Be fair, most people thought that they’d be using ladders instead of saws.
A true point.
Or even shovels.
In some places they’re using a stiff breeze.
Best wall ever.
Big, beautiful wall. And Mexico paid for it.
I’m waiting for some of them to reclaim it and pieces to start showing up at metal recycling places.
Nah, build a resupply/rest station about 100 yards into MX with it.
I wish I had thought of this back when Tan the Conman was bleating his nonsense. The US paid for the Panama Canal and ran it. Mexico should’ve done something similar: agree to pay for the wall and run it, deciding who could cross over going north (everyone) or south (only the very select folks who could pass a Spanish literacy test and a few other requirements).
An aside: I have relatives who still believe Trump is going to make Mexico pay for the wall.
A year or 2 ago there were reports of Mexicans stealing razor wire from border fences and using it on their private perimeter walls.
So, what you’re saying is that Mexicans are building walls and the USA is paying for it?
Two weeks after he finds all those Chinese ballots.
Do they think he’s still secretly president?
I swear, there are a lot more mentally ill people out and about in society than I previously thought.
I think I’ve cracked the code: Twinkies cause brain damage. Surely no God-unfearing democrat eats Twinkies.
Fake conclusion: Everybody knows Democrats are atheists and Satan-worshipers.
We’ve known this since 1979. See: Dan White Twinkie Defense. (Dopers of a certain age will remember this.)
The term “Twinkie defense” is an umbrella term that, in the most general sense, refers to an unconventional defensive argument. The term originated from the 1979 trial of Dan White, a San Francisco politician, who was charged with first-degree murder. A testifying psychiatrist pointed out that White’s consumption of sugary foods, such as Twinkies, could lead to diminished capacity. Using this testimony, White’s lawyer was successfully able to persuade the jury that White lacked the premeditation and deliberation elements necessary to establish first-degree murder. As a result, White was ultimately convicted of a lighter offense of involuntary manslaughter.
Known to the younger generation as the Chewbacca Defense
Except, as I recall it, that wasn’t the Twinkie defense.
The claim was that Dan White suffered from depression, which led to diminished capacity. One of the pieces of evidence that he was depressed was that White had stopped eating his normal healthy diet and was instead eating sugar-filled foods like, you guessed it, Twinkies.
The testifying psychiatrist did say the Twinkies could lead to him spiraling further into depression, but the key issue as presented was the depression, not the sugary foods. Of course, once there’s a punchy phrase like “Twinkie defense,” rather than the more accurate “depression defense,” the specifics are lost to human remembrance.
Dan White was a right-wing douchebag. I rest my case.
This defense still pisses me off. As a gay man, I grew up in Berkeley and San Francisco in the 60’s and 70’s. How the hell can you call getting a gun, climbing through a window (to evade security screening), and then shooting two people NOT be a premeditated action?
IOWARDI, natch.
No argument from me.