I really don't understand at all where he changed his mind from this article you linked. "By the end, Trump appeared to agree with McCarthy. "I think a clean DACA bill to me is a DACA bill, but we take care of the 800,000 people," Trump said. "But I think to me, a clean bill is a bill of DACA — we take care of them, and we also take care of security." When the White House released its official transcript Tuesday afternoon, the president’s line — “Yeah, I would like to do it” — was missing. A White House official said that any omission from the transcript was unintentional and that the context of the conversation was clear." That context is also exactly what I've been saying this entire thread in all of my posts. As for the second things you linked. They haven't had a proper discussion and debate, it is rushed. The conversation needs to be approached properly. Slipping it in an un-related bill isn't having the conversation approached properly. Having the conversation approached properly is debating DACA on it's own merit and where both establishments work together to create a bill everyone is happy with. This should be done in February before DACA expires in March, which is the date Trump decided to extend it to because he didn't want to kick DACA people out.
Yes the conversation must continue until the date expires and we kick them all out of the country right?
In Trump's defense, if you watch the video, he had no clue (I could stop there) as to what Feinstein was proposing. He did not know (I could stop there) what a "clean" bill meant until the Republicans present at the meeting told him.
The conversation should be done in February as initially planned before it expires in march.. MARCH, which is when TRUMP EXTENDED IT TO, he extended it because he didn't want to 'kick them all out'. He wants them to be able to stay. However, he also wants better immigration laws so we don't have a future DACA predicament. He extended it so it could get discussed. The democrats don't want to discuss it, they don't want illegal immigration to stop and they are slipping their demands in a government shutdown bill that is completely unrelated to DACA.
What additional discussion on DACA is required? How long as DACA existed... six years? Seems a very straightforward topic, probably why almost 9 out of 10 Americans want DACA recipients to stay in the U.S. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-in-10-favor-allowing-daca-recipients-to-stay
He admitted to much. Technicalities. He made it as clear as he could what he thought and what he wants with exactly what he said: "I think a clean DACA bill to me (thus he is admitting, this is what a clean DACA bill means to him) is a DACA bill, but we take care of the 800,000 people," Trump said. "But I think to me, a clean bill is a bill of DACA (thus he is admitting, this is what a clean DACA bill means to him) — we take care of them, and we also take care of security."
I don't understand how you aren't comprehending. Trump also wants them to stay. Dude is part of the 9 out of 10 Americans. The DACA discussion needs to be made to avoid a future where we have a DACA situation. If you just give full amnesty we will be back in this same situation in 10 years, as we saw when Reagen amnestied. Trump wants to amnesty DACA's with the assurance of a protocol (a wall or something they agree to) that lowers illegal immigration so we don't have a million new DACA's in 10 years. Democrats want illegal immigration to continue.
This is such BS. They could have discussed it since August. They had a deal in place in Congress just like Trump asked for. Then the right wingers got upset and he caved.
But Democrats have already agreed to increase border security spending including physical barriers, chain migration and other loopholes.
He also could have ended it altogether. But the big bad evil Trump didn't want to kick them all out, instead he decided to extend it to march. What a c*nt amirite.
So, 99% of congress truly know what a "clean" bill means, but the guy who is ultimately in charge doesn't? Got it. Man, governing is hard.
I don’t really feel bad for any of the politicians or their supporters on either side of the aisle. The same thing happened when Obama was President but it was over AHCA. Both sides have been playing this game. Both deserve to be roasted.
He could have not ended it at all. But he did it just to spite Obama and serve red meat to his base. He created this mess by ending it in the first place. His stupidity created this mess. Naturally you defend him.
Bottom line is that the senate and house have failed the people as they have the last 5yrs.No budget but they still get paid.
Facts - Republicans control the House, Senate, and White House and have absolute power to end the shutdown at any moment. But since they hate children and brown people , they won't. **** those guys
You definitely COULD look at this from both sides. In fact I'm sure both sides here contain some very fine people. But being a both sides here makes you kind of an ignorant dipshit, see the empirical work that Ornstein and Mann have done, among others. Honestly, splitting the baby here and opting for bothsiderism is TNT at the half level of commentary brah. Look, Houston is so easy to match up with because of their style. But the T wolves need to play more like Houston style, because the slowdown game doesn't really work any more
