Current Events > Ted Cruz working like Trump can't, finds funding for border wall.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/25922-senator-ted-cruz-introduces-bill-to-have-drug-lord-el-chapo-pay-for-the-wall

Instead of crying about Dems on twitter, Ted Cruz decided to think a little bit out of the box.
---

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.
---

Ted Cruz is the zodiac killer.

trump is the mojo jojo to ted cruz's HIM.

i'd much rather deal with mojo jojo than HIM.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?
---

3rd_Best_Master posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?

There we go, knew it would happen.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

3rd_Best_Master posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?

There we go, knew it would happen.

Impossible questions to answer, I know.
---

3rd_Best_Master posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?

El Chapo is one of Mexico's biggest business tycoons.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

3rd_Best_Master posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?

El Chapo is one of Mexico's biggest business tycoons.

Ah, so Mexico* will definitely be paying for it.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

1. Civil forfeiture should not a thing
2. The wall is a bad idea to begin with since it won't actually stop illegal immigration or drugs from entering the country
3. Drugs should be legal anyway
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Nah, more like everyone who has at least a little bit of common sense thinks it's a stupid idea
---

Tropicalwood posted...

3rd_Best_Master posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Did it somehow become less of a boondoggle? Is Mexico really going to reimburse us for the wall?

El Chapo is one of Mexico's biggest business tycoons.

That's, uh, one way of putting it.
---

I just wish they tried as hard to aid all of those homeless vets they're constantly talking about instead of finding creative ways to fund a wall in the desert.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

1. Civil forfeiture should not a thing
2. The wall is a bad idea to begin with since it won't actually stop illegal immigration or drugs from entering the country
3. Drugs should be legal anyway

Awful opinions for $500 Alex.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

1. Civil forfeiture should not a thing
2. The wall is a bad idea to begin with since it won't actually stop illegal immigration or drugs from entering the country
3. Drugs should be legal anyway

1. It's ill gotten money
2. You do realize Terry was shot
3. While I do agree that making drugs legal would hurt Chapo's business, he also experiments in human trafficking, murder, and paying off government officials.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Awful opinions for $500 Alex.

$500 is not a real amount for a subject in Jeopardy: $200, $400, $600, $800 and $1000 is the first round and the second round has $400, $800, $1200, $1600, and$2000.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Awful opinions for $500 Alex.

$500 is not a real amount for a subject in Jeopardy: $200, $400, $600, $800 and $1000 is the first round and the second round has $400, $800, $1200, $1600, and$2000.

My bad brah. I'd like to buy a vowel.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

1. It's ill gotten money
2. You do realize Terry was shot
3. While I do agree that making drugs legal would hurt Chapo's business, he also experiments in human trafficking, murder, and paying off government officials.

1. I don't care. Civil forfeiture is inherently a bad thing. We shouldn't fight crime with crime.
2. I know. Again, illegal immigration will not be hurt by the Wall being built.
3. While all of those things are true and bad, a lot of that would diminish to nothing if drugs were legal.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

1. Civil forfeiture should not a thing
2. The wall is a bad idea to begin with since it won't actually stop illegal immigration or drugs from entering the country
3. Drugs should be legal anyway

Awful opinions for $500 Alex.

Those are great opinions, you just aren't intelligent enough to be a good judge.
---

are the assets already in the US? If they aren't why does the US believe it can seize the property instead of Mexico doing it?
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

somehow Gojak will complain about liberals
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

those poor mexican drug lords

this is obviously racist
---

AugustAdoulin posted...

Ted Cruz is Grayson Allen

fixed to make it more insulting
---

Samurontai posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Nah, more like everyone who has at least a little bit of common sense thinks it's a stupid idea

Explain how its stupid

The libertarians had a good take on this:
http://reason.com/blog/2017/04/25/sen-ted-cruz-wants-to-pay-for-border-wal

First is the likely incorrect assumption that the federal government will be able to get its hands on all that El Chapo money. Axios notes that Cruz's proposed bill (he hasn't even posted the text up on his own Senate page yet so we don't really know what it says) would "use asset seized from drug lords such as El Chapo." Italics mine. Cruz's statement on his Senate page uses similar language.

It doesn't sound like this legislation would be confined to taking money from El Chapo. This is significant because police and prosecutors and like-minded supporters of asset forfeiture always attempt to present this process as taking the ill-gotten gains of the drug cartels and keeping it to fund law enforcement.

But that's not actually how it plays out. In reality, police and prosecutors tend to abuse the civil asset forfeiture process to harass travelers who are carrying cash, claim that it's all part of the drug trade, and attempt to keep it for themselves without ever providing any proof a crime happened. Civil asset forfeiture has become a massive source of controversy because it's been abused to take money and property from citizens without due process in order for police departments to fund themselves.

So if this legislation is not written in such a way that it requires these "drug kingpins" to actually be convicted of crimes before their money is seized, and the Trump administration becomes dependent on using this money to pay for this wall %u2026 you can see where this is going, can't you? FBI, DEA officers and federal prosecutors are going to have even more incentives and pressures to attempt to seize the property of greater numbers of people. And they're going to fight tooth and nail to keep from having to give it back even if they never actually charge people with federal crimes.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Alright Ted, go talk to El Chapo and make him pay. I'm sure you're capable.

what is this comment even
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Alright Ted, go talk to El Chapo and make him pay. I'm sure you're capable.

what is this comment even

While I feel dirty for agreeing with shock on damn near anything, How does a US politician plan to make a high kingpin from Mexico pay for a US project?
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

I sure will because the Wall is a terrible idea no matter who funds it
---

shockthemonkey posted...

Alright Ted, go talk to El Chapo and make him pay. I'm sure you're capable.

You do realize that the government is going to cease his assets regardless of the bill passing or not should Chapo be convicted. All the bill does is allocate what the money is spent on as apposed to sending it to the treasury and divvying it up toward other crap.
---

SO this law if not written perfectly would effectively allow the police to steal from anyone it arrest regardless Of a conviction ??

For a wall have the country doesn't want ?


Yeah no
---

Unsurprising that pubs support literally stealing property from civilians
---

I mean, if they're taking money from a drug lord who likely makes most of their money from US citizens, then US citizens are indirectly paying for it.

so not mexico.
---

booboy posted...

darkphoenix181 posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Alright Ted, go talk to El Chapo and make him pay. I'm sure you're capable.

what is this comment even

While I feel dirty for agreeing with shock on damn near anything, How does a US politician plan to make a high kingpin from Mexico pay for a US project?

it isn't making him pay
it is using the money that he has in US banks that were frozen because they are dirty drug dollars

that is why what he said makes no sense other than his great need to caricature the opposition and make them look ignorant
and while that is an ok thing to do, at least understand what is being said before your attempt :P
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

2. I know. Again, illegal immigration will not be hurt by the Wall being built.

Source? I know it won't stop it outright but saying it won't impede it in any way is a pretty brave statement
---

Trigg3rH4ppy posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

2. I know. Again, illegal immigration will not be hurt by the Wall being built.

Source?

Other countries have tried it and it doesn't work.

The only time it works is if you have guards stationed all over it and shoot anyone who even gets close. See: North Korea / South Korea or the Berlin Wall. And at that point it's not the wall doing the work.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

Gojak_v3 posted...

Awful opinions for $500 Alex.

$500 is not a real amount for a subject in Jeopardy: $200, $400, $600, $800 and $1000 is the first round and the second round has $400, $800, $1200, $1600, and$2000.

It used to be.
---

Gojak_v3 posted...

Somehow liberals will still find fault with this.

Funding the wall is only one of the major problems with Trump's wall plan.

The other, even more major problem with it, is that it will accomplish nothing.
---

Unless he's given more information than he did last week, this was funded by hypothetical civil forfeitures, not from an actual explicit sum of money that's just waiting to be used.
---

Anteaterking posted...

Unless he's given more information than he did last week, this was funded by hypothetical civil forfeitures, not from an actual explicit sum of money that's just waiting to be used.

and my question is why would the US be the one that seizes that money and not mexico?
---

Trigg3rH4ppy posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

2. I know. Again, illegal immigration will not be hurt by the Wall being built.

Source?

Most illegal immigration is people flying to the US and overstaying their visa.

The wall will cut down a small amount of illegal immigration and a small amount of drug trafficking.

Immigration is already going down anyway iirc.
---

KILBOTz posted...

Anteaterking posted...

Unless he's given more information than he did last week, this was funded by hypothetical civil forfeitures, not from an actual explicit sum of money that's just waiting to be used.

and my question is why would the US be the one that seizes that money and not mexico?

He's being prosecuted in the US for one, and Mexico would also just let the fucker out again.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

KILBOTz posted...

Anteaterking posted...

Unless he's given more information than he did last week, this was funded by hypothetical civil forfeitures, not from an actual explicit sum of money that's just waiting to be used.

and my question is why would the US be the one that seizes that money and not mexico?

He's being prosecuted in the US for one, and Mexico would also just let the fucker out again.

yes but presumably the majority of his assets are in Mexico. Why would mexico just hand the money over?
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Trigg3rH4ppy posted...

Hinakuluiau posted...

2. I know. Again, illegal immigration will not be hurt by the Wall being built.

Source?

Most illegal immigration is people flying to the US and overstaying their visa.

The wall will cut down a small amount of illegal immigration and a small amount of drug trafficking.

Immigration is already going down anyway iirc.

I know, I just wanted to point out how silly it was to say that it wouldn't hurt illegal immigration whatsoever. I know it's going to be a huge waste of money and horribly inefficient but it will work somewhat.

Semantics, I know.

I personally would love to see the money spent on intelligent reform, but that's asking a lot from this administration.
---

KILBOTz posted...

and my question is why would the US be the one that seizes that money and not mexico?

Idk. I'm assuming that they actually have seized some of his assets in the US, but I might be wrong.
---

KILBOTz posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

KILBOTz posted...

Anteaterking posted...

Unless he's given more information than he did last week, this was funded by hypothetical civil forfeitures, not from an actual explicit sum of money that's just waiting to be used.

and my question is why would the US be the one that seizes that money and not mexico?

He's being prosecuted in the US for one, and Mexico would also just let the fucker out again.

yes but presumably the majority of his assets are in Mexico. Why would mexico just hand the money over?

Because republican morons think Chapo is dumb enough to put his money in USA banks.
---

KILBOTz posted...

yes but presumably the majority of his assets are in Mexico. Why would mexico just hand the money over?

Uh... I really doubt that.

The money is most likely held out of country, since it would be easy for Mexican authorities to order a freeze on their own financial institutions instead of, say, Cambodia or Indonesia's banks.

It doesn't sound like the US has access to the $14 billion and there's not enough information to say that if we seize the assets if we'll actually get all $14 billion from the seizure.

Also if we're just going to seize that much money to use to build a wall, there's so many other more useful services to provide the citizens then a wall on the border for that money.
---

HiddenRoar posted...

KILBOTz posted...

yes but presumably the majority of his assets are in Mexico. Why would mexico just hand the money over?

Uh... I really doubt that.

The money is most likely held out of country, since it would be easy for Mexican authorities to order a freeze on their own financial institutions instead of, say, Cambodia or Indonesia's banks.

im basing my assumption on old drug lord movies where they keep mountains of cash since they cant put it in banks anywhere. and stuff like cocaine cowboys when they talk about how much money rats eat each month/year/whatever.
---