GoFundMe for building Trump's border wall

tomtaylz

LJR Addict
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,612
1,586
San Francisco, CA, USA
Heres Fox News but there is a lot of write up's I can link from other sources also.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/5986978097001/#sp=show-clips

TLDR; the 3755 number does not refer to people at the southern border as is implied, this includes international airports where people have attempted to fly by plane from anywhere in the world.

Customs and Border Protection data says the 6 non-citizen number at the border (although 6 month period, granted)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/im...hern-border-first-n955861?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Source on illegal immigration declining: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/28/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
 
Last edited:

tquig01

TJ Enthusiast
Mar 12, 2018
303
253
Brewerton, NY, USA
Not sure I would characterize it as nefarious, but it certainly wasn't to legally enter the US under international asylum laws. If that was the case A) they would have requested and received asylum in the first country they entered or B) went to the first US consulate in Mexico and request asylum. Instead they chose to disregard international asylum law and drag their families an additional 1000 miles. No one that is really starving or persecuted would put themselves or their families through something much more difficult if they could have accomplished the legal entry at a closer port of entry.
 

tquig01

TJ Enthusiast
Mar 12, 2018
303
253
Brewerton, NY, USA
Heres Fox News but there is a lot of write up's I can link from other sources also.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/5986978097001/#sp=show-clips

TLDR; the 3755 number does not refer to people at the southern border as is implied, this includes international airports where people have attempted to fly by plane from anywhere in the world.

Customs and Border Protection data says the 6 non-citizen number at the border (although 6 month period, granted)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/im...hern-border-first-n955861?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Source on illegal immigration declining: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/28/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
I was able to find this too, directly from DHS which addresses the mix-up between the reporting of the 3755 as terrorists rather than 3000 "Special Interest Aliens". As defined in the report, "This does not mean that all SIAs are “terrorists,” but rather that the travel and behavior of such individuals indicates a possible nexus to nefarious activity (including terrorism) and, at a minimum, provides indicators that necessitate heightened screening and further investigation.". So while technically correct that they are not terrorists, it does seem that there are more than 6 bad people that are stopped due to potential nefarious actions against the US.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/01/07/mythfact-known-and-suspected-terroristsspecial-interest-aliens

As far as the declining immigration, that data only goes through 2016. The data I provided references the increase between 2017 and 2018.
 

tomtaylz

LJR Addict
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,612
1,586
San Francisco, CA, USA
I was able to find this too, directly from DHS which addresses the mix-up between the reporting of the 3755 as terrorists rather than 3000 "Special Interest Aliens". As defined in the report, "This does not mean that all SIAs are “terrorists,” but rather that the travel and behavior of such individuals indicates a possible nexus to nefarious activity (including terrorism) and, at a minimum, provides indicators that necessitate heightened screening and further investigation.". So while technically correct that they are not terrorists, it does seem that there are more than 6 bad people that are stopped due to potential nefarious actions against the US.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2019/01/07/mythfact-known-and-suspected-terroristsspecial-interest-aliens
So without having a more concrete definition about SIA it’s not really useful in my opinion. I did say watchlist in my original post and that statement stands as correct as far as the data released pertains to. Example: my father has had to encounter additional screening before because he travels a lot for work all over the world, would that put him in this group? I’m guessing a SIA can still enter the country legally or are they turned away?

As far as the declining immigration, that data only goes through 2016. The data I provided references the increase between 2017 and 2018.
Out of curiosity, Is there any independent research data to back this up? I’m a bit confused in if the percent increases documents are solely illegal immigrants or combined with asylum seekers, or what is included in the loose statistics

Not to sound too cynical also but statistics can be skewed however the author wants them to be, and no matter who is in power the WH has motivation to skew then in favor of the policy they are pushing.
 
Last edited:

jjvw

0-60 in 18 seconds
Supporting Member
Feb 17, 2018
4,392
3,618
Colorado, USA
Not sure I would characterize it as nefarious, but it certainly wasn't to legally enter the US under international asylum laws. If that was the case A) they would have requested and received asylum in the first country they entered or B) went to the first US consulate in Mexico and request asylum. Instead they chose to disregard international asylum law and drag their families an additional 1000 miles. No one that is really starving or persecuted would put themselves or their families through something much more difficult if they could have accomplished the legal entry at a closer port of entry.
I certainly don't understand the methods and reasoning behind the route the "caravan" took, but they did go to a legal border crossing, even if it was the furthest one away from Honduras where it started. Regardless of the wisdom behind their plan, they didn't need a Wall to funnel them to that destination.
 

tomtaylz

LJR Addict
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,612
1,586
San Francisco, CA, USA
I certainly don't understand the methods and reasoning behind the route the "caravan" took, but they did go to a legal border crossing, even if it was the furthest one away from Honduras where it started. Regardless of the wisdom behind their plan, they didn't need a Wall to funnel them to that destination.
If im not mistaken I think also that the western states would technically have a lot more barriers in place than somewhere like Texas, which has physical barriers but more sparse on man made barriers. If you’re talking about state politics would that alter with the addition of a bigger barrier?

https://www.usatoday.com/border-wall/
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Chris

Chris

Administrator
Staff Member
Sep 28, 2015
33,390
20,532
Salem, Oregon
Western European countries are facing some serious immigration crisis' themselves.

I think that it's getting to the point in time where any first world country is going to have to grapple with this. People from impoverished countries would rather come to a first world country where they aren't in constant fear for their life, among other things.

Of course the problem that will eventually manifest (maybe not in our lifetime) is immensely overcrowded urban areas (cities), and probably a host of other things.

But, you certainly can't blame these people for wanting to leave those shit-hole South American countries where you have dictators in power, booming drug cartels, and a life expectancy that is probably far, far lower.

One thing I do know for sure is that first world countries (including the U.S.) have to deal with this immigration crisis at some point or another. I haven't the slightest clue how to deal with it, and the last thing I would EVER want to be is a politician.

I do however like that we are at least discussing the issue now. It's not something that can be ignored forever.
 
Likes: tquig01

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
643
638
Burnsville, MN, USA
That report has mistakes that the trump administration has admitted to.
Yea, there's a laundry list of issues with that report. It spins a bunch of statistics to try and make claims that the facts don't show by themselves:

1547044201216.png


So many numbers here are pumped up, so I'll try to break some of this down. The 17,000 (rounded up from 16,831) includes arrests both at ports of entry as well as from attempted illegal crossings. 63% of that 16,831 were at ports of entry, so you're left with 6,259 people with criminal records crossing illegally. Here's the breakdown of those criminal records from CBP's own numbers:

1547044940011.png


You'll notice a few things here:
1) This number is less than half of what it was two years ago (hardly the "influx" being argued) and
2) Most of these are non-violent offenses.

So when you take out the arrests at ports of entry, which have nothing to do with a border wall, and you take out the non-violent arrests, that rounded up 17,000 number goes down to 1,560, which is half of what during the last year of the Obama administration.

The next number from the report (the 3,755 known or suspected terrorists) is inflated even further since you'll notice that it's not even restricted to southern border crossings, let alone from non-ports of entry crossings. The CPB doesn't have numbers specifically on this, but this is still more likely to come from these terrorists being denied a flight due to being on a watchlist. Again, there's little evidence here for the efficacy of a wall making a difference.

The 6,000 gang members number is made from both Southern Border crossings and ICE arrests, but if you look at CPB numbers, there's only 728 arrests from the southern border, meaning that the rest come from ICE arrests. This is actually up year-over-year, but not to the point indicating any influx, particularly when looking at years past, such as 2017 when this was over 1,000.

With the bulk of the 6,000 number coming from ICE arrests, there's no indicator towards trend, particularly since Trump has increased ICE activity so much recently, but there's also no indication whether these gang members crossed through a port of entry or through an area that would be covered by a wall.

There's plenty of other issues throughout the document and I'm not saying that it's all false, but it's definitely spun beyond what the facts say in order to sell a certain opinion.

Full CPB source: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics

What's really going on:

If you clear out the spin, the grain of truth behind the ruckus, you do see an increase in overall immigration as a result worsening conditions for a lot of southern countries, but there's no reason to believe that this is an inherent threat in the form of terrorists or gang members. The reality is that gang members thrive in countries where government is corrupt and failing. The people who have reason to flee are the more honest citizens who are victim to that situation.

Trump is taking a humanitarian crisis and playing it up like it's a criminal/terrorist threat.


Regarding drugs:

An increase in immigration also doesn't inherently mean an increase in drug cartel activity across the border. Even if facts did point to any specific increase in this trend, a wall still wouldn't make much of an impact because most are sent over water, which is why the Coast Guard plays an integral role. Drugs on land either go through ports of entry (because you need trucks on roads to carry big quantities of drugs) or are small quantities carried in ounces or pounds.

Ships carrying drugs from the south carry drugs in the tons.

Rear Admiral Christopher Tomney said:
"[Now] well over 95% of the drugs are moving on the water via container ships, non-commercial vessels, pleasure boats, sail boats, fishing boats. They also have fast boats which try to outrun our law enforcement asset"
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34934574

And speaking of the Coast Guard...they're not getting paid right now because of the shutdown.
 

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
643
638
Burnsville, MN, USA
Western European countries are facing some serious immigration crisis' themselves.

I think that it's getting to the point in time where any first world country is going to have to grapple with this. People from impoverished countries would rather come to a first world country where they aren't in constant fear for their life, among other things.

Of course the problem that will eventually manifest (maybe not in our lifetime) is immensely overcrowded urban areas (cities), and probably a host of other things.

But, you certainly can't blame these people for wanting to leave those shit-hole South American countries where you have dictators in power, booming drug cartels, and a life expectancy that is probably far, far lower.

One thing I do know for sure is that first world countries (including the U.S.) have to deal with this immigration crisis at some point or another. I haven't the slightest clue how to deal with it, and the last thing I would EVER want to be is a politician.

I do however like that we are at least discussing the issue now. It's not something that can be ignored forever.
The world economy is slowing and even if the U.S. can weather the storm, I expect we will see more immigration in the future, so I definitely agree that talking about it is incredibly important.

What worries me with the way that Trump is addressing this is two-fold:

1) He's portraying immigrants like they're the boogeyman. This sort of rhetoric spawns all sorts of problems and there's a very dark path ahead if we let this continue.
1547049698154.png

2) The wall is a very, very expensive and inflexible option for border security that will drain money from better security options, further inflate our deficit, and will not begin to address many of the core concerns with border security that we're currently experiencing.
 
Likes: Chris

tquig01

TJ Enthusiast
Mar 12, 2018
303
253
Brewerton, NY, USA
Yup, politicians work the numbers to support their positions, nothing new there. The important question to me is what has changed? The Democrats back through President Clinton were pro-wall. There are many, many examples of where the illegal immigration problem was recognized as a real issue to the US by every high-level Democrat. They all voted in favor of increased border security to include a wall. They even offered $25B for enhanced border protection including a wall in exchange for DACA amnesty. This whole thing has absolutely nothing to do with border security - it is all politics. The Dems say "No DACA, not a penny for the border", the Repubs say "No wall, gov't shut-down". Now the Dems say "Fund gov't and we can talk". They did the same thing with President Reagan and once he yielded, the Dems didn't do anything. When either side takes these binary positions, it just sets the stage for the other side to reply in kind. The whole thing is a shit-show. They need to stop combining items to get their way. The Dems need to put aside their Trump Derangement Syndrome and fund the added border security because they know it is needed. The President needs to get the funding passed to end the shutdown.
 
Likes: Chris

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
643
638
Burnsville, MN, USA
Regardless of politics, we really need to change our government so that we don't have shutdowns used as a bargaining chip. Absolutely nothing good comes of this tactic.

I don't agree with the wall, regardless of who did or didn't support it then or now, but I don't think this debate is something that justifies any of the consequences related to shutdown.

Sadly, I'm not sure how we'll get out of this situation. Trump is hard up for wall or nothing, even though Dems are willing to negotiate other types of border security funding. And I don't expect Trump to budge:

  • He needs to keep his base happy to fight off critics
  • He's already using some very weak reasoning to justify his "Mexico will pay for it" promise
  • The economy of 2018 ended very differently than the economy of 2017 that became the bedrock of his credibility from moderates
  • If he gives in on this compromise, China will take it as a sign of weakness towards the trade war
But I'm not really sure I can see the Democrats waiver either. After winning the house in the midterms, it would be a step back for them to concede here and the only way for the established veterans of the party (i.e. Chuck and Nancy) to maintain their credibility against the wave of younger, less experienced, but more passionate Democrats, is to show that they can lead effectively.
 

tquig01

TJ Enthusiast
Mar 12, 2018
303
253
Brewerton, NY, USA
1) He's portraying immigrants like they're the boogeyman.
Only the ILLEGAL ones. He has countlessly said there is no problem with LEGAL immigrants. To not make that distinction is incorrect.

2) The wall is a very, very expensive and inflexible option for border security that will drain money from better security options, further inflate our deficit, and will not begin to address many of the core concerns with border security that we're currently experiencing.
There are no "better" security options. This is basic tactics and the reason we have ground troops in the military. You can't hold a theater without boots on the ground. We can monitor the border from drones, aircraft, electronic sensors and even satellite, but to what end? The only way to prevent or detain the illegal immigrants for the remote areas would be to further increase the number of agents. The current fences will continue to be repaired, destroyed and repaired at a recurring cost to the nation. Coupled with the extra technology, this becomes an equally costly endeavor.
 

tomtaylz

LJR Addict
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,612
1,586
San Francisco, CA, USA
Regardless of politics, we really need to change our government so that we don't have shutdowns used as a bargaining chip. Absolutely nothing good comes of this tactic.
Agree 100%. I think it’s ridiculous that in a modern government it can be, and recently is, shut down at least once a year for political wins.

Who would want to get a job in the federal government right now? A sector which at least in my field, tech, struggles to get talent already.
 
Likes: Equilibrium31

tquig01

TJ Enthusiast
Mar 12, 2018
303
253
Brewerton, NY, USA
Regardless of politics, we really need to change our government so that we don't have shutdowns used as a bargaining chip. Absolutely nothing good comes of this tactic.
100% - ultimatums just don't work. There has to be a removal of emotion from the whole process. Show the facts, the real facts, and make decisions based on them, not political interests. Notice how neither side ever presents a cost-benefit analysis to justify their positions. Show me a spreadsheet with the cost to build/maintain a wall in one column and the cost to repair fences/install & maintain electronic sensors/procure, maintain & operate drones in the other. Cheapest one wins, problem solved. Guess that's why I will never be a politician!
 
Likes: Equilibrium31

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
643
638
Burnsville, MN, USA
Only the ILLEGAL ones. He has countlessly said there is no problem with LEGAL immigrants. To not make that distinction is incorrect.
Problem is, most illegal immigrants aren't the kind of threat he makes them out to be either. Data clearly shows that the vast majority of people who cross the border illegally don't post any direct threat in the form of violence or drug trafficking. (Take a look at the breakdown of the 17,000 number from my earlier post to see more on this).

And what Trump doesn't say often weighs as much as what he does say. While I don't believe the vast majority of Trump supporters also support the same things many hate groups do, he's been plays fast and loose with what he says and a large part of the appeal of him is that people feel like they know what he really means, even when if it's not exactly what he explicitly said.

This style of rhetoric is exactly what allows the David Dukes and Richard Spencers to believe that Trump is on their side, even when Trump eventually states that he doesn't support white supremacy when pressed.


There are no "better" security options. This is basic tactics and the reason we have ground troops in the military. You can't hold a theater without boots on the ground. We can monitor the border from drones, aircraft, electronic sensors and even satellite, but to what end? The only way to prevent or detain the illegal immigrants for the remote areas would be to further increase the number of agents. The current fences will continue to be repaired, destroyed and repaired at a recurring cost to the nation. Coupled with the extra technology, this becomes an equally costly endeavor.
There's definitely better security options for the spending on border security, even though it doesn't fit into a neat tag line. Monitoring the border actually catches crossers and can adapt to new methods of crossing. Heat scanning can track people going underground and drones can watch the sky. And the most important part of all is the law enforcement trained and staffed to watch the border.

No single method is perfect, but investing in border security, like most things in life, provides the best returns when you diversify. If you wanted to make money on the stock market, you could throw all of your money to one stock that you felt was promising, but every investor out there will always tell you that you never want all your eggs in one basket.
 
Likes: bromel
OP
OP
Chris

Chris

Administrator
Staff Member
Sep 28, 2015
33,390
20,532
Salem, Oregon
Just a little update on the GoFundMe (taken from the page itself):

UPDATE: JANUARY 11, 2019

Eight days before Christmas I started this GoFundMe campaign because I was tired of watching the U.S. government’s inability to secure our southern border. Like most Americans, I see the porous southern border as a national security threat and I refuse to allow our broken political system to leave my family and my country vulnerable to attack.

The plan of action was simple and straightforward to raise money to construct a wall on our southern border. We have raised over $20 Million from 325,000 plus donors and we are only just getting started! I have been literally overwhelmed and inspired by the outpouring of support, calls, and emails from American citizens who support our efforts to Build the Wall. I got some hate as well but that was easy to ignore with all the positive feedback I was getting. I immediately sought out and consulted with some of our country's leading professionals in law, politics, national security, construction, and finance. This team has spent countless hours over the holidays reviewing all issues pertaining to the construction of a southern border wall. Unanimously, we have all come to the conclusion that:

-The federal government won’t be able to accept our donations anytime soon.

-We are better equipped than our own government to use the donated funds to build an actual wall on the southern border.

-Our highly experienced team is highly confident that we can complete significant segments of the wall in less time, and for far less money, than the federal government, while meeting or exceeding all required regulatory, engineering, and environmental specifications.

-Our team strongly believes that we can complete our segments of the wall for less than half of the government’s estimated costs on a per mile basis.

To show the government how “We the People” can get this done, we have formed a Section 501(c)(4) non-profit Florida Corporation named “We Build the Wall, Inc.” to receive the GoFundMe contributions. Our website can be found at www.webuildthewall.us.

The following individuals serve on the on the advisory board, and construction, finance, and or audit committees, operations, administration, PR, Media and ongoing fundraising:

www.webuildthewall.us/team

Brigadier General Dr. Robert S. Spalding III

Industrialist John Daniel Moran, Jr.

Ex-Navy SEAL and businessman Erik Prince,

Former Secretary of State of Kansas Kris Kobach,

Angel Mom Mary Ann Mendoza

Law enforcement and immigration expert Sheriff David Clarke

Fox news contributor and border security expert Sara A. Carter

Former Colorado Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo

Angel Dad Steve Ronnebeck

Media consultant and journalist Jennifer Lawrence

and many others

We have made significant progress in less than a month. We have begun extensive due diligence and the commencement of feasibility studies engaging leading experts in a variety of fields necessary to construct our border wall. These professionals have provided us with critical guidance on the legal, engineering, contracting, environmental, accounting, maintenance, and real estate issues required to build a wall on the southern border.

We are already taking action on:
-Identifying the most densely crossed areas of the border
-Soliciting affected landowners along the Southern border
-Studying the most feasible solutions based on terrain, barrier styles, environmental impact and efficacy
-Ascertaining the willingness of border landowners to provide no or low-cost easements on their property for wall construction

If the Democrats won't provide the funding for what the American people voted for in 2016 then we the people will. When Americans see us completing real miles of beautiful wall, we know that we will raise the many billions we need to finally secure the entire border. I am 100% committed to secure our southern border and protect Americans.

There is a lot of work ahead of us, but this has never deterred me in the past. With the help of our highly experienced team, and your support, we will make this work!

The Articles of Incorporation and Mission Statement of We Build The Wall, Inc. make delivering on my promise to get a wall on the southern border built the clear objective and purpose of the organization.

“Our mission is to unite private citizens that share a common belief in providing national security for our Southern Border through the construction, administration and maintenance of physical barriers inhibiting illegal entry into the United States. In interpreting the purpose of the Corporation, the Board of Directors and Members of the Advisory Board will consider the impact of a proposed structure on a selected site’s environment and construct barriers primarily designed to prevent illegal access to the United States, rather than cause catastrophic injury. We will focus on building portions of a U.S. Southern Border wall and manage the support operations required for, and the processes associated with, the design, engineering, construction, and maintenance of the wall.”

100% of the funds raised on GoFundMe will be used in the execution of our mission and purpose. To honor the commitment, we made to our donors; all funds raised, less the processing fees and refunds, will be transferred to a special purpose account to carry out the purposes and mission of We Build the Wall, Inc. I will personally not take a penny of compensation from these donations.

When I created this fundraiser, I said if we did not reach our goal we will refund donors. I am honoring that commitment today. We will promptly refund your donation unless you tell us you approve our new plan for action.

I WANT TO BUILD THE WALL!

You MUST tell GoFundMe you still want to Build the Wall or your contribution will not be included in this historic project.