2010, the Obama administration deployed National Guard troops as part of a border protection plan.

Officials in 2010 said up to 1,200 National Guard troops would be in place along the US-Mexico border for up to a year to assist US Customs and Border Protection with surveillance and intelligence gathering while the agency worked to hire additional staff.

And in 2014, as a surge of unaccompanied minors from Central America crossed into the United States, Texas Gov. Rick Perry announced the activation of up to 1,000 National Guard troops to help secure the southern border.

Still, Trump's statement took many Pentagon officials by surprise Tuesday, in that they know of his desire to ratchet up border security, but are not sure what he meant exactly, according to multiple Defense Department and military officials.

To fulfill his wishes, border states could send National Guard activated by their own state governors, an issue long complicated by whether the states or the federal government pay for it. Alternatively, the Defense Department could send either active duty or federally activated National Guard. Federal troops require certain documents and regulations, including an operational requirement, a unit identified, a strategy, and, although perhaps not formal, an exit strategy. That option also requires identifying rotational forces.

Trump also spoke Tuesday about the caravan of migrants from Central America currently moving through Mexico who plan to turn themselves in and request asylum once they make it to the US border. He has demanded a halt to the caravan in a series of tweets.

"If it reaches our border, our laws are so weak and so pathetic -- you (the Baltic leaders) would not understand this 'cause I know your laws are strong at the border -- it's like we have no border," he said.

Trump said he told Mexico "very strongly" that "you're going to have to do something about these caravans."

While he said the US is renegotiating the NAFTA trade deal with Mexico and Canada, he emphasized that border security would have to be part of the deal.

[Swordsmyth]

GOOD!

[Todd]

Hmm. Posse Comitatus?

[phill4paul]

Just put the whole guard there. With 350k members that are required to serve two weeks a year that would put a two man team every quarter mile of the 1,954 mile border 365 days a year. It's already funded and one of the purposes of the Guard is to repel invaders so it serves as training. Done deal.

[Swordsmyth]

Hmm. Posse Comitatus?


See: Annual ‘Caravan’ of Central-American Asylum Seekers – Heading to U.S.-Mexico Border – Sparks Trump’s Concern (http://ktla.com/2018/04/02/immigrant-caravan-heading-to-u-s-mexico-border-sparks-trumps-concern/)


April 2nd, 2018


”Alex Mensing, one of the US collaborators who works for Pueblo Sin Fronteras, started in the city of Tapachula, which is located in the state of Chiapas, Mexico, and borders Guatemala. The caravan of about 1,100 people is currently in Oaxaca, Mexico, about 420 miles from their starting point. Mensing said the migrants would turn themselves in and request asylum.


Pueblo Sin Fronteras said they would not respond to Trump's tweet, but stated that the refugee caravan "is a movement made of people who were forced to flee their countries of origin due to persecution and violence."


Note: that Pueblo Sin Fronteras means people without borders.


Keep in mind our Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. The fact is, our federal government is specifically charged with power:


”To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions” See Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15



As President, and in compliance with our federal government’s duty to protect the United States against invasions, Trump should immediately call out the National Guard, place them on the border, block these invaders, and protect the United States against this pending invasion. To not block these invaders at our border and allow them entry into the United States will, by default, entitle them to stay while a long legal process takes place which essentially allows them to stay and burden American Citizens with the costs of their economic needs: food, shelter, clothing, public schooling, medical attention, including the costs of females giving birth.


It’s time for President Trump to nip this madness in the bud, and do what is right for America’s citizens.



JWK



American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance the economic needs of millions of poverty stricken, poorly educated, low and unskilled aliens who have invaded America borders.




Repelling invaders is not domestic law enforcement.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics/mexican-ambassador-trump-border/index.html

The US doesn't have an ambassador to Mexico. Trump never nominated anybody.


Mexican ambassador: Mexico doesn't welcome Trump's call for military to border

The Mexican ambassador to the US said Tuesday that President Donald Trump's apparent call for the US military to guard the US-Mexico border is an unwelcome one.

"It's certainly not something that the Mexican government welcomes, but as soon as we have further clarification, we can expect to have a better idea of where we are," Ambassador Gerónimo Gutiérrez said in an interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

The Mexican ambassador stressed that his government is still trying to clarify what exactly Trump meant.
Gutiérrez made his comments in response to Trump's claim earlier on Tuesday that he would have the US military guard the nation's southern border until his proposed wall is built. Although Trump wasn't specific about what the troops' scope and authority would be, both Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush oversaw temporary deployments of National Guard troops to the border during their tenures.

The Mexican government has asked for formal clarification on Trump's comments, but Gutiérrez also said he had spoken with US Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. He said he expected clarification within a few hours and supposed it was similar to previous moves by the US.

"The (US) National Guard has been called before in different instances in past years in a supportive role," Gutiérrez said. "I would assume that that's what we're looking at."
In the interview, Gutiérrez also responded to Trump's repeated statements about a caravan of Central American migrants that reached Mexico en route to the US. Gutiérrez said the people in the caravan are "not dangerous" and that it is important to separate the "shared challenges" of transnational organized crime and other security threats from "a humanitarian situation."

Gutiérrez said likewise that the Mexican government shared a desire for a secure border with the United States, but acknowledged the two neighboring nations disagreed in major ways on how to achieve that security. He cited Trump's proposed border wall as an example and again stressed the Mexican government's position that it will not pay for Trump's wall.

"A relation like the one between Mexico and the United States needs to have spaces in order to agree to disagree," he said. "The issue of the wall is certainly one of them, and as my government has clearly expressed already, Mexico by no means would be paying for a wall."

[jkr]

DOING THE JOB!

SHOCKED

[goldenequity]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glAcWe1NNq4


======


PRESIDENT TRUMP HOLDS JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE (4/3/2018) (Baltic Nations)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyBWplDz4K4


US President Donald Trump has confirmed his intention to pull the country's troops from Syria,
explaining that the US military presence on Syria's soil has benefited other countries more than Washington itself.

"Our primary mission in terms of that was getting rid of ISIS [Daesh].
We've almost completed that task and we'll be making a decision very quickly in coordination with others, as to what we'll do.
Saudi Arabia is very interested in our decision,"
Trump stated during a press conference with the heads of the three Baltic states.

"I want to get out. I want to bring our troops home."




Relations With Russia, Nord Stream 2

The US president has also touched upon the strained relations with Moscow, speaking during the press-conference.

"I think we’ll be able to have great dialogue, I hope,"
"Nobody has been tougher on Russia than I have…
With that being said I think I could have a very good relationship with [Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin, I think.
It’s possible I won’t, and you will know about it."

He went on saying that it was not right for Germany to spend billions on energy from Russia
while failing to meet its two percent-of-GDP commitment to NATO.

"NATO is taking in billions of dollars more because of me…
Many of the countries were not paying, and even now Germany is paying one percent, and they are not even paying a full one percent,"
"Germany hooks up a pipeline into Russia where Germany is going to be paying billions of dollars for energy into Russia.
And I am saying what’s going on with that?
How come Germany is paying vast amounts of money to Russia where they hook up a pipeline? That’s not right."



Germany has repeatedly said the project is a commercial and economic enterprise, and that countries must abide by this principle.

Earlier in March, a group of 39 US senators urged the US Treasury Department to try blocking the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline
and consider imposing sanctions on companies involved in the project.

Nord Stream 2 is a joint venture between Russia's Gazprom and France's Engie, Austria’s OMV AG, UK-Dutch Royal Dutch Shell, and Germany's Uniper and Wintershall.

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804031063180324-trump-us-syria-troops-withdrawal/

[aGameOfThrones]

These invaders just gave Trump what a lot of U.S Citizens were calling for..... ��

[Intoxiklown]

Repelling invaders is not domestic law enforcement.

Honestly Sword, it would be domestic law enforcement.

However, the military is perfectly legal to utilize for those situations under Presidential decree authorizing it under set parameters. In other words, there is nothing illegal about Trump following through with this statement. More so doing so to act as an augmentation force to border patrol. And agreed....and I say this as someone who is not really a fan of Trump....at least he is willing to take action.

[goldenequity]

Trump Deploys U.S. Military To Southern Border
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-03/trump-deploys-us-military-southern-border

“Until we can have a wall and proper security, we are going to be guarding our border with the military. That's a big step,”
Trump told reporters at the White House while sitting nearby Defense Secretary James Mattis.

[Todd]

Repelling invaders is not domestic law enforcement.

lol.

Invaders......

[Superfluous Man]

Trump says US has no border. Mexico has powerful border.


Trump's followers are not at all bothered by his obvious admiration for foreign despotic regimes.

[Superfluous Man]

lol.

Invaders......

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Todd again."

[Bern]

Seems logical that Trump would need a formal declaration of war against Mexico in order to stage troops on the border. How fun.

[asurfaholic]

I’m alright with this.

I have no problem with Mexicans and think the border Wall is stupid, but if the choice is between the Military being overseas being a offensive imperialistic force, or staying at home and protecting the borders I’m voting B every time.

Still think that welfare is the cause of mass movement over the borders. End welfare and the phony drug war and the need for a fence is completely evaporated.

[dannno]

Seems logical that Trump would need a formal declaration of war against Mexico in order to stage troops on the border. How fun.

The border is in Mexico?!

[timosman]

The border is in Mexico?!

It isn't?:confused:

[Brian4Liberty]

Hmm. Posse Comitatus?


Repelling invaders is not domestic law enforcement.

Yeah, this one may be Constitutional (for once). Sending national guard when there is a large group of foriegners threatening invasion is a defensive action.

[dannno]

The border is in Mexico?!


It isn't?:confused:

No, it's on the border.

[timosman]

No, it's on the border.

Is there any way I could blame the POTUS however? This guy is a bad role model and I am concerned my kids will not grow up in a country they deserve.:cool:

[Swordsmyth]

Seems logical that Trump would need a formal declaration of war against Mexico in order to stage troops on the border. How fun.
He would only need one to invade Mexico.

[Bern]

No, the border isn't in Mexico, but legally, as I understand it, we would have to be at war with our neighbor in order for the military to be stationed and engaging in defense activities (not training) domestically (on our side of the border) or it would run afoul of the Posse Comitatus restriction.

[Ender]

I’m alright with this.

I have no problem with Mexicans and think the border Wall is stupid, but if the choice is between the Military being overseas being a offensive imperialistic force, or staying at home and protecting the borders I’m voting B every time.

Still think that welfare is the cause of mass movement over the borders. End welfare and the phony drug war and the need for a fence is completely evaporated.

Pretty much.

The thing about this 'caravan", to my understanding, is that this is the 5th year for a march, the people are asking both Mexico & the US for refuge, & last year 3 were allowed in the US but the qualifying process is still going on.

Seems like a whole lotta screaming from DC for something not endangering- maybe to take our eye off the man behind the curtain?

[TheTexan]

Military Wall, fuck yea!

[TheTexan]

Next step... deport all the zippy Juan's that made it past our border

[Todd]

Yeah, this one may be Constitutional (for once). Sending national guard when there is a large group of foriegners threatening invasion is a defensive action.

If it's the "National Guard" then no issue. The National Guard has been doing border patrol duty for many years so that's not unprecedented, but Federal troops is a no go.

I also think we need to tone down the "invasion" rhetoric. More like an Refugee exodus.

[Ender]

If it's the "National Guard" then no issue. The National Guard has been doing border patrol duty for many years so that's not unprecedented, but Federal troops is a no go.

I also think we need to tone down the "invasion" rhetoric. More like an Refugee exodus.

Exactly.

[Origanalist]

I’m alright with this.

I have no problem with Mexicans and think the border Wall is stupid, but if the choice is between the Military being overseas being a offensive imperialistic force, or staying at home and protecting the borders I’m voting B every time.

Still think that welfare is the cause of mass movement over the borders. End welfare and the phony drug war and the need for a fence is completely evaporated.

This is my take also.

[Pauls' Revere]

Seems logical that Trump would need a formal declaration of war against Mexico in order to stage troops on the border. How fun.

when was the last time we "formally" declared war with congressional approval?

[specsaregood]

So what exactly is the military going to do? Shoot trespassers? Catch and release according to federal law? If so, whats the point?

[TheTexan]

So what exactly is the military going to do? Shoot trespassers? Catch and release according to federal law? If so, whats the point?

We could also throw them in prisons. And they can work off their sentence by building a wall.

[TheCount]

I have no problem with Mexicans and think the border Wall is stupid, but if the choice is between the Military being overseas being a offensive imperialistic force, or staying at home and protecting the borders I’m voting B every time.

He's going to use the National Guard for it, which means federalizing more troops and spending even more money, not redirecting the active force away from overseas tasks to domestic tasks.

[Brian4Liberty]

So what exactly is the military going to do? Shoot trespassers? Catch and release according to federal law? If so, whats the point?

Trump (and his neocon advisors) are rather fond of Israeli tactics and strategies...

[TheTexan]

He's going to use the National Guard for it, which means federalizing more troops and spending even more money, not redirecting the active force away from overseas tasks to domestic tasks.

Of course. We certainly wouldn't want to jeopardize national defense, by bringing our troops home to defend our nation.

[TheTexan]

Trump (and his neocon advisors) are rather fond of Israeli tactics and strategies...

We're going to bulldoze their homes and claim their land as ours?

Not a bad strategy actually.

[dannno]

Seems like a whole lotta screaming from DC for something not endangering- maybe to take our eye off the man behind the curtain?

It seems to be that the "man behind the curtain" (hint, it's not Trump) is doing everything he can to prevent a border wall from being built.

[Superfluous Man]

I’m alright with this.

I have no problem with Mexicans and think the border Wall is stupid, but if the choice is between the Military being overseas being a offensive imperialistic force, or staying at home and protecting the borders I’m voting B every time.

Still think that welfare is the cause of mass movement over the borders. End welfare and the phony drug war and the need for a fence is completely evaporated.

It's hard to disagree with that.

But military protection of the border shouldn't involve stopping peaceful people from crossing it.

I agree with Ron Paul's position that we should be allowed to cross the border without even having to show ID to anyone.

[Superfluous Man]

So what exactly is the military going to do? Shoot trespassers? Catch and release according to federal law? If so, whats the point?

It's unlikely that Trump has thought through those nitty gritty details.

[Zippyjuan]

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/immigration/sd-me-military-border-20180403-story.html


Federal law limits Trump's proposal to send troops to guard border

President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he hopes to send members of the military to guard the southwest border — an escalation in his push to reduce the number of immigrants coming to the U.S. But without sign off from Congress or Gov. Jerry Brown, federal law will likely block the president’s plans, at least in California.

Since he took office, Trump has criticized U.S. laws that allow people to come to the border and ask for asylum. After reports of a large caravan of migrants traveling through Mexico to seek asylum from violence-stricken Central American countries surfaced over Easter, the president reinforced his push to change what he called “weak” immigration laws.

Trump said he planned to meet with Gen. Jim Mattis, the defense secretary, on Tuesday to discuss options for installing troops at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The Mexican border is very unprotected by our laws,” Trump said during a news conference with the presidents of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. “We have horrible, horrible, and very unsafe, laws in the United States.”

The White House confirmed that Trump’s strategy involves mobilizing the National Guard.

Trump said the military would remain at the border until his promised border wall is completed. Though Congress has granted $1.6 billion in funding for new and replacement fencing along the border, Trump has not been able to get funding to build a wall fashioned after his prototypes in Otay Mesa.

Everard Meade, director of the Trans Border Institute at University of San Diego, said the president will also have a difficult time installing troops at the border.

“They’ve been using military metaphors and talking about invasions — in that sense, it’s not a surprise, but when you move from political rhetoric to actual policy, I don’t see a legal way to actually do it,” Meade said. “The U.S. Armed Forces are far too professional and risk-averse and rule-bound to accept some vague cowboy mission down there. That’s just not what they do.”

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. Congress later gave the military the ability to provide equipment and personnel for certain drug enforcement operations. The Coast Guard is exempt from the act’s restrictions.

The estimated 1,200 migrants in the caravan would not count as an invasion, Meade said. Border Patrol has also apprehended significantly fewer unauthorized crossers since arrests peaked in 2000, according to data from the agency, which Meade said would also argue against sending military.

Governors can deploy the National Guard in their states to respond to emergencies. Previous presidents have, with governor sign off, used the National Guard to supplement Border Patrol agents during hiring pushes.

[Swordsmyth]

On Wednesday, Department Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen announced that President Donald Trump is sending the National Guard to protect the United States' southern border and also indicated that DHS is looking into constructing military installations along the border.

"What [Trump] meant is there are some lands that the Defense Department owns right on the border where we see illicit activity," Nielsen said during a White House press briefing. "We're looking into options for the military to build wall or military installations on the border."

On using military appropriations to fund construction of proposed border wall, DHS Sec. Nielsen tells @jonkarl (https://twitter.com/jonkarl?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw): "We're looking into options for the military to build wall on military installations on the border." https://t.co/VFkTztU5Xx pic.twitter.com/4ww3Neys7j (https://t.co/4ww3Neys7j)
— ABC News (@ABC) April 4, 2018 (https://twitter.com/ABC/status/981616636296757248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

More at: https://www.dailywire.com/news/29077/national-guard-border-dhs-wants-military-ryan-saavedra?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=idealmedia&utm_campaign=dailywire.com&utm_term=68731&utm_content=2215152

[RonPaulMall]

No, the border isn't in Mexico, but legally, as I understand it, we would have to be at war with our neighbor in order for the military to be stationed and engaging in defense activities (not training) domestically (on our side of the border) or it would run afoul of the Posse Comitatus restriction.

Posse Comitatus is about domestic law enforcement. Putting troops on the border is a purely military action and fully within the President's authority. You don't need any Congressional input because it is simply moving troops around and not engaging in a war.

In fact, the most Constitutional thing Trump could do is withdraw our overseas troops and station all of them on our border. Then we would go back to having a fully Constitutional military.

[Zippyjuan]

Posse Comitatus is about domestic law enforcement. Putting troops on the border is a purely military action and fully within the President's authority. You don't need any Congressional input because it is simply moving troops around and not engaging in a war.

In fact, the most Constitutional thing Trump could do is withdraw our overseas troops and station all of them on our border. Then we would go back to having a fully Constitutional military.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1385


18 U.S. Code § 1385 - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus


Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.


Enforcing immigration laws would be a violation of the Act.

If he wants to use the National Guard, the Governors of the respective states would have to agree.

[Raginfridus]

Oh lawdy, is Congress just now taking offense, after decades of unconstitutional wars were waged under their noses w/ approvals from almost everyone?


What makes the basic human rights of brown Catholics down south more important than brown Muslims overseas? (Not that Congress respect anybody's rights.)

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1385


Enforcing immigration laws would be a violation of the Act.



If he wants to use the National Guard, the Governors of the respective states would have to agree.


except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution


A4S4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican (https://usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REPUBLIC) Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;



Keep DREAMing Juan.

[Ender]

A4S4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican (https://usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REPUBLIC) Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;



Keep DREAMing Juan.

Maybe we should hold the United States accountable for every state being a Republic first?

Then, guess what? Most problems are easily solved.

[Zippyjuan]

A4S4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican (https://usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REPUBLIC) Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;



Keep DREAMing Juan.



invasion
noun [ C ] US ​ /ɪnˈveɪ·ʒən/
​
the act of entering a place by force, often in large numbers

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/invasion


Definition of invasion

1 : an act of invading; especially : incursion of an army for conquest or plunder

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invasion


1. variable noun
If there is an invasion of a country, a foreign army enters it by force

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/invasion

[Danke]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1385



Enforcing immigration laws would be a violation of the Act.

If he wants to use the National Guard, the Governors of the respective states would have to agree.

A long time ago Governors had that kind of control, I'm pretty sure the President can now use the Guard without the Governors' consent.

[Swordsmyth]

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/invasion



https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invasion



https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/invasion

Definition of invasion 1 : an act of invading (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invading); especially : incursion of an army for conquest or plunder

2 : the incoming or spread of something usually hurtful



https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invasion


from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition

n. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
n. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease.
n. An intrusion or encroachment.

from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License

n. A military action consisting of armed forces of one geopolitical entity entering territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of conquering territory or altering the established government.
n. The entry of a large group into a new area.

from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English

n. The act of invading; the act of encroaching upon the rights or possessions of another; encroachment; trespass.
n. A warlike or hostile entrance into the possessions or domains of another; the incursion of an army for conquest or plunder.
n. The incoming or first attack of anything hurtful or pernicious.

from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia

n. The act of invading a country or territory as an enemy; hostile entrance or intrusion.
n. Hence A harmful incursion of any kind; an onset or attack, as of disease.
n. Infringement by intrusion; encroachment by entering into or taking away what belongs to another: as, an invasion of one's retirement or rights.
n. In phytogeography, the phenomenon of the movement of plants from an area of one character into one of a different character, and their colonization in the latter.

from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.

n. the act of invading; the act of an army that invades for conquest or plunder
n. any entry into an area not previously occupied
n. (pathology) the spread of pathogenic microorganisms or malignant cells to new sites in the body



https://www.wordnik.com/words/invasion


invasion (ɪnˈveɪʒən) n1. (Military) the act of invading with armed forces
2. any encroachment or intrusion: an invasion of rats.

3. the onset or advent of something harmful, esp of a disease
4. (Pathology) pathol the spread of cancer from its point of origin into surrounding tissues
5. (Botany) the movement of plants to a new area or to an area to which they are not native

Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014


https://www.thefreedictionary.com/invasion



invasion
noun

1An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
‘Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia in 1812’

mass noun ‘in 1546 England had to be defended from invasion’






1.1 An incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity. ‘there was a brief pitch invasion when Sunderland scored’





1.2 An unwelcome intrusion into another's domain. ‘random drug testing of employees is an unwarranted invasion of privacy’





https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/invasion

[Zippyjuan]

A long time ago Governors had that kind of control, I'm pretty sure the President can now use the Guard without the Governors' consent.

Obama and Bush both sent National Guard troops to the border for short periods of time- and they worked with the governors on it. The governors have to foot the bill if they go.

Are they needed? Border interdictions are at record lows.

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/4/17199790/national-guard-border-trump-legal

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VXz9FydPBn29ylHizVZ6gSoJrwQ=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10587935/border_apprehensions_presidents.jpg



President Trump is signing a proclamation to authorize the use of state National Guard forces to protect the US-Mexico border — where inflows of immigrants are at historic lows.

You read that right.

The president has the legal authority to do this, as long as governors of border states acquiesce — and agree to foot the bill. (Given that three of the four governors of southwestern border states are Republicans, their agreement looks likely.) But just because it’s legal doesn’t necessarily make it a good idea.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said on Wednesday, announcing the mobilization, that “the threat” of drug smuggling and illegal entry “is real.” But it’s not clear precisely what threat the administration is trying to address with a National Guard mobilization.



Both of Trump’s predecessors got state governors to mobilize National Guard troops at the border, as Vox’s Tara Golshan has explained. George W. Bush called National Guard troops to the border in May 2006, and Barack Obama mobilized 1,200 National Guard troops for border enforcement in May 2010. (In 2014, Texas Gov. Rick Perry mobilized 1,000 National Guard members to the border to help process unaccompanied children from Central America entering the US.)

National Guard troops aren’t sent to the border to literally fight off immigrants — that’s still illegal. They’re not even sent to the border to catch immigrants; only Border Patrol agents are authorized to do that. So during previous mobilizations, the National Guard has done a mix of surveillance and intelligence work to help Border Patrol agents track down immigrants, and support work to help process those immigrants once they’re apprehended.


Deploying the National Guard to help guard the border won’t have a huge impact on drug smuggling, which is much more common through ports of entry — airports, seaports, road crossings — than by sneaking across the border. And it won’t prevent people who are trying to cross the US to seek asylum from being able to do so.

[Danke]

Obama and Bush both sent National Guard troops to the border for short periods of time- and they worked with the governors on it. The governors have to foot the bill if they go.

Are they needed? Border interdictions are at record lows.

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/4/17199790/national-guard-border-trump-legal

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VXz9FydPBn29ylHizVZ6gSoJrwQ=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10587935/border_apprehensions_presidents.jpg

doesn't really address what I wrote.

as in, a Governor could try to prevent using his Guard forces, but the President has ultimate say.

[Zippyjuan]

Bush spent over $1 billion on national guard troops for the border.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics/border-troops-deployed-obama-bush/index.html


2006: In a national address, President George W. Bush announces plans to deploy 6,000 troops

Name: Operation Jump Start

When it happened: June 2006-July 2008

Cost: $1.2 billion

Who was deployed: 6,000 National Guard troops deployed to California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.

Assists with undocumented immigrant apprehensions: 186,814 (11.7% of the total apprehensions on the Southwest land border in that period)

Assists with drug seizures: 316,364 pounds of marijuana (9.4% of all marijuana seized on the Southwest border in that period)


2010: President Obama orders the deployment of up to 1,200 troops to the US-Mexico border

Name: Operation Phalanx

When it happened: Initially from July 2010-June 30, 2011, then extended

Cost: $110 million for the first year

Who was deployed: Initially 1,200 National Guard troops. In 2012, the number of troops was scaled back as the focus shifted from boots on the ground to aerial surveillance.

Assists with undocumented immigrant apprehensions: 17,887 in the first 11 months (5.9% of the total apprehensions on the Southwest land border in that period)

Assists with drug seizures: 56,342 pounds of marijuana in the first 11 months (2.6% of all marijuana seized on the Southwest border in that period)

[Ender]

Bush spent over $1 billion on national guard troops for the border.



Always thought it was interesting that none of this happened after 9-11. That was my first clue, as a kid, that something was not right.

[Zippyjuan]

The border is leaking like crazy! Massive, record numbers swarming across! Actually it is a distraction- an excuse to justify spending more taxpayer money.

https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/blog_border_apprehensions_february_july_2008_20171 .gif

[TheCount]

Posse Comitatus is about domestic law enforcement. Putting troops on the border is a purely military action and fully within the President's authority.

If the troops will not be enforcing a law, what will they be doing and how?

[oyarde]

He's going to use the National Guard for it, which means federalizing more troops and spending even more money, not redirecting the active force away from overseas tasks to domestic tasks.

As far as I know it would keep troops from overseas because the Guard and Reserve have been in the overseas rotations for a couple decades based on the units within 60 miles of me .

[oyarde]

doesn't really address what I wrote.

as in, a Governor could try to prevent using his Guard forces, but the President has ultimate say.

The Gov here has his own . A guard Reserve . ( IGR , Indiana Guard Reserve , formerly known as Indiana Legion or Liberty Guard) .

[TheCount]

As far as I know it would keep troops from overseas because the Guard and Reserve have been in the overseas rotations for a couple decades based on the units within 60 miles of me .
There is only one large guard unit deployed overseas right now that I know of; they're from PA. Other than that there's individuals and small units.

Overall only a very small part of the military is deploying compared to a decade ago or even 5 years ago.

[Danke]

The Gov here has his own . A guard Reserve . ( IGR , Indiana Guard Reserve , formerly known as Indiana Legion or Liberty Guard) .


Doesn't sound very trustworthy.

[goldenequity]

Mexico says US troops on border won’t be armed
https://apnews.com/b45463c479584daf9e90fc345892dea2?utm_campaign=Soci alFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

The Mexican foreign ministry says U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen has told Mexico’s top diplomat that U.S. National Guard troops being deployed to the border “will not carry arms or carry out migration or customs control activities.”

Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray is in Washington on a visit. A foreign ministry statement issued Wednesday night says Nielsen told Videgaray that the troops will only be providing support for Department of Homeland Security work.

[oyarde]

Doesn't sound very trustworthy.

I dunno , my stock broker is in it . He tried to recruit me and I declined .

[TheCount]

Mexico says US troops on border won’t be armed
https://apnews.com/b45463c479584daf9e90fc345892dea2?utm_campaign=Soci alFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

The Mexican foreign ministry says U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen has told Mexico’s top diplomat that U.S. National Guard troops being deployed to the border “will not carry arms or carry out migration or customs control activities.”

Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray is in Washington on a visit. A foreign ministry statement issued Wednesday night says Nielsen told Videgaray that the troops will only be providing support for Department of Homeland Security work.
Womp womp.

Welfare program.

[timosman]

Womp womp.

Welfare program.

Maybe it would be cheaper to let them in?:confused:

[Brian4Liberty]

No need for military. Trump can use well-regulated volunteer militias and private contractors such as Academi to defend the border. Problem solved.

[Swordsmyth]

Mexico says US troops on border won’t be armed
https://apnews.com/b45463c479584daf9e90fc345892dea2?utm_campaign=Soci alFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

The Mexican foreign ministry says U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen has told Mexico’s top diplomat that U.S. National Guard troops being deployed to the border “will not carry arms or carry out migration or customs control activities.”

Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Videgaray is in Washington on a visit. A foreign ministry statement issued Wednesday night says Nielsen told Videgaray that the troops will only be providing support for Department of Homeland Security work.

I will wait for trustworthy confirmation.

[nikcers]

Maybe it would be cheaper to let them in?:confused:
The military solution is always the cheapest solution, we can build a wall with free lunch to stop people from coming here for free lunch and reward the people who build the wall with free lunch. Plus its already in the budget so its not even any extra money, its money that would of been spent otherwise so its conservative.

[Danke]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCsg5NzYcWE

[Todd]

So what exactly is the military going to do? Shoot trespassers? Catch and release according to federal law? If so, whats the point?

You don't have to guess. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Jump_Start

I knew many at the time who did this duty and thought it was worthless.

Nevermind that problems with our port entries.

This is pure bullshit smoke and mirrors and makes a good dog and pony show ( A very expensive one to be sure) for Trumps base

[TheCount]

No need for military. Trump can use well-regulated volunteer militias and private contractors such as Academi to defend the border. Problem solved.
Will they have police powers?

[TheCount]

I will wait for trustworthy confirmation.
Why would they need to be armed? You've stated that they will not be enforcing domestic law and also will not be invading Mexico. That leaves them doing nothing.

[EBounding]

Military Wall, fuck yea!

http://www.myemoticons.com/images/patriotic-military/patriotic/eagle.gif
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaBvo_OUwAA2n8t.jpg

[Superfluous Man]

Maybe it would be cheaper to let them in?:confused:

Of course it would. But then some here who don't want to suffer the displeasure of having them in their general proximities would have to endure that.

[Ender]

You don't have to guess. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Jump_Start

I knew many at the time who did this duty and thought it was worthless.

Nevermind that problems with our port entries.

This is pure bull$#@! smoke and mirrors and makes a good dog and pony show ( A very expensive one to be sure) for Trumps base

That's EXACTLY my POV.

"The Mexicans are coming! The Mexicans are coming! The Mexicans are coming!"

And meanwhile, as many run around with their hands in the air screaming over the "alien invasion", we lose our gun rights, and most other rights, REAL ID becomes real, wars get bigger, and gov becomes more corrupt and unaccountable.

But, hey that's OK- 'cause dem brown people cain't be here, and we all know all of America's problems come from them, amirite? :rolleyes:

[timosman]

That's EXACTLY my POV.

"The Mexicans are coming! The Mexicans are coming! The Mexicans are coming!"

And meanwhile, as many run around with their hands in the air screaming over the "alien invasion", we lose our gun rights, and most other rights, REAL ID becomes real, wars get bigger, and gov becomes more corrupt and unaccountable.

But, hey that's OK- 'cause dem brown people cain't be here, and we all know all of America's problems come from them, amirite? :rolleyes:

Have you ever met somebody more gullible than yourself?:confused:

[Ender]

Have you ever met somebody more gullible than yourself?:confused:

Put it where the sun don' shine, buddy.

[timosman]

Put it where the sun don' shine, buddy.

If you do believe in people's ability to be honest, show us the way. :cool:

[nobody's_hero]

But, hey that's OK- 'cause dem brown people socialist-locusts-moving-from-one-country-to-the-next-voting-for-more-government-handouts-and-then-moving-on-when —as-Margaret-Thatcher-once-said—'they-ran-out-of-other-people's-money' cain't be here, and we all know all of America's problems come from them, amirite? :rolleyes:

Fixed. And not all the problems come from them, but, I would say that the problems aren't any smaller because of them, either.

Take for instance, gun control, which I believe was mentioned:

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/10/16/latino-voters-and-the-2014-midterm-elections/ph-2014-10-latino-voters-2014-midterm-election-02-02/

14%. Just 14% of foreign-born Hispanics polled favored protecting the right of Americans to own guns.

14. Percent.

14 out of 100

Fourteen

[timosman]

Fixed. And not all the problems come from them, but, I would say that the problems aren't any smaller because of them, either.

Why do you have to bring race to the discussion? Are you a racist? :cool:

[nobody's_hero]

Why do you have to bring race to the discussion? Are you a racist? :cool:

You're right. Going to check my white privilege. BRB.

. . . .
Yep, say's here specifically in paragraph G, page 109, "not allowed to have opinion on border security or else RACIST!"

My bad.

[timosman]

You're right. Going to check my white privilege. BRB.

. . . .
Yep, say's here specifically in paragraph G, page 109, "not allowed to have opinion on border security or else RACIST!"

My bad.

I am glad we made it so simple even you can understand.:cool:

[Ender]

Fixed. And not all the problems come from them, but, I would say that the problems aren't any smaller because of them, either.

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/10/16/chapter-2-latinos-views-on-selected-2014-ballot-measure-issues/

Again- entitlements are a gov problem.

If we fixed our own country first and got gov out of every single corner of our lives, there would be no issue with "free stuff".

[timosman]

Again- entitlements are a gov problem.

If we fixed our own country first and got gov out of every single corner of our lives, there would be no issue with "free stuff".

How stupid you are really? Even if we eliminated all entitlements, it still would be, for 95% of the world population, advantageous to come here and leech off gullible people like you. More so if they didn't have to pay taxes. :cool:

[nobody's_hero]

Again- entitlements are a gov problem.

If we fixed our own country first and got gov out of every single corner of our lives, there would be no issue with "free stuff".

And, respectfully, how do you intend to reconcile that with the fact that continuing to leave the door open to anyone who also wants a piece of the pie, is going to leave us with practically no chance whatsoever to undo those entitlements?

You ever tried to repair a faucet without turning off the water to the house? Good luck, lol.

[nobody's_hero]

How stupid you are really? Even if we eliminated all entitlements, it still would be, for 95% of the world population, advantageous to come here and leech off gullible people like you. More so if they didn't have to pay taxes. :cool:

He's right, it actually wouldn't be leeching if we got rid of entitlements. I just can't wrap my head around libertarian think-tanking that arrives at the conclusion that surrounding yourself with as many people as you can who neither have interest or understanding of liberty, somehow, leads to more liberty. It seems to me there's an order-of-operations there and we disagree strongly on the order.

[timosman]

I just can't wrap my head around libertarian think-tanking that arrives at the conclusion.

Blackmail?:confused:

[Zippyjuan]

How stupid you are really? Even if we eliminated all entitlements, it still would be, for 95% of the world population, advantageous to come here and leech off gullible people like you. More so if they didn't have to pay taxes. :cool:

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/03/28/hold-think-tank-illegal-immigrant-males-more-likely-to-be-in-workforce-than-legal-immigrants-us-born-men/

From Breitbart:


Pew Researcher: Rate of Illegal Immigrant Males in Workforce 12 Percent Higher Than US-Born Males

WASHINGTON, DC — An illegal immigrant male residing in the United States is more likely to be gainfully employed than a male who is a legal immigrant or U.S.-born citizen, a senior demographer at the Pew Research Center think tank told lawmakers.

In 2012, the most recent year for which data is available, an estimated 91 percent of illegal immigrant males were in the workforce. This compares to 84 percent of legal immigrant men and 79 percent of U.S.-born males, Pew Research Center demographer Jeffrey Passel wrote in testimony prepared for a March 26 hearing held by the Senate Homeland Security & Government Affairs Committee.

[dannno]

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/03/28/hold-think-tank-illegal-immigrant-males-more-likely-to-be-in-workforce-than-legal-immigrants-us-born-men/

From Breitbart:

Sounds legit..

(Notice breitbart posted the story, but did not comment on the legitimacy of the data)

I thought some people estimated that there were as many as 2-3 times as many illegal immigrants in the country than what the Fed govt. estimates.

Not sure why they would claim to have concrete data on employment.

Not to mention,


“For women, the opposite is true; only 61% of unauthorized immigrant women are in the labor force, compared with 72% of U.S.-born women,” Mr. Passel continued.

[aGameOfThrones]

Nobody is even addressing the big elephant in the room... The Wage Gap between illegal aliens and U.S. Citizens. I think illegal and legal should get equal pay for the same work, same taxable income, same, same , same.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/wahRIe1tXGB1K/giphy.gif

[Swordsmyth]

He's right, it actually wouldn't be leeching if we got rid of entitlements.

They would come for the opportunity and vote for welfare.

[Influenza]

I will wait for trustworthy confirmation.
like who? trump? ayyy lmao

[Swordsmyth]

Oregon Governor Tells Trump She'll Refuse Order To Send Guard Troops Southhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/mexico-border-wall-oregon-governor-090702600.html

[Brian4Liberty]

Will they have police powers?

IDK, seems to SOP for US "policing" of foreign nations. Do they have police powers there, or just shoot on sight?

[spudea]

Oregon Governor Tells Trump She'll Refuse Order To Send Guard Troops Southhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/mexico-border-wall-oregon-governor-090702600.html

she wasn't even asked. HURR DURR I'M NOT GOING TO THE PARTY I WASN'T INVITED TOO!! REEEEE!

[Swordsmyth]

she wasn't even asked. HURR DURR I'M NOT GOING TO THE PARTY I WASN'T INVITED TOO!! REEEEE!
Maybe she wants to run for POTUS.

[TheCount]

IDK, seems to SOP for US "policing" of foreign nations. Do they have police powers there, or just shoot on sight?
Exactly my point.

If you want to treat america just like America treated Iraq, it's a great idea.

[Raginfridus]

http://www.myemoticons.com/images/patriotic-military/patriotic/eagle.gif
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DaBvo_OUwAA2n8t.jpg

Red rover, red rover, send Poncho on over

[johnwk]

lol.

Invaders......

Yes, "invaders". We now have at least 12 million of them and they have been causing social and economic havoc. Are you defending those who have invaded our borders?



JWK

[TheCount]

social and economic havoc.
Lol

[Swordsmyth]

https://media.8ch.net/file_store/843dae336d2d50d4b4da68847a31798109c34050b51f183b46 3d188d79c8c61b.png

[Swordsmyth]

Oregon’s Liberal Dem Governor Kate Brown Accepted Large Soros Donation Three Days Before She Refused to Send National Guard to Protect US Border

by Jim Hoft April 6, 2018
Guest post by Joe Hoft

Liberal Democrat Governor Kate Brown accepted a large donation from George Soros only days before announcing that she will not send Oregon’s National Guard to the Southern border to help protect the country from illegal aliens.
The Oregon RNC reported on Monday April 2nd, 2018, that the Oregon governor received a large donation from former Nazi collaborator and creepy billionaire George Soros –

Willamette Week is reporting(link is external) that Governor Kate Brown has accepted “an unprecedented” campaign check from George Soros, a billionaire left-wing hedge-fund manager and campaign donor who resides in New York. This is Soros’ “first direct involvement” in Oregon.

“Kate Brown has consistently ignored problems facing everyday Oregonians and has instead used the office of Governor to make herself a national left-wing celebrity. Now, Brown is cashing in and taking big campaign donations from notorious leftist puppet master, billionaire George Soros,” stated Oregon Republican Chairman Bill Currier.

“We need a Governor who tackles crime, faltering state agencies, and the PERS pension crisis, and a leader who will rescue our bottom performing K-12 schools and stop the out-of-control spending and endless tax increases,” added Currier. “Kate Brown is more interested in wooing George Soros and the out-of-state, leftist, super-rich donor class than truly confronting the serious problems at home. Now we know who she really works for.”

Three days later CNN reported –

Oregon’s governor says that if President Donald Trump asks to dispatch members of her state’s National Guard to the US southern border, she’ll “say no.”

The liberal governor tweeted –



Creepy and sinister Soros may have gifted Governor Brown to encourage her to encourage Oregon to keep his voting machines in place too. Oregon is one of 16 states that use Soros related voting machines.

Is any corrupt Democrat not associated with creepy Soros?


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...zen.yandex.com (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/04/oregons-liberal-dem-governor-kate-brown-accepted-large-soros-donation-three-days-later-she-refused-to-send-national-guard-to-protect-us-border/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com)

...

[phill4paul]

"I do think we should deal with our borders.

One way that I would suggest that we could do it is pay less attention to the borders between Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan and bring our troops home and deal with the border.

But why do we pay more attention to the borders overseas and less attention to the borders here at home?

We now have a mess on the borders, and it has a lot more to do with it than just immigration, because we're financing some of this militarism against the drug dealers on the borders right now to the tune of over $1 billion. And there is a mess down there, but it's much bigger than just the immigration problem." - RONALD ERNEST PAUL.

[Raginfridus]

"I do think we should deal with our borders.

One way that I would suggest that we could do it is pay less attention to the borders between Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan and bring our troops home and deal with the border.

But why do we pay more attention to the borders overseas and less attention to the borders here at home?

We now have a mess on the borders, and it has a lot more to do with it than just immigration, because we're financing some of this militarism against the drug dealers on the borders right now to the tune of over $1 billion. And there is a mess down there, but it's much bigger than just the immigration problem." - RONALD ERNEST PAUL.And the problem won't go away by hunkering behind a boondoggle or while a million hired guns sit around tallying "invaders".

[Swordsmyth]

Arizona and Texas will be sending 400 National Guard members to the southern border in response to President Donald Trump's Wednesday Executive Order directing the troops to "assist the border patrol" in guarding the nation's existing border fence - and of course the many miles of completely unprotected crossing zones.
The troops will be armed for self defense "depending on the mission set," according to Brig. Gen. Tracy Norris, commander of the Texas Army National Guard, who added that it was "premature right now to know what the cost will be" of the overall operation.


The deployment will be a joint effort between Trump's federal imitative and state-level management under what's known as Title 32. Governors will retain control of the National Guard troops, however the federal government will finance the patrols.
150 Arizona Guard members from will deploy next week, while the Texas National Guard confirmed a deployment of 250 troops over the next 72 hours as an "initial surge" which began shortly after 7 p.m. Friday at the Armed Forces Reserve Center in Austin, according to a Guard spokesman.

Brig. Gen. Tracy Norris, commander of the Texas Army National Guard, said the deployment would begin meeting “the priorities of the governor and the president in securing our border.” In addition to troops, the Guard said it would send ground surveillance vehicles and light and medium aircraft. -New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/us/national-guard-border-texas.html)
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey confirmed his state's deployment over Twitter.

Our office is working closely with @AZNationalGuard (https://twitter.com/AZNationalGuard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw), @DeptofDefense (https://twitter.com/DeptofDefense?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) and @DHSgov (https://twitter.com/DHSgov?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) on plans to deploy approximately 150 national guard members to the border next week
— Doug Ducey (@dougducey) April 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/dougducey/status/982371098728677381?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) The initial wave of troops falls short of the 2,000 to 4,000 members of the National Guard that Trump told the media he wanted to send - however Defense Secretary James Mattis signed orders on Friday authorizing funding for an additional 4,000 National Guard troops until Sept. 30, who would remain under the "command and control of their respective governors."

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-07/texas-national-guard-deploying-border-within-72-hours-doj-enacts-zero-tolerance

[goldenequity]

Nevada Governor Opposes Trump’s National Guard Request
https://truepundit.com/nevada-governor-opposes-trumps-national-guard-request/
https://www.westernjournal.com/nevada-governor-opposes-trumps-national-guard-request/

[enhanced_deficit]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/politics/trump-border-wall-military/index.html

Trump says US has no border. Mexico has powerful border.

No details on his idea were provided.

You'd have to concede that at least he's consistent on this and had invoked Israel's border wall example during campaign:

Trump calls out Hillary Clinton for her support for Israel’s separation wall (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?487762-Trump-calls-out-Hillary-Clinton-for-her-support-for-Israel%E2%80%99s-separation-wall&)


What would be so wrong if US followed example of our closest ally and only non-racist democracy in mideast on this and applied military to the border?

http://s19453.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/DZi2iGwXkAIh2cL-580x364.jpg
Israeli military at Gaza border, April 2018

Israeli military kills 32 Palestinians as they tried to come near Israel's separation wall (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?521116-Do-you-think-Nikki-Haley-should-discuss-killing-of-32-Palestinian-protesters-by-Israel&)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK9LWhsd3QI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK9LWhsd3QI

[Todd]

Yes, "invaders". We now have at least 12 million of them and they have been causing social and economic havoc. Are you defending those who have invaded our borders?



JWK

Lol x2. I reject your false analogy.

[Ender]

Lol x2. I reject your false analogy.

Same.

Also, as I said on another thread:

Looks like the "army" headed here has been reduced to maybe 200.

Most are looking at options for staying in Mexico.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1HH052

[johnwk]

Yes, "invaders". We now have at least 12 million of them and they have been causing social and economic havoc. Are you defending those who have invaded our borders?



JWK




Lol


Yes. They have caused social and economic havoc beginning in the 1990s. And that is something to laugh about?


Let us take a look at the destructive social and economic consequences in just one county in California inflicted upon its citizens in 1995 when this massive invasion of our borders began to accelerate. CLICK HERE (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=11&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CBwQFjAAOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnativeborncitizen.files.wordpress .com%2F2013%2F05%2Fsocietallegaliss00unit1.pdf&ei=DNy9U6uSE8KQyATbqIHADQ&usg=AFQjCNEmdHdMT6W-I380gWQK8fOGRG-Qag&sig2=kdhITFjpabZ5lkQwsxEcrg) and scroll to page 93 for testimony given by JOAN ZINSER before the COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DECEMBER 13, 1995


Good morning Chairman Smith and other honorable members of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. I am Joan Zinser, Deputy Director of the San Diego County Department of Social Services. I direct the department's Income Maintenance Bureau, which has responsibility for AFDC, Food Stamps and Medicaid eligibility determinations. I am here today to tell you about the effects of illegal immigration on the County's assistance programs, and to present information regarding impacts on other county-funded services.


Impacts on San Diego County

In 1993, illegal aliens in San Diego County were estimated to be 7.9% of the population, or a total of almost 220,000 illegal aliens in a county with a population of slightly over 2 1/2 million. A 1993 Calffornia State Senate report estimated that the State, local governments - primarily the County - and schools incurred $304 million in costs to provide services to illegal aliens. These costs were offset by only $60 million in taxes generated by illegal aliens - leaving a net impact of $244 million.

Welfare Costs.

When a child is a US citizen, AFDC can be granted for the child but not the parent, if the parent is an undocumented immigrant. In 1992 there were 6,414 children born to undocumented immigrant parents in San Diego County hospitals. Each year, the illegal alien parents of nearly 2000 "citizen children" apply for and receive AFDC in San Diego County. The cumulative total of these "citizen child" cases continues to rise each year.

Public assistance is intended to support the citizen child, but is paid to the illegal alien parent and is, no doubt, used by the parent to support the entire family. Costs for providing AFDC to "citizen children" cases in San Diego totaled $37 million in 1993 for approximately 5430 AFDC cases.

Additional costs are incurred in Child Welfare Services. Combining costs for Out-of-Home and Family Maintenance services to families of illegal aliens results in an additional cost of $1.7 million.

Medicaid and Other Health-Related- Costs.

Medicaid services are an increasingly large portion of the costs involved in illegal immigration. In 1992, Medicaid paid for 6,414 births illegal alien mothers. Although studies have shown that illegal aliens use fewer Medicaid services than do the age-equivalent members of the general population, significant costs remain. Delivery costs are greater for babies with mothers lacking adequate prenatal care and many medical conditions are treated more cost-effectively in their early stages. Infectious diseases are also a major concern of the County. San Diego County has historically carried large costs because of illegal aliens with these problems. Costs associated with providing emergency and pregnancy related needs to illegal aliens are paid for under "restricted Medi-Cal benefits." During the 1992 calendar year, an estimated $37 million was paid for "restricted Medi-Cal benefits." Other costs, including uncompensated care in hospitals, community clinics, and other health services elevated the 1993 total costs to over $50 million.

Criminal justice.
A recent 90-day pilot project involved having INS Agents present in the county jails to interview those suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. Approximately 20% of the persons booked into the jails during that pilot were identified as being illegal aliens. With annual bookings of approximatel 105,000 persons a year, it is estimated that up to 21,000 were illegal aliens.

According to the San Diego County District Attorney, 8,521 felony crimes were committed by illegal aliens between 1987 and 1992. Illegal aliens commit an estimated 22% of felony crimes committed in the county. The number of misdemeanors committed during the same period in San Diego County by illegal aliens is estimated to be 17,000. In 1993, approximately 15. 1 % of the costs -accrued in dealing with crimes were spent on illegal aliens. Costs for illegal aliens to the legal system totaled $151 million in the County of San Diego for 1993.

Education.

Recently, a video of students crossing the border and getting on a school bus in San Diego County in order to receive free education was shown nationwide. Locally, we have worked to make sure that this situation does not recur, but education of the children of illegal aliens is also a significant CDSt. It is estimated that $60 million was spent in San Diego County in 1993 for education of illegal aliens.
________

And, more recently see:

Illegal aliens cost California billions (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/dec/6/20041206-102115-6766r/)
2004
”Illegal immigration costs the taxpayers of California — which has the highest number of illegal aliens nationwide — $10.5 billion a year for education, health care and incarceration, according to a study released yesterday.”

Also see: Testimony about "51 Florida Hospitals in trouble" due to illegal aliens expenses: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDjZ6gzo0C4)

Jun 10, 2008

”No need to editorialize. Here is a sampling of the sort of facts the politicians and pro-illegal lobby want you to ignore, yet expect you to continue to bear the burden of. Is it any wonder scores of hospitals in border states and elsewhere have shut down or closed their ER units?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

Then take a look at Texas Faces Rising Cost For Illegal Immigrant Care (http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/101098849.html)

Aug 19, 2010

Texas spent at least $250 million in the past year for medical care and imprisonment of illegal immigrants and other non-citizens.

And how about this: The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer)

May 6, 2013

”In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar.”

And how about the tens of thousands of criminal aliens released into our nation’s population? See: Judicial Watch: 165,900 Criminal Aliens into US Population Through April 2014 (http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/03/24/judicial-watch-165900-criminal-aliens-into-us-population-through-april-2014/)

Mar 2015

”Nearly 166,000 convicted criminal illegal aliens were released by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as of April, 2014. This is the analysis of 76 pages of DHS documents obtained by Judicial Watch via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The criminal illegal aliens include rapists, murderers and kidnappers.”

_________



Why do you find this so amusing?


JWK





American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.

[Ender]

Maybe you ought to learn some REAL History:

At the end of the Mexican American War, the original terms of the treaty stated that property belonging to Mexicans would remain theirs, and those who stayed in newly established U.S. territories would gain citizenship. Those rights were often denied, however, through judgments by the U.S. judiciary. Mexicans were often disenfranchised and some weren't granted full U.S. citizenship until the 1930s.

Congress passed the country's most comprehensive immigration act up to that point in 1917. It banned people deemed “undesirables” from entering the country, which included “illiterates” over the age of 16, "feeble-minded persons,” “epileptics,” “insane persons,” alcoholics, “professional beggars," and others. But businesses needed help because many men were fighting in World War I, so the Immigration Act was invoked because it had also established the first sanctioned temporary worker policy, which allowed workers from the Western Hemisphere, including Mexicans, to enter the country legally to work primarily in agriculture, but also on the railways and in other industries. Some stayed and built lives in the U.S.

Then the stock market crashed in 1929 and the Great Depression began. With millions out of work, some officially, and unofficially, decided the way they were going to create jobs was by getting rid of anyone with a Mexican-sounding name.

The government called it "repatriation," or the return of someone to their own country. But according to a Los Angeles County statistic cited in the book Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s, more than 60% of those deported were U.S. citizens. The deportations often took place without due process and Mexicans were targeted “because of 'the proximity of the Mexican border, the physical distinctiveness of mestizos, and easily identifiable barrios.

Working, tax-paying, American citizens who were of Mexican descent, were forced out of their homes and taken to Mexico. Many had never even been in Mexico before.

[bunklocoempire]

Esequiel Hernández Jr.

https://pictshare.net/360x360/6xtv5qf6ms.jpg

When Soldiers Patrol the Border, Civilians Get Killed
https://theintercept.com/2018/04/06/border-patrol-us-mexico-esequiel-hernandez/

EDIT: FFF is where I originally stumbled across the link.
https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/freedom-on-the-web-link/soldiers-patrol-border-civilians-get-killed/

[nikcers]

Maybe you ought to learn some REAL History:
History is fake news which is always written by the victors. I don't blame the culture warriors, try going into another country and not following the unwritten social contracts. The people that have the worst time here are the people who flat out refuse to follow the laws of the land, oh I can't get insurance so I will drive without insurance so everyone has to get "uninsured drivers insurance".

I was all for letting people have a fair shake at society and couldn't see the other side of the coin until my coworker got hit by a van with an unlicensed illegal immigrant driving it, while he was on his motorcycle. Why couldn't she of taken the bus if she can't have a license? Hell I don't even think I would be okay with this situation if she was allowed and had a license. This is why Trump's they aren't sending the best people resonated with people. The best people wouldn't break rules even if they aren't fair.

[Ender]

History is fake news which is always written by the victors. I don't blame the culture warriors, try going into another country and not following the unwritten social contracts. The people that have the worst time here are the people who flat out refuse to follow the laws of the land, oh I can't get insurance so I will drive without insurance so everyone has to get "uninsured drivers insurance".

I was all for letting people have a fair shake at society and couldn't see the other side of the coin until my coworker got hit by a van with an unlicensed illegal immigrant driving it, while he was on his motorcycle. Why couldn't she of taken the bus if she can't have a license? Hell I don't even think I would be okay with this situation if she was allowed and had a license. This is why Trump's they aren't sending the best people resonated with people. The best people wouldn't break rules even if they aren't fair.

Sorry about your friend but I do hope you know that insurance is a mercantile crap shoot, headed by elitists and is unconstitutional. Also, licenses were only supposed to be for things that were otherwise unlawful. They were never supposed to be for driving, marriage, cutting hair, etc.

These kinds of issues are so ingrained in society that we don't understand that they are definitely part of the Matrix trap that we are all held in.

This scene has never been more relevant.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw88MWoqenQ

[nikcers]

Sorry about your friend but I do hope you know that insurance is a mercantile crap shoot, headed by elitists and is unconstitutional. Also, licenses were only supposed to be for things that were otherwise unlawful. They were never supposed to be for driving, marriage, cutting hair, etc.

These kinds of issues are so ingrained in society that we don't understand that they are definitely part of the Matrix trap that we are all held in.

This scene has never been more relevant.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw88MWoqenQ
Guests that are here for the benefit of the ultra rich don't have a right to civil disobedience. They are in fact just as guilty of their crimes as their sponsors. Why do you think the media didn't want to cover someone getting hit by an illegal driver on his motorcycle leaving behind a widow and an orphan?

[Ender]

Guests that are here for the benefit of the ultra rich don't have a right to civil disobedience. They are in fact just as guilty of their crimes as their sponsors. Why do you think the media didn't want to cover someone getting hit by an illegal driver on his motorcycle leaving behind a widow and an orphan?

Stop thinking about "guests" for a moment- they are a ruse- and think about yourself, your family, friends. Think about the freedoms that are being cut down daily and what is happening right in front of our faces. We will soon all be Bundys or Snowdens, or worse, absolutely clueless to the Matrix that we now live in.

[Raginfridus]

I'd rather see Trump hold the line, and ratchet up the border Guard rhetoric, passively defaming Assad and taunting Putin, than mobilize any further elsewhere. No, troops at the border won't accomplish anything, no more than a wall would, but by sending a couple thousand part-time soldiers to do their PT on the border, he's helping to keep the argument alive. Its an argument that can help liberty candidates in pro-military districts. We're past war weariness and squarely in, "if there's no great excuse for war, let's just do it already" territory.

That argument is, let's secure our borders with the military, rather than go to war. Anything to stretch out the debate at this point should be an option.

[Swordsmyth]

National Guard troops stationed along the US-Mexico border have contributed to 1,600 apprehensions of people crossing the border illegally and the capture of about 1,000 pounds of marijuana in their three-and-a-half weeks on the job, according to a Customs and Border Protection official. The official said the National Guard troops have also contributed to 451 "turn backs," where individuals abandon an attempt to illegally cross into the US.

More at: https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/09/politics/national-guard-troops-border-apprehensions/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+rss%252Fcnn_latest+(RSS%253 A+CNN+-+Most+Recent)


The Department of Homeland Security (https://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/homeland-security.htm) is asking the Pentagon (https://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/the-pentagon.htm) for additional manpower and equipment to help secure the southern border, U.S. defense and Homeland Security officials tell ABC News.

The defense official said the Department of Homeland Security Wednesday will request about 700 additional National Guardsmen plus helicopters and other equipment. Defense Secretary James Mattis (https://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/james-n.-mattis.htm) is expected to review the request and respond to DHS on Thursday.

More at: https://abcnews.go.com/US/dhs-requesting-700-additional-troops-helicopters-border-security/story?id=55049432

[timosman]

Stop thinking about "guests" for a moment


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/005/935/ef1.jpg

[Swordsmyth]

The National Guard’s deployment to the southwest border in mid-April has led to 10,805 “deportable alien arrests” of people who illegally entered the United States from Mexico, a U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman said Monday.
Because guardsmen are military personnel and not law enforcement officers, they cannot apprehend illegal immigrants. But CBP officers and Border Patrol agents apprehended thousands of people that guardsmen helped point out.
The National Guard’s presence also helped lead to the interception of more than 3,300 others who were turned back before they crossed into the U.S., CBP press secretary Corry Schiermeyer said in an email to the Washington Examiner. The Guard’s deployment has also led to an additional 11,686 pounds of marijuana being seized as a result of their work.

More at: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/national-guard-deployment-led-to-more-than-10-000-additional-arrests-of-illegal-immigrants-says-cbp