# Trump to visit Mexico's President today

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552>\
**Category:** Politics & Elections\
**Created:** [August 31, 2016, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552 "2016-08-31T08:59:40Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/121 "2016-09-01T17:14:19Z")

</div>

Some people are saying, good people, that these are proforma invitations, and that the Donald, lacking the kind of finesse required for the kabuki dance that is international diplomacy, mistook it for an actual invitation.

When Peña Nieto tried to explain that “darn, I will be washing my hair that day” The Don still insisted, and diplomacy being what it is, the couldn’t lock Mexico, draw the curtains and pretend they weren’t home.

You tell me.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/122 "2016-09-01T17:19:18Z")

</div>

Double post.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/123 "2016-09-01T17:20:25Z")

</div>

How did he manage to fly into Mexico and back out and live through it? How many divisions of Secret Service did they send with him?

Frankly, I’m utterly amazed there wasn’t a hail of gunfire at his private jet.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/124 "2016-09-01T17:40:41Z")

</div>

> [@Chimera](#):
>
> How did he manage to fly into Mexico and back out and live through it? How many divisions of Secret Service did they send with him?
> 
> Frankly, I’m utterly amazed there wasn’t a hail of gunfire at his private jet.

The Cartels may be nasty entities with no regard for human life, but even they’d know that an attempt on a would-be POTUS would be extraordinarily bad for business.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/125 "2016-09-01T17:42:21Z")

</div>

> [@Mighty\_Girl](#):
>
> Some people are saying, good people, that these are proforma invitations, and that the Donald, lacking the kind of finesse required for the kabuki dance that is international diplomacy, mistook it for an actual invitation.
> 
> When Peña Nieto tried to explain that “darn, I will be washing my hair that day” The Don still insisted, and diplomacy being what it is, the couldn’t lock Mexico, draw the curtains and pretend they weren’t home.
> 
> You tell me.

I think they absolutely could have avoided this meeting. They chose not to.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/126 "2016-09-01T17:49:09Z")

</div>

> [@JRDelirious](#):
>
> The Cartels may be nasty entities with no regard for human life, but even they’d know that an attempt on a would-be POTUS would be extraordinarily bad for business.

They’re probably rooting for Trump, since he’s utterly incompetent and would inevitably fail in doing anything to harm the cartels.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/127 "2016-09-01T17:57:46Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> Yes, Nieto made it clear that he wouldn’t pay for the wall, but no, they didn’t discuss it. I don’t think that Trump ever said that the subject never came up.

The subject came up - I would suggest that the President took the payment off the table, saying they wouldn’t pay, but that Trump figured it was the opening salvo in negotiations, because how the hell do you discuss the wall without paying for it?

> [@](#):
>
> Who pays for the wall? We didn’t discuss," Trump had said when asked by a reporter during a news conference following their meeting in Mexico City. “We did discuss the wall. We didn’t discuss payment of the wall. That’ll be for a later date.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/128 "2016-09-01T18:04:42Z")

</div>

> [@JohnT](#):
>
> In real life, “discuss” means a situation in which one party verbally relates information to another party, even if the other party doesn’t reply\*. Even if both parties came with prepared statements, each of them can claim to have “discussed” with the other party the items contained in the prepared statements.
> 
> \*“Sophia, clean your room.”  
> “Sophia, clean your room!”  
> “Sophia, did you hear me?”  
> “God, Dad, why do you have to be so hostile?”
> 
> See? Discussion! 🙂

Meh, I could see it both ways, I personally wouldn’t consider what you described to be a discussion, since I think a discussion requires participation of two or more parties, otherwise its a monologue or a command.

Alternative scenario:  
\*“Sophia, clean your room.”  
\*“But dad…”  
\*“This is not open to discussion you will clean your room right now!”

See? No Discussion! 🙂

In any case, there is some wiggle room in the definition, I don’t think we can count it as a clear pants on fire lie. At least not without further evidence that Trump expressed his views on the matter at the meeting.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/129 "2016-09-01T18:18:39Z")

</div>

> [@Chimera](#):
>
> How did he manage to fly into Mexico and back out and live through it? How many divisions of Secret Service did they send with him?
> 
> Frankly, I’m utterly amazed there wasn’t a hail of gunfire at his private jet.

I know Mexico has crime problems, but it’s not Mad Max down there at Mexico City International. It is a functioning country.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/son_of_a_rich/32/5439_2.png) [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Son_of_a_Rich)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/130 "2016-09-01T18:32:15Z")

</div>

Has Trump ever suggested any reason at all why Mexico would pay for his wall?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Leo\_Krupe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@Leo\_Krupe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Krupe)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/131 "2016-09-01T18:45:50Z")

</div>

Trump’s not done yet! He’s going to Make Mexico Great Again…sort of. As an afterthought.

> **[‘Make Mexico Great Again Also’: The newest Trump hat | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/01/politics/new-trump-hat-trnd/)**
>
> The Trump campaign debuted a new piece of swag Wednesday night.

> [@](#):
>
> (CNN)The Trump campaign debuted a new piece of swag Wednesday night.
> 
> ```
> Rudy Giuliani's hat says "MAKE MEXICO GREAT AGAIN ALSO." pic.twitter.com/qydTO4ALdX
> — Eric Bradner (@ericbradner) September 1, 2016
> 
> ```

Some of the other tweets in the article are funny as hell.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![zwede](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ac91a4/32.png) [@zwede](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zwede)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/132 "2016-09-01T18:54:51Z")

</div>

> [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](#):
>
> Has Trump ever suggested any reason at all why Mexico would pay for his wall?

Actually he has: He said Mexicans in the US transfer a lot of money back to Mexico, and all he would have to do was tell Mexico he would block any transfer of funds to Mexico and they would gladly pay for the wall. He backed it up with some amounts I’m sure were thoroughly researched showing that the amount of money sent to Mexico is much more than the cost of the wall.

Now as a fun game for the whole family I suggest: “Find all the legal & constitutional reasons the above is absurd”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/133 "2016-09-01T19:15:20Z")

</div>

> [@zwede](#):
>
> .Now as a fun game for the whole family I suggest: “Find all the legal & constitutional reasons the above is absurd”.

Uuuuh, why don’t you start us off?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/134 "2016-09-01T19:28:45Z")

</div>

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> Uuuuh, why don’t you start us off?

How about this:

There are Mexican citizens who are in the U.S. illegally, who are sending money transfers back to Mexico.

However, there are also Mexican citizens who are in the U.S. **legally** , who are doing the same thing.

And, finally, there are U.S. citizens (either naturalized immigrants, or born-in-the-U.S.) who are sending money to Mexico.

Holding money transfers back to Mexico “hostage” is, at a minimum, interfering with the third group, who are our own citizens, engaging in an absolutely legal financial transaction. Even the second group would represent interfering with citizens of another country, as they engage in an absolutely legal financial transaction.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/135 "2016-09-01T19:28:55Z")

</div>

> [@Buck\_Godot](#):
>
> Meh, I could see it both ways, I personally wouldn’t consider what you described to be a discussion, since I think a discussion requires participation of two or more parties, otherwise its a monologue or a command.
> 
> Alternative scenario:  
> \*“Sophia, clean your room.”  
> \*“But dad…”  
> \*“This is not open to discussion you will clean your room right now!”
> 
> See? No Discussion! 🙂
> 
> In any case, there is some wiggle room in the definition, I don’t think we can count it as a clear pants on fire lie. At least not without further evidence that Trump expressed his views on the matter at the meeting.

You prove my point. 🙂

There _was_ a discussion, even though one party claimed there wasn’t. Especially if the child goes and cleans their room. Information was exchanged verbally, therefore discussion occurred.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/136 "2016-09-01T19:32:05Z")

</div>

> [@QuickSilver](#):
>
> I think they absolutely could have avoided this meeting. They chose not to.

How, without insulting a potential POTUS?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/137 "2016-09-01T19:37:04Z")

</div>

> [@Mighty\_Girl](#):
>
> How, without insulting a potential POTUS?

Bibi blew Donald off earlier in the year.

So did the Irish Prime Minister. In fact, the Irish PM threatened to call Trump a racist to his face if he showed his face in Ireland.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/138 "2016-09-01T19:43:45Z")

</div>

> [@zwede](#):
>
> Actually he has: He said Mexicans in the US transfer a lot of money back to Mexico, and all he would have to do was tell Mexico he would block any transfer of funds to Mexico and they would gladly pay for the wall.

From a practical perspective, how realistic is it that the US could actually block the transfer of funds? From what I understand, it’s not a bank-to-bank transfer. It’s people here sending money through services like Western Union or Paypal. Can the US actually block money transfers to Mexico which go through those types of non-bank services?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/139 "2016-09-01T20:13:57Z")

</div>

> [@kenobi\_65](#):
>
> How about this:
> 
> There are Mexican citizens who are in the U.S. illegally, who are sending money transfers back to Mexico.
> 
> However, there are also Mexican citizens who are in the U.S. **legally** , who are doing the same thing.
> 
> And, finally, there are U.S. citizens (either naturalized immigrants, or born-in-the-U.S.) who are sending money to Mexico.
> 
> Holding money transfers back to Mexico “hostage” is, at a minimum, interfering with the third group, who are our own citizens, engaging in an absolutely legal financial transaction. Even the second group would represent interfering with citizens of another country, as they engage in an absolutely legal financial transaction.

You didn’t cite the law or constitutional basis that “interfering” with money transfers is illegal.

@filmore:  
[U.S. Rules Force Western Union to Block Money Transfers by Muslims](http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/07/02/us-rules-force-western-union-to-block-money-transfers-by-muslims.html)(yeah, I know that’s a Foxnews link but it’s an AP story)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\
**Post date:** [September 1, 2016, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552/140 "2016-09-01T20:19:03Z")

</div>

> [@filmore](#):
>
> From a practical perspective, how realistic is it that the US could actually block the transfer of funds? From what I understand, it’s not a bank-to-bank transfer. It’s people here sending money through services like Western Union or Paypal. Can the US actually block money transfers to Mexico which go through those types of non-bank services?

Even if they did, someone would start a three point transfer (US to some civilized country and from there to Mexico) in about five minutes. Especially since most people would find it moral to violate the orders of the orange fascist.  
It would make smuggling booze from Canada during Prohibition seem tough.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552.md?page=6)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-to-visit-mexicos-president-today/764552.md?page=8)
