Trump holds up BLANK piece of paper at press conference claiming it was the MEXICAN DEAL.

Status
Not open for further replies.
May 2019
1,199
1,265
midwest
#42
I'm reminded of the 2016 campaign when Trump at a press conference held up what he said was a fax that had just come in from the Better Business Bureau, giving Trump University an 'A' rating. He wouldn't let reporters read it.
The BBB issued a statement later that day saying that they had not sent Trump anything, and that the last rating received by TU was a 'D', their lowest grade.
Nothing Trump says should be believed.
As an example, a tweet of HIS just today repeating HIS broken slogan.
:cool:


 
Likes: the watchman
Mar 2019
273
372
TN
#43
Blaming America is Lib mantra. Sucks.
So NOTHING this country has ever done, or will ever do, has never and will never, come back to bite us in the ass ?? AND according to you it is UNAMERICAN to examine our policies and and actions and to consider how those policies and actions might have long term and possibly unforeseeable effects ??

WOW you really are a total party drone. Totally incapable of independent thought. If it's not vetted thru the RNC, or at least the RNC's propaganda arm, aka Faux News, as far as you are concerned, it's just not valid !!!
 
Jul 2014
66,179
54,805
CA
#45
Fake news. The paper has writing on it in all non-doctored photos.

Trump accidentally reveals Mexico migrant plan

Take note of every website and Twitter account that fakes this shit and STOP BELIEVING THEM

Trump lies every time he opens his mouth. Pathologically. It is extremely important to not make up fake criticisms so that it can't be said that ALL criticism is fake.
Here is what it actually said - again, a big nothing burger


Below I’ve combined what we can see in the two photos to reconstruct the document. Where I’m inferring a word or letters, I’ll put it in brackets:

[UNREADABLE] such agreement would [UNREADABLE] party’s domestic and international legal obligations, a commitment under which each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory [UNREADABLE] other party. The parties further intend [UNREADABLE] an agreem[ent] [UNREADABLE] to burden-sharing in relation to the processing of refuge[es] [UNREADABLE].
Mexico also commits to immediate[ly] [UNREADABLE] domestic laws and regulations with a view to identifying any changes that [UNREADABLE] to bring into force and implement such an agreement. If the United States determines, at its discretion and after consultation with Mexico, after 45 calendar days from the date of the issuance of the Join Declaration, that the measures adopted by the Government of Mexico pursuant to the Joint Declaration have not sufficiently achieved results in addressing the flow of migrants to the southern border of the United States, the Government of Mexico will take all necessary steps under the domestic law to bring the agreement into force with a view to ensuring that the agreement will enter into force within 45 days.​

The first question is obviously whether the document is legitimate. It is signed by two people, that we can see, but neither of these signatures are from the countries’ respective presidents, top diplomats or ambassadors to the other country. They appear to belong to Marik A. String, the U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, and Alejandro Celorio Alcantara, a deputy legal adviser in Mexico’s foreign ministry.

The document clearly deals with some kind of “burden-sharing” involving “refugees.” The prevailing wisdom is that Trump may have been referring to some kind of deal involving asylum rules, possibly a “safe third country agreement” in which Central Americans seeking asylum in the United States would be held in Mexico while their claims are processed. (This is a controversial topic in Mexico, and the Mexican government has denied any such agreement). That appears to be what this document deals with. We don’t generally refer to asylum seekers as “refugees,” but the concept is similar. The part about how “each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory” sounds a lot like some kind of “safe third” agreement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...al-heres-what-it-says/?utm_term=.b7caad4b8e0e
 
Mar 2019
4,056
1,414
California
#47
Here is what it actually said - again, a big nothing burger


Below I’ve combined what we can see in the two photos to reconstruct the document. Where I’m inferring a word or letters, I’ll put it in brackets:

[UNREADABLE] such agreement would [UNREADABLE] party’s domestic and international legal obligations, a commitment under which each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory [UNREADABLE] other party. The parties further intend [UNREADABLE] an agreem[ent] [UNREADABLE] to burden-sharing in relation to the processing of refuge[es] [UNREADABLE].​
Mexico also commits to immediate[ly] [UNREADABLE] domestic laws and regulations with a view to identifying any changes that [UNREADABLE] to bring into force and implement such an agreement. If the United States determines, at its discretion and after consultation with Mexico, after 45 calendar days from the date of the issuance of the Join Declaration, that the measures adopted by the Government of Mexico pursuant to the Joint Declaration have not sufficiently achieved results in addressing the flow of migrants to the southern border of the United States, the Government of Mexico will take all necessary steps under the domestic law to bring the agreement into force with a view to ensuring that the agreement will enter into force within 45 days.​

The first question is obviously whether the document is legitimate. It is signed by two people, that we can see, but neither of these signatures are from the countries’ respective presidents, top diplomats or ambassadors to the other country. They appear to belong to Marik A. String, the U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, and Alejandro Celorio Alcantara, a deputy legal adviser in Mexico’s foreign ministry.

The document clearly deals with some kind of “burden-sharing” involving “refugees.” The prevailing wisdom is that Trump may have been referring to some kind of deal involving asylum rules, possibly a “safe third country agreement” in which Central Americans seeking asylum in the United States would be held in Mexico while their claims are processed. (This is a controversial topic in Mexico, and the Mexican government has denied any such agreement). That appears to be what this document deals with. We don’t generally refer to asylum seekers as “refugees,” but the concept is similar. The part about how “each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory” sounds a lot like some kind of “safe third” agreement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...al-heres-what-it-says/?utm_term=.b7caad4b8e0e
WaPo? Fake News.
 
Jan 2017
251
75
online
#48
Here is what it actually said - again, a big nothing burger


Below I’ve combined what we can see in the two photos to reconstruct the document. Where I’m inferring a word or letters, I’ll put it in brackets:

[UNREADABLE] such agreement would [UNREADABLE] party’s domestic and international legal obligations, a commitment under which each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory [UNREADABLE] other party. The parties further intend [UNREADABLE] an agreem[ent] [UNREADABLE] to burden-sharing in relation to the processing of refuge[es] [UNREADABLE].​
Mexico also commits to immediate[ly] [UNREADABLE] domestic laws and regulations with a view to identifying any changes that [UNREADABLE] to bring into force and implement such an agreement. If the United States determines, at its discretion and after consultation with Mexico, after 45 calendar days from the date of the issuance of the Join Declaration, that the measures adopted by the Government of Mexico pursuant to the Joint Declaration have not sufficiently achieved results in addressing the flow of migrants to the southern border of the United States, the Government of Mexico will take all necessary steps under the domestic law to bring the agreement into force with a view to ensuring that the agreement will enter into force within 45 days.​

The first question is obviously whether the document is legitimate. It is signed by two people, that we can see, but neither of these signatures are from the countries’ respective presidents, top diplomats or ambassadors to the other country. They appear to belong to Marik A. String, the U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, and Alejandro Celorio Alcantara, a deputy legal adviser in Mexico’s foreign ministry.

The document clearly deals with some kind of “burden-sharing” involving “refugees.” The prevailing wisdom is that Trump may have been referring to some kind of deal involving asylum rules, possibly a “safe third country agreement” in which Central Americans seeking asylum in the United States would be held in Mexico while their claims are processed. (This is a controversial topic in Mexico, and the Mexican government has denied any such agreement). That appears to be what this document deals with. We don’t generally refer to asylum seekers as “refugees,” but the concept is similar. The part about how “each party would accept the return, and process refugee status claims, of third-party nationals who have crossed that party’s territory” sounds a lot like some kind of “safe third” agreement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...al-heres-what-it-says/?utm_term=.b7caad4b8e0e
Wow, talk about desperate. The paper has writing on it. This entire thread is a farce.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.