You can't make this up: To fund border wall, Trump weighs cuts to Coast Guard, airport security

[fskimospy]

Well they are going to pay for the wall, but just not in the way you'd logically assume what Trump meant to say when he kept repeating that well known refrain over and over again at every single rally he held.

His surrogates somehow knew exactly what he meant to say, although if you ask each one of them you'd get a different version of it.

And the folks who voted for him based on that startling declaration of his also know exactly what he meant by that. Just ask them, they'll tell you without a single nervous blink or a twitch of the lip that you're not going to fully understand what Trump meant to say because what he said wasn't what you'd really think he meant exactly, even though the Mexicans are actually going to pay for the wall after all is said and done.

You see, they all know what Trump meant, it's just that they'll tell you what you heard from Trump can be easily misunderstood because what he meant to say when he said what he said can only be truly understood if you voted for him. Otherwise, for sure you'd take what he said the wrong way, which is that Mexico was going to pay for the wall in cash and on demand. Wrong. You have to take what Trump said and run it through a series of Conservative Speak filters in order to get on the right track, which is a highly confidential process that is closely guarded but well known among Trump's supporters.

For the rest of us, we have to understand that what Trump actually meant to say was that "Mexico was going to pay for the wall.........One way or another." The problem is that only Trump's supporters know what that is but they're not ever going to let on about that until after it actually happens, if ever.

Haha it's like schrodinger's statement. The mere act of trying to figure out what Trump means when he says something changes what he meant.

 

[vi edit]

It makes sense that a man with a 4th grade vocabulary also applies 4th grade level logic to prevention and response teams.

But that beautiful wall though...

 

[ch33zw1z]

Which cereal comes with Trump's secret decoder ring?

 

[Exterous]

TSA had to move money from other programs into screening last year to beef up staffing. Reducing the overall agency budget will remove some or all of that ability. If congress sets a funding level at or below what it originally did for 2016 the problem will most likely recur at peak travel season.

I'm not quite sure what your argument is here. You want to keep spending $20M a year on arming pilots (0 cases where this has been useful) and a proven flawed and racist program (Behavioral Detection Officers https://www.aclu.org/report/bad-trip-debunking-tsas-behavior-detection-program?redirect=bad-trip) because it could be used as a slush fund in the event of poor financial allocations? (The local police grants are pre-allocated and cannot be re-allocated.)

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well obviously he's going to defund the coastguard and airport security. In Trump's game of wall vs. anything, wall always wins.

Maybe after the wall comes the giant wooden badger?

Let's skip the wall and go for the bigliest wooden badger. It would be at least as effective and cost much less.

 

[Bitek]

There is absolutely 0 evidence that airport security has stopped terrorist attacks. There is, however, a preponderance of evidence that airport security is completely and utterly inept at their jobs despite the billions in funding they get. After their 91% failure rate they asked for more money and they got it. The result? A 95% failure rate. This is also the same group that decided it would mandate more fondling of US citizens because it was too difficult for their agents to decide how much groping to do on their own

Have we really gotten to the point where this site is so anti-Trump that they'll defend airport security and its funding? I would think that last program specifically should be hailed as a cut since it there is a decent amount of evidence that it disproportionally targets muslims

I'm all for cutting wasteful spending and programs, and TSA is in that zone, but not at the goal to dump it into an even larger, more wasteful spending program.

Cut it and cut the deficit.

 

[Jaskalas]

Really? Cut the Coast Guard's capabilities to fund...

Why did you select the wall? Maybe cuts are for the tax cuts or military budget increase?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm not quite sure what your argument is here. You want to keep spending $20M a year on arming pilots (0 cases where this has been useful) and a proven flawed and racist program (Behavioral Detection Officers https://www.aclu.org/report/bad-trip-debunking-tsas-behavior-detection-program?redirect=bad-trip) because it could be used as a slush fund in the event of poor financial allocations? (The local police grants are pre-allocated and cannot be re-allocated.)

The TSA is a wonderful example of a politically created bureaucracy based on clueless policy. The 20M? I don't see that as a bad investment. That there has been no need to use weapons does not mean much. Think of it as a lock on your door. Because you haven't been robbed does not mean you should not replace them if they break. Even better imagine removing your unneeded locks and announcing you don't buy into this whole "lock thing".

I'm thinking that's not a good idea.

 

[ThePresence]

Well they are going to pay for the wall, but just not in the way you'd logically assume what Trump meant to say when he kept repeating that well known refrain over and over again at every single rally he held.

His surrogates somehow knew exactly what he meant to say, although if you ask each one of them you'd get a different version of it.

And the folks who voted for him based on that startling declaration of his also know exactly what he meant by that. Just ask them, they'll tell you without a single nervous blink or a twitch of the lip that you're not going to fully understand what Trump meant to say because what he said wasn't what you'd really think he meant exactly, even though the Mexicans are actually going to pay for the wall after all is said and done.

You see, they all know what Trump meant, it's just that they'll tell you what you heard from Trump can be easily misunderstood because what he meant to say when he said what he said can only be truly understood if you voted for him. Otherwise, for sure you'd take what he said the wrong way, which is that Mexico was going to pay for the wall in cash and on demand. Wrong. You have to take what Trump said and run it through a series of Conservative Speak filters in order to get on the right track, which is a highly confidential process that is closely guarded but well known among Trump's supporters.

For the rest of us, we have to understand that what Trump actually meant to say was that "Mexico was going to pay for the wall.........One way or another." The problem is that only Trump's supporters know what that is but they're not ever going to let on about that until after it actually happens, if ever.

I'd take out the word "conservative" and replace it with "Trumpeteer" and then you have a post worthy of a Post of the Year award.

 

[Thump553]

The sad thing is WHEN the next major terrorist attack comes (not if, but when) Trump is going to blame the courts for blocking his muslim ban. Meanwhile he does just about every possible to REDUCE our security. He does bonehead moves like this and deliberately ignores his daily intelligence briefings, instead relying on the internet version of the National Enquirer.

 

[Homerboy]

Well obviously he's going to defund the coastguard and airport security. In Trump's game of wall vs. anything, wall always wins.

Maybe after the wall comes the giant wooden badger?

Wrong.
Ladder and shovel both beat wall.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Haha it's like schrodinger's statement. The mere act of trying to figure out what Trump means when he says something changes what he meant.

Heh that's true. To paraphrase Feynman again "anyone who says they understand Trump demonstrates that they don't understand Trump".

 

[K1052]

because it could be used as a slush fund in the event of poor financial allocations?

Unless the screening program is fully funded, by congress, to it's actual needs yes.

 

[Exterous]

The TSA is a wonderful example of a politically created bureaucracy based on clueless policy. The 20M? I don't see that as a bad investment. That there has been no need to use weapons does not mean much. Think of it as a lock on your door. Because you haven't been robbed does not mean you should not replace them if they break. Even better imagine removing your unneeded locks and announcing you don't buy into this whole "lock thing".

I'm thinking that's not a good idea.

Spending $320M on a very flawed program that results in rarely having a pilot who is allowed to carry and use a weapon under extremely limited cases whose only application would be if all other security methods failed doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/thousands-pilots-wont-fly-armed-blame-tsa

Edit - if we expand your lock analogy it would be more like living in a 100 room mansion behind a fence, security system and deadbolt. This program would be adding a single lock to one of the 100 rooms, irrespective of the importance of the room, in case the robber gets past everything else and just happens to choose that room to steal from

 

[Exterous]

Unless the screening program is fully funded, by congress, to it's actual needs yes.

I guess we will disagree on the usefulness of keeping a wasteful and racist program around to hypothetically make sure that people occasionally don't need to wait in lines then

 

[hal2kilo]

Haha it's like schrodinger's statement. The mere act of trying to figure out what Trump means when he says something changes what he meant.

Spooky actions at a distance.

 

[zinfamous]

Wrong.
Ladder and shovel both beat wall.

Don't forget the giant wooden rabbit.

 

[JMC2000]

Why not just eliminate the entire Department of Homeland Security?

With EXTREME Vetting, The Make America Great Again Wall and The (not a Muslim ban) Travel Ban, America will be bigly safe forever!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Spending $320M on a very flawed program that results in rarely having a pilot who is allowed to carry and use a weapon under extremely limited cases whose only application would be if all other security methods failed doesn't seem like a good idea to me at all

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/thousands-pilots-wont-fly-armed-blame-tsa

Edit - if we expand your lock analogy it would be more like living in a 100 room mansion behind a fence, security system and deadbolt. This program would be adding a single lock to one of the 100 rooms, irrespective of the importance of the room, in case the robber gets past everything else and just happens to choose that room to steal from

I'm looking at the TSA proper and how often things get past them and their record isn't that good. But we have our differing perspectives so we agree to disagree, OK?

 

[BurnItDwn]

We need to worry about Mexico's Kaiju. A wall will not help us. We need giant robots!

 

[JMC2000]

We need to worry about Mexico's Kaiju. A wall will not help us. We need giant robots!

Does it have tequila-powered atomic breath?

 

[chowderhead]

so when Trump says Mexico will pay for the wall, he actually meant, cuts to the Coast Guard but also 18 billion in cuts to medical research, education, other infrastructure projects, help for the elderly, housing, etc. Republicans own this forever. He is their end result after Reagan, W and now Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powe...489b735b3a3_story.html?utm_term=.a7f8a64ae878

 

[theeedude]

Republicans are so stupid, it's pretty mind boggling.

 

[IronWing]

Why not just eliminate the entire Department of Homeland Security?

That's been the dream since the day it was created. The creation of DHS was one of the grand pooba f*ups of American history.

 

[Muse]

If you think logically about it you will realize that Trump's assertion that Mexico will pay for a wall at their border is 100% ridiculous. They have no reason to want a wall there. Why should they care if their people flee over the border? They shrug.

Any wall the US builds will be paid for by the US. If we try to extract payment from them, how can we do it? Bribe them? Blackmail them? Threaten them with what? Tariffs? Refuse to allow imports from Mexico? Throttle them? Refuse to allow exports from the USA? That doesn't pay for a wall, it just throttles commerce, it has nothing to do with financing a wall. Nothing we can do to hold them up for our expenses will work. We can't tax them, we can only tax ourselves.

The Egyptians built the pyramids with slaves, however we cannot enslave the Mexicans (although we've arguably semi-enslaved a lot of them on our soil to plant and harvest our crops and do a lot of other dirty work). The net sum of our shenanigans will be zero. Trump can pretend that Mexico has paid for "the wall," but the truth of the matter will be that the cost was born 100% by the citizens of the USA. Trump's assertions on the matter have been and will continue to be complete propaganda without substance.