quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Did Democrats reverse border wall position after Donald Trump was elected?

The law authorized a fence along about 700 miles of the border between the U.S.-Mexico border. By 2015, U.S. Customs and Border Protection had constructed 654 miles of fencing, the Government Accountability Office reported.

The fence was different from the wall Trump promised to build on the campaign trail, which he said would be made of "hardened concrete" as tall as "95 stories" with a "very big, very beautiful door."

Trump derided the 2006 fence as too modest during the 2016 campaign — he said it was "not a wall" but a "little fence" that could be scaled with a ladder.

"Now we got lucky because it was such a little wall, it was such a nothing wall, no, they couldn't get their environmental — probably a snake was in the way or a toad," Trump said. (Actually, the project didn’t face environmental hurdles; we rated that part of the claim Mostly False.) -snip

he Democrats’ offer to Trump is a continuing resolution on last year’s appropriations act, which provided $1.3 billion for fencing and additional money for other types of border security. The language made it so that the funds could only be used on repairing or extending fencing that had already been built under the 2006 law.

We’re rated similar statements in which the Trump administration has claimed Democrats wanted a wall as Half True, but here, Trump goes farther. Democrats have not changed their stance on the border fencing they previously supported; they simply don’t support the more ambitious wall Trump proposes.

Finally, Trump says the Democrats no longer support their previous position simply because he wants it. But Democrats have actually proposed current funding for the fencing that was approved in 2006.

We rate this statement Mostly False. -snip

(please log in to view the image)


Seems not.

quote:

"...back in 2013, she supported a bill that required the construction of 700 miles of border fencing.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
No goalposts were moved, you mentioned the fencing, so I commented on the fencing.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Pelosi still seems fine with the fencing, it's part of the 1.3billion proposal.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
If she still supports the fencing and it's part of the 1.6b package, there's no hypocrisy.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
And you don't see the hypocrisy? Not even a little bit? If the wall is ineffective and wasteful then...


Follow?

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Protecting 700 miles of fencing is possible. Though it will likely fail too, imo.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
Wonderful, we agree!

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Pelosi tacitly supported fencing, and has a fence herself, so there is no hypocrisy there. But! That was before Loomer proved that barriers do not work, so Pelosi has even more reason to oppose a wall now.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by dadudemon
"This wall is unnecessary! It's ineffective for its intended purpose! And immoral! Ohohoho, but this fence will work just fine!"


Nope, nothing to see here. No hypocrisy at all.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Are walls fences? And did she claim she put up a fence to keep anyone out? Keep reaching.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Most fences around homes are for property line markings and privacy reasons, so the casual passerby or neighbor can't peek in your window. There's no real belief that they'll stop an intruder.

Why I laugh every time some Trumper brings up the "but they have fences and gates around their homes!" angle.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Loomer sodomized her own point when she casually went over Pelosi's home wall.

As noted, the 700mile fencing idea (with patrols) could work or partially work along those 700miles. I personally doubt it though. High-end technology seems to be what would offer the most security. eg Drones high above covering many miles at a time and then radioing in so border patrol can drive directly to a possible entrance attempt.

Imo, it's not a word game to note the difference between some relatively keep steel fencing and Trump's super expensive mega wall.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Robtard
Loomer sodomized her own point when she casually went over Pelosi's home wall.

As noted, the 700mile fencing idea (with patrols) could work or partially work along those 700miles. I personally doubt it though. High-end technology seems to be what would offer the most security. eg Drones high above covering many miles at a time and then radioing in so border patrol can drive directly to a possible entrance attempt.

Imo, it's not a word game to note the difference between some relatively keep steel fencing and Trump's super expensive mega wall.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I think men in monkey suits with nets are the answer.