The great motivator is for the states to work with people to help them find legitimate work to become self sustaining. A big reason so many are NOW coming in is for the "free" stuff. I have found that those who went through the correct immigration process are very hard workers, very family oriented, very committed to having self respect and take p***e in themselves. The folks who take advantage of the system we have right now can be spotted a mile away by their attitudes, how they speak, what they say, even their body language.

The people who should be taxed are the very same who produced a product and are collecting the revenue for it, it only needs to be part of the cost involved, why should it be ours, though inevitably it winds up being so anyway, the dog chasing its tail. The outcome would be different if they didn't have such a monopoly on t***sportation, and also why they block the competition. We can have cars running almost pollution-free at this point in time, but we don't, just like we don't use trains as much as we should and we all know why don't we. With towns putting traffic lights in sync to get every single light traveling on through, using as much possible fuel as possible, serving our oil Kings, sorry, hit a pet peeve there, LOL

Behind closed doors? With only the committee chairman having the right to post what is said in the inquiry. That makes it a kangaroo court by any means. Schiff, just like before, when shifty Schiff walked out of the committee room and then things were suddenly posted in the news, that hadn't been approved by the committee. I don't believe Trump ever promised such a thing, as to stay in those areas for ever. That was all Bush and Obama. Another flash for you, our Congress never authorized for any war to be fought. All of these have been military engagements without any end in sight. It should be the responsibility of those countries in the regions where there is trouble, then help for a short time, if asked. There has been too much blood shed by our troops, for the profiteers of war. We have very few rue allies of any consequence, except for England, Australia and Israel. Most of the other countries in the U. N. are not our friends.

I have provided medical care to literally hundreds free of charge. In hospitals across Texas hundreds of anchor babies are given birth and after birth care for nothing as well. In towns across Texas class rooms are filled with children if i******s. Churches hand out food like a free grocery; that's what they are being. Charity! I see next to zero l*****t liberals involved.

Pass the word. Charity is constitutional. Federal gov paying for their welfare is not.

I'll be looking for those donations from the likes of Rachel Maddow and Stephen Colbert et al.

My question is how did Trump find out this and since the information supplied by the Whistle Blower was confirmed to be true why does it matter what party the WB belonged to? In all logical arguments, it's the argument that is important not the person making the argument. That Donald is trying to discredit the argument by discrediting the person is an ad-hominem attack and a logical fallacy. Now I know fallacies don't bother you conservatives but when you argue through a fallacy you are conceeding you are wrong before you even make your argument.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/trump-says-whistleblower-has-ties-democratic-rival-here-s-what-n1064281

President Donald Trump claimed Wednesday that the intelligence community whistleblower whose complaint led to an impeachment inquiry has ties to his Democratic "opponents," a charge met with pushback from the still-anonymous person's lawyer.

"The Whistleblower's facts have been so incorrect about my 'no pressure' conversation with the Ukrainian President, and now the conflict of interest and involvement with a Democrat Candidate, that he or she should be exposed and questioned properly. This is no Whistleblower," Trump said in a tweet Wednesday morning.

"The Whistleblower's lawyer is a big Democrat. The Whistleblower has ties to one of my DEMOCRAT OPPONENTS. Why does the ICIG allow this s**m to continue?" he continued.

Trump and some Republican allies, including Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, have previously said the identity of the whistleblower whose complaint galvanized an impeachment inquiry should be made public, even though whistleblower laws protect requests for confidentiality.

Mark Zaid, an attorney for the whistleblower, called the identity of his client "irrelevant" — but responded Wednesday evening to what he said were "ongoing efforts to mischaracterize whistleblower #1's alleged 'bias' in order to detract from the substance of the complaint."

Beyond Zaid's comments — and what Inspector General of the Intelligence Community Michael Atkinson wrote in a letter released to the public on Sept. 26 — not much else is known about the still-anonymous person who wrote the complaint. That letter, addressed to acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire and dated Aug. 26, raised the appearance of bias.

What the letter said about the whistleblower's politics
Atkinson wrote to Maguire that he considered an "indicia of an arguable political bias on the part of the Complainant in favor of a rival political candidate" in considering the complaint's credibility.

But Atkinson, a Trump appointee, determined that this did not change the facts surrounding the issue, “particularly given the other information the ICIG obtained during its preliminary review” of the complaint. He concluded the complaint was "credible" and of "urgent concern."

While a Congressional investigation is ongoing, Atkinson is the first person who will have had a chance to evaluate the complaint. Attorneys who represent whistleblowers told NBC News last week that once a complaint is filed, the internal watchdog is charged with reviewing its credibility, which might mean reviewing documents and interviewing witnesses to check for corroborating information.

Trump's allegations
Trump's tweets Wednesday also alleged "involvement with a Democratic candidate," citing media reports not confirmed by NBC News.

Zaid, responding Wednesday, said the whistleblower "never worked for or advised a political candidate, campaign, or party," and had spent their government career in apolitical roles in the executive branch.

"In these positions, our client has come into contact with p**********l candidates from both parties in their roles as elected officials—not as candidates," Zaid said, adding that the whistleblower "voluntarily provided relevant career information" to help Atkinson vet his complaint.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/10/politics/whistleblower-complaint-corroboration/
https://www.justsecurity.org/66475/ukraine-ukrainegate-overwhelming-confirmation-of-whistleblower-complaint-an-annotation/