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.
Double post.
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.
I think they absolutely could have avoided this meeting. They chose not to.
They’re probably rooting for Trump, since he’s utterly incompetent and would inevitably fail in doing anything to harm the cartels.
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?
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.
I know Mexico has crime problems, but it’s not Mad Max down there at Mexico City International. It is a functioning country.
Has Trump ever suggested any reason at all why Mexico would pay for his wall?
Trump’s not done yet! He’s going to Make Mexico Great Again…sort of. As an afterthought.
Some of the other tweets in the article are funny as hell.
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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(yeah, I know that’s a Foxnews link but it’s an AP story)
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.