这位前总统在威斯康星州Prairie du Chien向全场的支持者发表了这些言论，似乎是为了破坏贺锦丽在移民问题上的领导地位。 川普对观众说：“拜登智力受损了，而贺锦丽天生如此，她生来就是这样。”这番言论引得观众们哄堂大笑。这位前总统继续说道：“你仔细想想，只有智障人士才会允许这种事情发生在我们的国家。任何人都知道这一点。” 川普所说的“这种事情”指的是去年涌入美国的移民。川普竞选团队的一大支柱就是将移民越境问题归咎于贺锦丽，并称其作为副总统有责任解决这个问题。 拜登政府的多位官员表示，贺锦丽的任务只是了解中美洲国家大规模移民的根本原因，并领导外交努力减少这些问题。 美国残疾人协会（American Association of People with Disabilities）主席Maria Town表示，川普的言语是“残疾歧视”。她在一份声明中称，川普今天的残疾歧视言论，更多地反映了他本人以及他对残疾人的不准确、仇恨的偏见，而不是对副总统贺锦丽的偏见。 与此同时，AAPD呼吁两党领导人在2024年大选中谴责川普使用的残疾歧视言论。该部门表示，川普持有对残障人士的错误观念，他认为如果一个人有残疾，他们就不是人，也不值得拥有尊严。 Maria在声明中提醒人们，多位前总统都曾患有残疾。罗斯福总统曾患小儿麻痹症，并一直使用轮椅；约翰·肯尼迪患有阿狄森氏病、溃疡性结肠炎和慢性疼痛，里根患有听力障碍，而拜登总统患有口吃。因此，单凭一个人是否有残疾不足以确定其是否适合担任民选公职。 据报道，这位前总统在周六晚上长达一小时的集会上大部分时间都在侮辱贺锦丽，他称她“无能”，“是个坏人”，并声称她周五晚上在边境发表的讲话是“胡说八道”。 此外，川普周五还在社交媒体上发文说道，如果司法部不以“公然干涉选举”为由起诉谷歌，那么“当他赢得大选并成为美国总统时”，他将要求起诉谷歌。 据报道，川普之所以说出这一番话，有可能与右倾的媒体研究中心的一项新研究有关，这项研究指出，当用户搜索川普2024年总统竞选时，谷歌搜索引擎倾向于显示对民主党人贺锦丽有利的新闻文章，而非川普自己的竞选网站。 谷歌方面则表示，在相关和常见搜索查询中，两位候选人的网站始终位居搜索结果的首位，关于总统选举或候选人的搜索，通常会显示出不断变化的新闻文章链接，这些文章反映了网络上的情况，所以它们一直在变化，“我们绝对不会操纵搜索结果来偏袒任何候选人。”事实上，有媒体报道称，与其他搜索引擎的结果相比，川普竞选网站在谷歌搜索结果中的排名更高。
那个所谓的“bipartisan bill” 实际上在再次修改后已经面目全非，连若干起草成员都已经反对。 而且不少猪党议员因为各种原因反对，在Senate压根拿不到 60票， 在house 会dead on arrival， 其中一个重要原因是乌克兰援助法案， 这个一参乎进去，基本上就是毒丸， 贴到任何法案上都是死翘翘 ipartisan border bill loses support, fails procedural vote in U.S. Senate By: Ariana Figueroa - May 24, 2024 7:15 am U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, flanked by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, left, and Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat, speaks during a news conference to support a border security bill on Wednesday, May 22, 2024. The bill failed on a procedural vote Thursday (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images). WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate failed Thursday to advance a border security bill as both parties seek to hone their messages on immigration policy in the runup to November’s elections. The Senate bill failed to advance on a 43-50 procedural vote. The chamber already rejected the measure as part of a broader foreign aid package earlier this year. The bill, negotiated with the White House and a bipartisan trio of senators in the hopes of winning broad appeal, would have overhauled immigration law for the first time in more than 30 years. Two of the border deal’s chief Senate negotiators, Oklahoma Republican James Lankford and Arizona independent Kyrsten Sinema, voted against advancing the measure Thursday, protesting what they said was an unserious process focused on political optics. The bill’s third major sponsor, Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy, voted in favor. The procedural vote to advance to debate on the bill came as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer aimed to contrast Democrats’ approach to immigration policy with Republicans’ ahead of the November elections. The issue continues to rise as a top concern for voters and remains a core campaign theme for the GOP and its presumptive presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump. Both chambers are readying other votes seemingly aimed at highlighting election themes. The Democratic-led Senate is teeing up votes as early as next month on access to contraceptives, and protections for in vitro fertilization, or IVF, as Democrats have continued to campaign on the issue of reproductive rights. The Republican-controlled House is moving forward with immigration related legislation, such as barring noncitizens from voting in federal elections, something that is rare and already illegal, as the GOP continues to highlight its disagreements with the White House over immigration policy. Shortly after the Senate vote, President Joe Biden in a statement said Senate Republicans “put partisan politics ahead of our country’s national security.” “Congressional Republicans do not care about securing the border or fixing America’s broken immigration system,” he said. “If they did, they would have voted for the toughest border enforcement in history.” Losing support The border security bill, S.4361, received fewer votes Thursday as a standalone bill than it had as part of the larger foreign aid package in February, when it failed on a 49-50 procedural vote. Sixty votes are needed to advance bills in the Senate. The bill did not get all Democrats on board, which Schumer acknowledged earlier this week was a possibility. “We do not expect every Democrat or every Republican to come out in favor of this bill,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday. “The only way to pass this bill – or any border bill – is with broad bipartisan support.” But the bill failed to attract that broad support, losing backing even from Democrats who’d voted for the foreign aid package. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said in a Wednesday statement that while he voted for the larger package in early February – mostly because it included critical aid to Ukraine – he would not do so this time around because the bill was too restrictive. “I will not vote for the bill coming to the Senate floor this week because it includes several provisions that will violate Americans’ shared values,” Booker said. “The proposed bill would exclude people fleeing violence and persecution from seeking asylum and instead doubles down on failed anti-immigrant policies that encourage irregular immigration.” ‘Another cynical, political game’ Democratic senators who voted against moving the bill forward included Alex Padilla and Laphonza Butler of California, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Booker. Independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sinema also voted against. Sinema said she voted against advancing her own bill because she felt Democrats were using her bill to “point the finger back at the other party.” “Yet another cynical, political game,” she said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to vote to advance the bill after Lankford voted against the bill he helped write. Lankford said Thursday’s vote was “a prop.” “Everyone sees this for what it is,” he said. “It is not an actual effort to make law, it is an effort to do political messaging.” Padilla, who voted against the larger package, said on the Senate floor Thursday that he was disappointed Democrats were voting on the bill again because it did not address the root causes of migration or create lawful pathways to citizenship for children brought into the U.S. without authorization known as Dreamers, farmworkers, and noncitizens who have been in the country for decades. He urged other Democrats to vote no. “The proposal before us was initially supposed to be a concession, a ransom to be paid to Republicans to pass urgent and critical aid to Ukraine,” Padilla said. “What’s this concession for now? It’s hard to swallow.” Senate Republicans accused Democrats of bringing the bill as a political stunt. “One thing the American people don’t have to wonder about is why Washington Democrats are suddenly champing at the bit to convince their constituents that they care about border security,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor Thursday. “(Americans) know the solution is not cynical Senate theater.” Biden called McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday night to ask them to vote for the bill, but both Republican leaders rejected that appeal. First vote Lankford, Sinema and Murphy introduced the bill earlier this year, optimistic that months of bipartisan negotiations could lead to the first immigration policy overhaul in decades. But Trump opposed the measure, and after those senators released the legislative text, House Republicans said they would fall in line with the former president. Senate Republicans then walked away from the deal they had said would be needed in order for passage of a supplemental foreign aid package to Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. The sweeping border security bill would have raised the bar for migrants claiming asylum, clarified the White House’s parole authority, ended the practice of allowing migrants to live in U.S. communities as they await their asylum hearings, and given Biden the executive authority to close the southern border when asylum claims reached high levels, among other things. Dueling messages The day leading up to Thursday’s vote, Senate Democrats and Republicans held dueling press conferences on the bill. Democrats, including Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, argued that the bill negotiated earlier in the year would address the fentanyl crisis by providing new scanning technology at ports of entry and increasing staffing for custom agents. Stabenow said she’s tired of Senate Republicans saying that “‘somebody should do something about the border,’” and that Thursday’s vote would give them an opportunity to address the southern border. She was joined by Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, who talked about how many people in their states had died from fentanyl overdoses. Republicans in their press conference argued that Democrats were holding a second vote to protect vulnerable incumbents in competitive races in Montana, Ohio and Pennsylvania. “It is an election-year political stunt designed to give our Democratic colleagues the appearance of doing something about this problem without doing anything,” Tennessee GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn said Wednesday. She was joined by Republican Sens. Roger Marshall of Kansas, Rick Scott of Florida, Eric Schmitt of Missouri, John Coryn of Texas, J.D. Vance of Ohio and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. House opposition Even if the border security bill passed the Senate, it would have no chance in the House, where Johnson has vowed it will be dead on arrival. The Louisiana Republican in a Wednesday press conference called the measure a messaging bill and said Schumer was “trying to give his vulnerable members cover.” And not all House Democrats were on board with the bill negotiated out of the Senate. The chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state and the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Nanette Barragán of California, slammed Senate Democrats for putting forth the legislation and urged them to abandon the effort. “We are disappointed that the Senate will once again vote on an already-failed border bill in a move that only splits the Democratic Caucus over extreme and unworkable enforcement-only policies,” they wrote in a statement. “This framework, which was constructed under Republican hostage-taking, does nothing to address the longstanding updates needed to modernize our outdated immigration system, create more legal pathways, and recognize the enormous contributions of immigrants to communities and our economy.” Latino Democrats also voiced opposition to the bill when it was first released because it contained many hard-line policies that were reminiscent of the Trump administration.
singlemummy 发表于 2024-09-28 23:37 那个所谓的“bipartisan bill” 实际上在再次修改后已经面目全非，连若干起草成员都已经反对。 而且不少猪党议员因为各种原因反对，在Senate压根拿不到 60票， 在house 会dead on arrival， 其中一个重要原因是乌克兰援助法案， 这个一参乎进去，基本上就是毒丸， 贴到任何法案上都是死翘翘 ipartisan border bill loses support, fails procedural vote in U.S. Senate By: Ariana Figueroa - May 24, 2024 7:15 am U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, flanked by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, left, and Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat, speaks during a news conference to support a border security bill on Wednesday, May 22, 2024. The bill failed on a procedural vote Thursday (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images). WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate failed Thursday to advance a border security bill as both parties seek to hone their messages on immigration policy in the runup to November’s elections. The Senate bill failed to advance on a 43-50 procedural vote. The chamber already rejected the measure as part of a broader foreign aid package earlier this year. The bill, negotiated with the White House and a bipartisan trio of senators in the hopes of winning broad appeal, would have overhauled immigration law for the first time in more than 30 years. Two of the border deal’s chief Senate negotiators, Oklahoma Republican James Lankford and Arizona independent Kyrsten Sinema, voted against advancing the measure Thursday, protesting what they said was an unserious process focused on political optics. The bill’s third major sponsor, Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy, voted in favor. The procedural vote to advance to debate on the bill came as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer aimed to contrast Democrats’ approach to immigration policy with Republicans’ ahead of the November elections. The issue continues to rise as a top concern for voters and remains a core campaign theme for the GOP and its presumptive presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump. Both chambers are readying other votes seemingly aimed at highlighting election themes. The Democratic-led Senate is teeing up votes as early as next month on access to contraceptives, and protections for in vitro fertilization, or IVF, as Democrats have continued to campaign on the issue of reproductive rights. The Republican-controlled House is moving forward with immigration related legislation, such as barring noncitizens from voting in federal elections, something that is rare and already illegal, as the GOP continues to highlight its disagreements with the White House over immigration policy. Shortly after the Senate vote, President Joe Biden in a statement said Senate Republicans “put partisan politics ahead of our country’s national security.” “Congressional Republicans do not care about securing the border or fixing America’s broken immigration system,” he said. “If they did, they would have voted for the toughest border enforcement in history.” Losing support The border security bill, S.4361, received fewer votes Thursday as a standalone bill than it had as part of the larger foreign aid package in February, when it failed on a 49-50 procedural vote. Sixty votes are needed to advance bills in the Senate. The bill did not get all Democrats on board, which Schumer acknowledged earlier this week was a possibility. “We do not expect every Democrat or every Republican to come out in favor of this bill,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday. “The only way to pass this bill – or any border bill – is with broad bipartisan support.” But the bill failed to attract that broad support, losing backing even from Democrats who’d voted for the foreign aid package. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said in a Wednesday statement that while he voted for the larger package in early February – mostly because it included critical aid to Ukraine – he would not do so this time around because the bill was too restrictive. “I will not vote for the bill coming to the Senate floor this week because it includes several provisions that will violate Americans’ shared values,” Booker said. “The proposed bill would exclude people fleeing violence and persecution from seeking asylum and instead doubles down on failed anti-immigrant policies that encourage irregular immigration.” ‘Another cynical, political game’ Democratic senators who voted against moving the bill forward included Alex Padilla and Laphonza Butler of California, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Booker. Independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sinema also voted against. Sinema said she voted against advancing her own bill because she felt Democrats were using her bill to “point the finger back at the other party.” “Yet another cynical, political game,” she said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to vote to advance the bill after Lankford voted against the bill he helped write. Lankford said Thursday’s vote was “a prop.” “Everyone sees this for what it is,” he said. “It is not an actual effort to make law, it is an effort to do political messaging.” Padilla, who voted against the larger package, said on the Senate floor Thursday that he was disappointed Democrats were voting on the bill again because it did not address the root causes of migration or create lawful pathways to citizenship for children brought into the U.S. without authorization known as Dreamers, farmworkers, and noncitizens who have been in the country for decades. He urged other Democrats to vote no. “The proposal before us was initially supposed to be a concession, a ransom to be paid to Republicans to pass urgent and critical aid to Ukraine,” Padilla said. “What’s this concession for now? It’s hard to swallow.” Senate Republicans accused Democrats of bringing the bill as a political stunt. “One thing the American people don’t have to wonder about is why Washington Democrats are suddenly champing at the bit to convince their constituents that they care about border security,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor Thursday. “(Americans) know the solution is not cynical Senate theater.” Biden called McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday night to ask them to vote for the bill, but both Republican leaders rejected that appeal. First vote Lankford, Sinema and Murphy introduced the bill earlier this year, optimistic that months of bipartisan negotiations could lead to the first immigration policy overhaul in decades. But Trump opposed the measure, and after those senators released the legislative text, House Republicans said they would fall in line with the former president. Senate Republicans then walked away from the deal they had said would be needed in order for passage of a supplemental foreign aid package to Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. The sweeping border security bill would have raised the bar for migrants claiming asylum, clarified the White House’s parole authority, ended the practice of allowing migrants to live in U.S. communities as they await their asylum hearings, and given Biden the executive authority to close the southern border when asylum claims reached high levels, among other things. Dueling messages The day leading up to Thursday’s vote, Senate Democrats and Republicans held dueling press conferences on the bill. Democrats, including Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, argued that the bill negotiated earlier in the year would address the fentanyl crisis by providing new scanning technology at ports of entry and increasing staffing for custom agents. Stabenow said she’s tired of Senate Republicans saying that “‘somebody should do something about the border,’” and that Thursday’s vote would give them an opportunity to address the southern border. She was joined by Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, who talked about how many people in their states had died from fentanyl overdoses. Republicans in their press conference argued that Democrats were holding a second vote to protect vulnerable incumbents in competitive races in Montana, Ohio and Pennsylvania. “It is an election-year political stunt designed to give our Democratic colleagues the appearance of doing something about this problem without doing anything,” Tennessee GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn said Wednesday. She was joined by Republican Sens. Roger Marshall of Kansas, Rick Scott of Florida, Eric Schmitt of Missouri, John Coryn of Texas, J.D. Vance of Ohio and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. House opposition Even if the border security bill passed the Senate, it would have no chance in the House, where Johnson has vowed it will be dead on arrival. The Louisiana Republican in a Wednesday press conference called the measure a messaging bill and said Schumer was “trying to give his vulnerable members cover.” And not all House Democrats were on board with the bill negotiated out of the Senate. The chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state and the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Nanette Barragán of California, slammed Senate Democrats for putting forth the legislation and urged them to abandon the effort. “We are disappointed that the Senate will once again vote on an already-failed border bill in a move that only splits the Democratic Caucus over extreme and unworkable enforcement-only policies,” they wrote in a statement. “This framework, which was constructed under Republican hostage-taking, does nothing to address the longstanding updates needed to modernize our outdated immigration system, create more legal pathways, and recognize the enormous contributions of immigrants to communities and our economy.” Latino Democrats also voiced opposition to the bill when it was first released because it contained many hard-line policies that were reminiscent of the Trump administration.
被修改是因为第一稿没成，你贴的文章里就说了为啥没成： First vote Lankford, Sinema and Murphy introduced the bill earlier this year, optimistic that months of bipartisan negotiations could lead to the first immigration policy overhaul in decades. But Trump opposed the measure, and after those senators released the legislative text, House Republicans said they would fall in line with the former president. Senate Republicans then walked away from the deal they had said would be needed in order for passage of a supplemental foreign aid package to Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. The sweeping border security bill would have raised the bar for migrants claiming asylum, clarified the White House’s parole authority, ended the practice of allowing migrants to live in U.S. communities as they await their asylum hearings, and given Biden the executive authority to close the southern border when asylum claims reached high levels, among other things.
she is the biggest phony in US election history, a shameless despicable phony, we the people see through her! you are fired scamala! Go back to shot hole San Francisco!
这个法案就应该黄，最明显的一条就是允许一天有5000个非法移民。明明现有国法规定不应该有一个，这跟法案直接升级非移quota了。还不包括Ukrain这种猫腻。 open border是因为边境警员不够吗？是asylum政策有问题。拜登上台就180度改变川普政府的边境政策。搞了3年多了，现在竟然还要把锅给川普背。 DEM有accountability意识吗？
BKS 发表于 2024-09-29 14:10 呵呵，基本上是搞笑的吧，谁不知道民主党擅长作弊，反对only citizen can vote 的基本常识
那是你们的谎言！来看看20年抓住的作弊的都是谁？ An Iowa woman named Kim Taylor was sentenced to four months in prison Monday after a federal jury convicted her last year on more than 50 counts of voter fraud as part of a scheme to help her husband in a congressional primary and a county supervisor race. (GOP) Most recently, a judge ruled that Brian Pritchard, the first vice chairman of Georgia’s Republican Party, had violated state election law. Between 2008 and 2010, Pritchard voted nine times while on probation for a felony sentence, which is not allowed in Georgia. https://www.wpr.org/news/jury-former-milwaukee-election-official-guilty-election-fraud-zapata There have been 306 convictions across 37 states for voter fraud in all US elections between 2016 and 2020. 151 convictions related to a presidential or congressional race: 146 cases involved one vote, three cases had seven votes or less, and two cases had an unknown number of votes. The political affiliations are known for 170 defendants: 39.4% of those convicted were Democrats, 41.1% were Republicans, while the remainder were Independent, nonpartisan, or unaffiliated. Donald Trump lost the 2016 popular vote by 2.8 million votes and the 2020 election by 7 million votes. https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/ 慢着，作假的39.4%的民主党人， 41.1%的共和党人？贵党的冠军啊！
westlake 发表于 2024-09-29 14:56 那是你们的谎言！来看看20年抓住的作弊的都是谁？ An Iowa woman named Kim Taylor was sentenced to four months in prison Monday after a federal jury convicted her last year on more than 50 counts of voter fraud as part of a scheme to help her husband in a congressional primary and a county supervisor race. (GOP) Most recently, a judge ruled that Brian Pritchard, the first vice chairman of Georgia’s Republican Party, had violated state election law. Between 2008 and 2010, Pritchard voted nine times while on probation for a felony sentence, which is not allowed in Georgia. https://www.wpr.org/news/jury-former-milwaukee-election-official-guilty-election-fraud-zapata There have been 306 convictions across 37 states for voter fraud in all US elections between 2016 and 2020. 151 convictions related to a presidential or congressional race: 146 cases involved one vote, three cases had seven votes or less, and two cases had an unknown number of votes. The political affiliations are known for 170 defendants: 39.4% of those convicted were Democrats, 41.1% were Republicans, while the remainder were Independent, nonpartisan, or unaffiliated. Donald Trump lost the 2016 popular vote by 2.8 million votes and the 2020 election by 7 million votes. https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/ 慢着，作假的39.4%的民主党人， 41.1%的共和党人？贵党的冠军啊！
看得出来是主媒洗脑媒体看多了，只看到了民主党想让你们看到的，wake up…连 主媒都承认现在他们的受体主要是boomer generation!! New generation 已经移步社交媒体了，骗人不那么容易了，这就是为什么哈哈姐的年青人支持率不行。
副总统贺锦丽前往亚利桑那州第二大入境口岸道格拉斯（Douglas），环绕边境议题争取选民支持。她批评前总统特朗普阻挠参院的跨党派移民协议，任由边境危机持续，而她如果当选将落实措施，收紧美墨边境的移民执法。
综合美联社、CNN及《国会山报》报道，贺锦丽27日下午乘坐直升机抵达道格拉斯，这是她成为民主党总统候选人后首次到访边境，她到达后在边境巡逻队代表陪同下，巡视前总统奥巴马任内修建的边境围墙，在100华氏的高温下逗留了大约半小时。贺锦丽听取边境执法人员的工作简报后，形容边巡人员工作艰钜，需要各方支持完成任务，而她此行除了感谢对方之外，也希望“与他们讨论可以如何继续提供支持”。
行程期间贺锦丽还与联邦、州府及地方的一些公职人员见面，包括代表亚州的联邦参议员凯利（Mark Kelly）、亚州总检察长梅耶斯（Kris Mayes）以及道格拉斯市长（Donald Huish）、管辖当地的科奇斯县治安官丹尼斯（Mark Dannels）、县政参事英格利希（Ann English）等等。
贺锦丽在演讲时表示，自己在担任加州总检察长期间便打击跨境犯罪，曾捣毁墨西哥的贩卖海洛因集团，亦率先以州总检察长的身份，分析跨国犯罪与公共安全、经济威胁之间的关系。她表示，自己多年来一直把边境安全视为首要任务，今年大选如果胜利，也会继续把移民议题视为优先事项。
在谈到共和党的批评时，贺锦丽表示参院曾通过跨党派协议，史无前例地收紧边境执法，但是特朗普却游说保守派反对，导致该协议无法在国会过关，而她执政后将要求国会，重新表决“被特朗普否决的边境安全法案”，从联邦立法的层面化解边境危机。
🔥 最新回帖
Trump建墙被民主党百般阻扰，Biden上台后立刻停工，大开国门。Trump那四年非法移民过境量大幅度减低，看看border patrol的图表吧！
川普骂Harris“天生智障”“精神失常” 遭美残协炮轰
据雅虎新闻援引独立报9月29日报道 前总统川普在周六的集会上再次对副总统贺锦丽进行贬损言论，声称她生来“智力受损”并且“精神失常”。
这位前总统在威斯康星州Prairie du Chien向全场的支持者发表了这些言论，似乎是为了破坏贺锦丽在移民问题上的领导地位。
川普对观众说：“拜登智力受损了，而贺锦丽天生如此，她生来就是这样。”这番言论引得观众们哄堂大笑。这位前总统继续说道：“你仔细想想，只有智障人士才会允许这种事情发生在我们的国家。任何人都知道这一点。”
川普所说的“这种事情”指的是去年涌入美国的移民。川普竞选团队的一大支柱就是将移民越境问题归咎于贺锦丽，并称其作为副总统有责任解决这个问题。
拜登政府的多位官员表示，贺锦丽的任务只是了解中美洲国家大规模移民的根本原因，并领导外交努力减少这些问题。
美国残疾人协会（American Association of People with Disabilities）主席Maria Town表示，川普的言语是“残疾歧视”。她在一份声明中称，川普今天的残疾歧视言论，更多地反映了他本人以及他对残疾人的不准确、仇恨的偏见，而不是对副总统贺锦丽的偏见。 与此同时，AAPD呼吁两党领导人在2024年大选中谴责川普使用的残疾歧视言论。该部门表示，川普持有对残障人士的错误观念，他认为如果一个人有残疾，他们就不是人，也不值得拥有尊严。
Maria在声明中提醒人们，多位前总统都曾患有残疾。罗斯福总统曾患小儿麻痹症，并一直使用轮椅；约翰·肯尼迪患有阿狄森氏病、溃疡性结肠炎和慢性疼痛，里根患有听力障碍，而拜登总统患有口吃。因此，单凭一个人是否有残疾不足以确定其是否适合担任民选公职。
据报道，这位前总统在周六晚上长达一小时的集会上大部分时间都在侮辱贺锦丽，他称她“无能”，“是个坏人”，并声称她周五晚上在边境发表的讲话是“胡说八道”。
此外，川普周五还在社交媒体上发文说道，如果司法部不以“公然干涉选举”为由起诉谷歌，那么“当他赢得大选并成为美国总统时”，他将要求起诉谷歌。
据报道，川普之所以说出这一番话，有可能与右倾的媒体研究中心的一项新研究有关，这项研究指出，当用户搜索川普2024年总统竞选时，谷歌搜索引擎倾向于显示对民主党人贺锦丽有利的新闻文章，而非川普自己的竞选网站。 谷歌方面则表示，在相关和常见搜索查询中，两位候选人的网站始终位居搜索结果的首位，关于总统选举或候选人的搜索，通常会显示出不断变化的新闻文章链接，这些文章反映了网络上的情况，所以它们一直在变化，“我们绝对不会操纵搜索结果来偏袒任何候选人。”事实上，有媒体报道称，与其他搜索引擎的结果相比，川普竞选网站在谷歌搜索结果中的排名更高。
所以说，佛州，德州州长才是货真价实的“人贩子”
🛋️ 沙发板凳
bipartisan的边境法案被川普控制的众议院否了，因为川普竞选时需要这个话题来攻击民主党。
小心咖喱粉们喷你一头狗屎
像川王修墙让Mexico付钱一样干？
所以川王和副王捣鼓国会把boarder control security bill 给killed 掉
就简单问一句 为啥不是现在。。她不是在office吗
现在就是副总统，负责边境，此前一次也没有去边境，现在就可以行动，为何要等到当选？那个移民法里夹带大量私货，关于边境的拨款只占极少一部分。她收紧边境的话，谁信谁傻。
那个所谓的“bipartisan bill” 实际上在再次修改后已经面目全非，连若干起草成员都已经反对。 而且不少猪党议员因为各种原因反对，在Senate压根拿不到 60票， 在house 会dead on arrival， 其中一个重要原因是乌克兰援助法案， 这个一参乎进去，基本上就是毒丸， 贴到任何法案上都是死翘翘
ipartisan border bill loses support, fails procedural vote in U.S. Senate By: Ariana Figueroa - May 24, 2024 7:15 am
Losing support The border security bill, S.4361, received fewer votes Thursday as a standalone bill than it had as part of the larger foreign aid package in February, when it failed on a 49-50 procedural vote. Sixty votes are needed to advance bills in the Senate. The bill did not get all Democrats on board, which Schumer acknowledged earlier this week was a possibility. “We do not expect every Democrat or every Republican to come out in favor of this bill,” Schumer said on the Senate floor Tuesday. “The only way to pass this bill – or any border bill – is with broad bipartisan support.” But the bill failed to attract that broad support, losing backing even from Democrats who’d voted for the foreign aid package. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said in a Wednesday statement that while he voted for the larger package in early February – mostly because it included critical aid to Ukraine – he would not do so this time around because the bill was too restrictive. “I will not vote for the bill coming to the Senate floor this week because it includes several provisions that will violate Americans’ shared values,” Booker said. “The proposed bill would exclude people fleeing violence and persecution from seeking asylum and instead doubles down on failed anti-immigrant policies that encourage irregular immigration.”
‘Another cynical, political game’ Democratic senators who voted against moving the bill forward included Alex Padilla and Laphonza Butler of California, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Booker. Independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sinema also voted against. Sinema said she voted against advancing her own bill because she felt Democrats were using her bill to “point the finger back at the other party.” “Yet another cynical, political game,” she said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to vote to advance the bill after Lankford voted against the bill he helped write. Lankford said Thursday’s vote was “a prop.” “Everyone sees this for what it is,” he said. “It is not an actual effort to make law, it is an effort to do political messaging.” Padilla, who voted against the larger package, said on the Senate floor Thursday that he was disappointed Democrats were voting on the bill again because it did not address the root causes of migration or create lawful pathways to citizenship for children brought into the U.S. without authorization known as Dreamers, farmworkers, and noncitizens who have been in the country for decades. He urged other Democrats to vote no. “The proposal before us was initially supposed to be a concession, a ransom to be paid to Republicans to pass urgent and critical aid to Ukraine,” Padilla said. “What’s this concession for now? It’s hard to swallow.” Senate Republicans accused Democrats of bringing the bill as a political stunt. “One thing the American people don’t have to wonder about is why Washington Democrats are suddenly champing at the bit to convince their constituents that they care about border security,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor Thursday. “(Americans) know the solution is not cynical Senate theater.” Biden called McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday night to ask them to vote for the bill, but both Republican leaders rejected that appeal.
First vote Lankford, Sinema and Murphy introduced the bill earlier this year, optimistic that months of bipartisan negotiations could lead to the first immigration policy overhaul in decades. But Trump opposed the measure, and after those senators released the legislative text, House Republicans said they would fall in line with the former president. Senate Republicans then walked away from the deal they had said would be needed in order for passage of a supplemental foreign aid package to Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. The sweeping border security bill would have raised the bar for migrants claiming asylum, clarified the White House’s parole authority, ended the practice of allowing migrants to live in U.S. communities as they await their asylum hearings, and given Biden the executive authority to close the southern border when asylum claims reached high levels, among other things.
Dueling messages The day leading up to Thursday’s vote, Senate Democrats and Republicans held dueling press conferences on the bill. Democrats, including Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, argued that the bill negotiated earlier in the year would address the fentanyl crisis by providing new scanning technology at ports of entry and increasing staffing for custom agents. Stabenow said she’s tired of Senate Republicans saying that “‘somebody should do something about the border,’” and that Thursday’s vote would give them an opportunity to address the southern border. She was joined by Democratic Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, who talked about how many people in their states had died from fentanyl overdoses. Republicans in their press conference argued that Democrats were holding a second vote to protect vulnerable incumbents in competitive races in Montana, Ohio and Pennsylvania. “It is an election-year political stunt designed to give our Democratic colleagues the appearance of doing something about this problem without doing anything,” Tennessee GOP Sen. Marsha Blackburn said Wednesday. She was joined by Republican Sens. Roger Marshall of Kansas, Rick Scott of Florida, Eric Schmitt of Missouri, John Coryn of Texas, J.D. Vance of Ohio and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin.
House opposition Even if the border security bill passed the Senate, it would have no chance in the House, where Johnson has vowed it will be dead on arrival. The Louisiana Republican in a Wednesday press conference called the measure a messaging bill and said Schumer was “trying to give his vulnerable members cover.” And not all House Democrats were on board with the bill negotiated out of the Senate. The chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington state and the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Nanette Barragán of California, slammed Senate Democrats for putting forth the legislation and urged them to abandon the effort. “We are disappointed that the Senate will once again vote on an already-failed border bill in a move that only splits the Democratic Caucus over extreme and unworkable enforcement-only policies,” they wrote in a statement. “This framework, which was constructed under Republican hostage-taking, does nothing to address the longstanding updates needed to modernize our outdated immigration system, create more legal pathways, and recognize the enormous contributions of immigrants to communities and our economy.” Latino Democrats also voiced opposition to the bill when it was first released because it contained many hard-line policies that were reminiscent of the Trump administration.
被修改是因为第一稿没成，你贴的文章里就说了为啥没成：
First vote Lankford, Sinema and Murphy introduced the bill earlier this year, optimistic that months of bipartisan negotiations could lead to the first immigration policy overhaul in decades. But Trump opposed the measure, and after those senators released the legislative text, House Republicans said they would fall in line with the former president. Senate Republicans then walked away from the deal they had said would be needed in order for passage of a supplemental foreign aid package to Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. The sweeping border security bill would have raised the bar for migrants claiming asylum, clarified the White House’s parole authority, ended the practice of allowing migrants to live in U.S. communities as they await their asylum hearings, and given Biden the executive authority to close the southern border when asylum claims reached high levels, among other things.
这个可信度高！
要是我是trump我也会鼓动共和党反对这个提案。三年在台上非法移民敞开进，最后一年做作样子，当选以后继续敞开进。民主党就是祸国殃民。
川粉别做梦了，川建国已经完完
什么样的撒比才会选你们川主子
她除了血统，好像也没什么印度联系，你这么说挺过分的，甚至显得愚蠢了。
她爸妈在她六岁就离婚了。她基本上应该是印度妈和印度外公外婆带大的吧。应该比较典型的印裔。
为什么现在不做呢？!
她妈是印度留学生，父母离婚，她姐妹基本都是她妈带大，要谈文化传承她肯定是印度裔而非黑人，她自己也是非常认可自己的印度裔传承，这也解释了很多黑人不认同她是黑人，她就没有这个黑人文化传承，和奥巴马这个混血儿不一样。这个可以看她以前的各类资料。这本身没什么，谷爱琳就是同样一个例子。
HBCU洗黑的差不多了，而且感觉她对父亲（父系权威）的连结是正面的，侧面解释了她在拜登下面直到最后一刻都待得很老实。
收紧的法案不是被川普搞黄了吗？众议院共和党多数，现在哪里能通过？需要把众议院的共和党捣乱分子选下去才行。
然，现在的非移泛滥不是因为没有法律，而是因为民主党有法不依执法不严，什么收紧法案被共和党否决了就是借口。
美国执法和党派无关，事实是警察检察官共和党支持者占多数。美国执法困难和可能被各种各样的起诉有关。执法但凡一点不完美，就要倒霉。执法完美，也可能倒霉被折腾。参考刚刚发生的警察抓走在迪士尼不买票的妈妈事件。
那是难民，难民不是非法移民
为什么需要专门的法律收紧？biden/harris政府有什么法律工具是4年前的trump/pence政府所没有的？
Harris根本不需要法案去执法。拜登政府前一个月开始收紧asylum，非移就下降了。所以，为什么不做，要搞法案？法案里各种猫腻都不说了。
现在，马上可以做，不做，这就是态度。
这个法案就应该黄，最明显的一条就是允许一天有5000个非法移民。明明现有国法规定不应该有一个，这跟法案直接升级非移quota了。还不包括Ukrain这种猫腻。
open border是因为边境警员不够吗？是asylum政策有问题。拜登上台就180度改变川普政府的边境政策。搞了3年多了，现在竟然还要把锅给川普背。
DEM有accountability意识吗？
哈里斯干啥啥不行，甩锅第一名。 经济上通涨四十年第一，川普的错。 边境上放入二千万移民，川普的错。 还有就是拜登的错，跟我这副总统无关。
她什么都没做，当然什么都和她无关。
放一头驴子来竞选，也是一模一样innocent。
主媒的民调就跟主媒的新闻一样，谁还信啊，骗骗自己的信徒的。。。wake up，去看看2020最小误差的几个民调吧，这次哈哈姐恐怕连popular vote 都要难保。
前一段德州受不了了非移入境， 在那个河边架设了铁丝网， 看拜等政府跟杀父之仇一样跟德州政府死磕啊
这到底谁想放非法移民进来，大家都看得一清二楚
a donkey is better than a trump.
我理解你的立场。这样说其实比较容易接受。
我的怀疑是。。也不一定。。那四年经济不错。
那时候biden/harris政府给媒体的通稿洗法是“为什么不应该阻止非法移民入境”，后来发现再说这个选举药丸，就改成了“共和党阻止新法律通过”了。
当然智商不足的人一直都吃这套坏逼的宣传。
不是一模一样，驴比她强多了，起码驴什么都不做，不会祸害这个国家，而她释放那么多罪犯，制订坑害社会的恶法，放进来那么多非法移民，把国家推向了万劫不复的边缘，她就是祸害美国的罪魁祸首，以后这笔帐一定会清算的。
现在需要 非法移民 劳动力进来 降低通胀压力.
川普把孩子和父母分开关在笼子里，到现在还有不少孩子找不到父母
严格说，拜登政府没有川普那么无良和恶劣。
从法律角度来说，现行的法律规定申请难民是合法的入境途径，政府有责任审核难民申请，批准有足够证据的难民，拒绝/遣返证据不足的难民。但是这几年南美的生态环境恶化，难民申请大幅度增加，加上GOP不给funding，让难民法庭有足够的人力物力审理难民申请，造成难民申请大幅度积压，才是大量未被批准难民等待的滞留美国的根本原因。
从根本上解决这个问题，是通过国会制定法律，控制积压的难民申请（一方面增加资金给难民法庭，另一方面控制申请难民人数），这样才能是长久解决的方案。总统令只能是临时解决方案，第一，时刻会被法官叫停（没有国会批准法律的合法性），第二，换一个总统就可能被叫停，没有政策的连续性。但是几个月前一个立法的机会被川普毁了。他觉得他赢得选举的利超过了国家利益。
因为拜登政府讲人道，非法移民也是人。如果这些非法移民被这些铁丝网刺伤甚至死亡，可以状告美国政府，纳税人的钱要被用来打官司，赔款！
非法移民也是人，基本人权不少于你我。这就是做人的基本道理
川普把孩子和父母分开关在笼子里，到现在还有不少孩子找不到父母
这是奥巴马时期的政策，川普只是继承了而已。如果主党真的反对把孩子和大人分开关，为什么奥巴时期不反对，不出来游行？
这就是一个借口。DEM根本不关心儿童。不管是被关的孩子，还是美国的孩子。美国pornograghy，DEM想管吗？LGBTQ一堆喜欢孩子的，DEM想管吗？边境走私儿童，DEM管吗？
人道？那么你说说为什么眼看着大家反对自己的政策，拜登政府最近几个月突然180转弯，开始要反对illegal crossing，收紧asylum，说要造墙了？
why not now
在做更重要的事。比如，给川普找麻烦定罪。
真逗，没钱怎么干？现在这点边境警察根本没用。要不你们川粉捐点钱？
招人建墙都要钱，拨款法案本来都谈好了，被川普给破坏了
奥巴马时期绝对没有把孩子和父母分开，川拿这个吹嘘是他的功绩之一，你转手就给了奥巴马，你家川爷同意了吗？
人道是不去故意伤害移民，哪怕是非法移民
人道是试图说服他们不要来，法律手段阻止他们来，不是拿铁丝网去刺伤他们
你是不是字典里从来就没有人道两个字，完全不知道怎么做个人？
检察官的职责就是给有罪的人定罪，没毛病
LGBT一些喜欢孩子的？
你是说专门date未成年少女的Matt Gaetz，还是喜欢看child porn的Robinson，还是教堂里那些特别喜欢性侵小男孩的神父们？
你可能忘了摇摆州基本上都是GOP在管理本州的选举事宜，他们都是干什么吃的？
呵呵，基本上是搞笑的吧，谁不知道民主党擅长作弊，反对only citizen can vote 的基本常识
https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-says-harris-handled-everything-from-foreign-policy-domestic-policy-under-his-administration 对啊 ， 拜登现在已经把所有权力都交给她了， 她怎么啥都不干啊
太恶心了。你不是讲人道吗？把你家地址贴一下，我介绍几十个非移今晚到你家吃饭去。他们可需要你的人道关怀了，不许锁门哦。不敢贴就说明你是hypocrite.
你有认真看过bipartisan法案的内容吗？里面约定每天合法入境5000非法移民，之后关闭边境。就好比你家里有人非法住进来，然后有人出台一个法案，允许每天有五个人非法住进来，之后允许你关门谢客。是个人都不会同意吧。Trump让不要同意这样的法案，我倒要为他拍手叫好！民主党真心向治理非法移民，拜登执政以后，继续Trump的移民政策，建完边境墙，实施境外申请，通过之后才允许入境，非法移民绝对以控制。三年多了，再选举时，想起来要治理边境了，这才是诈骗好嘛！
谁故意伤害？你咋不说他们故意去受伤?不知道穿过去要受伤吗？
那是你们的谎言！来看看20年抓住的作弊的都是谁？
An Iowa woman named Kim Taylor was sentenced to four months in prison Monday after a federal jury convicted her last year on more than 50 counts of voter fraud as part of a scheme to help her husband in a congressional primary and a county supervisor race. (GOP)
Most recently, a judge ruled that Brian Pritchard, the first vice chairman of Georgia’s Republican Party, had violated state election law. Between 2008 and 2010, Pritchard voted nine times while on probation for a felony sentence, which is not allowed in Georgia.
https://www.wpr.org/news/jury-former-milwaukee-election-official-guilty-election-fraud-zapata
There have been 306 convictions across 37 states for voter fraud in all US elections between 2016 and 2020. 151 convictions related to a presidential or congressional race: 146 cases involved one vote, three cases had seven votes or less, and two cases had an unknown number of votes. The political affiliations are known for 170 defendants: 39.4% of those convicted were Democrats, 41.1% were Republicans, while the remainder were Independent, nonpartisan, or unaffiliated. Donald Trump lost the 2016 popular vote by 2.8 million votes and the 2020 election by 7 million votes.
https://the2020election.org/voter-fraud-convictions-since-2016/
慢着，作假的39.4%的民主党人， 41.1%的共和党人？贵党的冠军啊！
又来了，这是不是很无聊？你也把你的信用卡号码贴一下，我帮你买十个十个川普金表如何？不多，只要一百万哦，忠诚无价的！
这五千是入境申请难民的，才会被允许入境，你不是LAW&ORDER吗？去看看现行法律怎么说的再来丢人显眼好不好？
你仔细看了那个法案吗？那个法案提议给非法移民进来配额，当然不能同意。只要有了配额，就是合法了，以后配额会越来越多。
不懂就问，o8不也是白人妈带大的吗，为啥就有黑人传承了？
不要偷换概念，民主党就是要通过增加倾向于投票给民主党的人口基数，实现永久控制整个国家的目标。难民怎么了，为什么让他们跋山涉水到别的国家去生存？最好的办法不是让他们留在自己国家，通过改善他们的生存环境在故土扎根。 更不要说法案还绑定了其他法案，试图以治理移民为借口，大撒比。
哪几个是最小误差的民调啊？我去看看
Hypocrite就不要再转移话题了，你再骂川普一百句也还是hypocrite.
他们不爬铁丝网不就不会被刺死了吗？铁丝网又没长腿追他们
看得出来是主媒洗脑媒体看多了，只看到了民主党想让你们看到的，wake up…连 主媒都承认现在他们的受体主要是boomer generation!! New generation 已经移步社交媒体了，骗人不那么容易了，这就是为什么哈哈姐的年青人支持率不行。
五千就是申请难民，允许在境内等待的人数。以前没有任何法律制定这个限额。
你这段话完全是你的意淫，还好意思说人家偷换概念？
真的以为谎言说一千遍就是事实？
就你这有X 下，没X 教育的！
有人不需要谁是自己的主子，不像狗必须要有个主子给扔鸡骨头！ 川是你爹，哈哈是你妈，你这些主子爱咋撒比和别人没关系！！ 活到这个算数了还需要主子，你真他X loser!
AtlasIntel, Rasmussen,Trafalgar
非法入境就是criminal，你问问在全世界监狱里关着的女犯能带着孩子吗？而且那些cage是Obama时期建设并使用的.
昨天ICE放出来的data，Biden/Harris 放了40万罪犯入镜。上千万的非法移民有三十万儿童不知去向。Harris就是个人贩子。
又是听风就是雨对吧？那四十万是己任总统累计都数字，包括川普四年也贡献了不少！
https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/29/politics/fact-check-trump-harris-immigrants-homicide
你用这个就是搞错逻辑了。非法移民是不请自来。有人逼着你买川普金表了吗？没有吧。
有人逼你收留移民吗？
再说了，你家主子的号召你敢不执行？太不忠诚了吧？