Nancy Pelosi Defends Violent MS-13 Gang Members In Response To Trump, Says They’re Not Animals

[Dashinka 24,765]

The Left Wing Media and the Dems seem to like digging themselves a hole. 

 

 

 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi defended violent MS-13 gang members in a press conference Thursday, saying they are not “animals,” a term President Trump dubbed MS-13 members earlier this week.

 

Pelosi first alluded to God, saying, “Some of us who are attracted to the political arena, to government and public service” believe that “we are all God’s children” and “there is a spark of divinity among every person on earth, and we all have to recognize that as we respect the dignity and worth of every person.”

 

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/17/pelosi-ms-13-animals/

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

anybody surprised. 

[bcking 3,157]

The actual transcript of what Trump said:

 

Mims: "Thank you. There could be an MS-13 gang member I know about — if they don't reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about it."

Trump: "We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we're stopping a lot of them — but we're taking people out of the country. You wouldn't believe how bad these people are. These aren't people. These are animals. And we're taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that's never happened before. And because of the weak laws, they come in fast, we get them, we release them, we get them again, we bring them out. It's crazy.

The dumbest laws, as I said before, the dumbest laws on immigration in the world. So we're going to take care of it, Margaret. We'll get it done."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/may/17/context-donald-trumps-comments-about-immigrants-an/

 

I think the word he is missing somewhere in that sentence is "Some" (Or a synonym). After talking about MS-13 gang members, his statement does not qualify that they are talking about only a subset of those who try to enter the country. He doesn't say that some of the people entering the country are animals, he doesn't say that the MS-13 gang members trying to enter are animals. He just says "We have people coming into the country....These are animals". There are many people coming into the country that don't meet his description. Though I agree it is an apt description for MS-13.

 

He's done this before. No one doubts that there are SOME horrible people that try to come into this country, MS-13 included. But that doesn't characterize EVERYONE who is trying to enter the country. He speaks broadly about people coming into the country, when the conversation was about some of the people entering the country (Specifically MS-13 gang members).

[bcking 3,157]

https://cis.org/Fact-Sheet/Fact-Sheet-MS13-Arrests-ICE-20052014

- In a 10 year period ICE arrested 4,000 MS-13 gang members, 92% of which were illegal aliens

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2018/04/08/how-many-ms-13-gang-members-united-states/426635002/

- There are roughly 10,000 MS-13 gang members in the USA - Not all of them are illegal aliens

 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/27/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

- We have an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the country

 

Even if you were extremely conservative and assumed all MS-13 gang members are illegal aliens (which we know isn't true), and used 10,000 as the total number - That is 0.09% of the total number of illegal immigrants in the country.

 

While they are horrible, and I agree they are animals and I want them out (or honestly I'd be fine with most of them dead), I think a group of people that don't even represent 1% of the larger group you are discussing deserve some sort of "qualifier" like "Some" or "A few" etc...

 

To put the statistic another way - That means there are an estimated 1,111 illegal aliens that AREN'T MS-13 gang members for everyone 1 illegal alien that is.

Edited May 18, 2018 by bcking

[jg121783 3,921]

Anyone with half a brain understands the conversation was about MS13 and that is where Trump's comments were directed. Only the unhinged left doesn't get this. The Russia investigation is collapsing and no one cares about Stormy Daniels so the Trump hating corporate media needs a new attention grabbing headline. In fact the AP has actually retracted a story saying Trump's comments were directed at all illegal aliens.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, jg121783 said:

Anyone with half a brain understands the conversation was about MS13 and that is where Trump's comments were directed. Only the unhinged left doesn't get this. The Russia investigation is collapsing and no one cares about Stormy Daniels so the Trump hating corporate media needs a new attention grabbing headline. In fact the AP has actually retracted a story saying Trump's comments were directed at all illegal aliens.

Say what you will.

 

I wouldn't have made a news story about it but the fact is his actual words did not specify that he was speaking about only SOME illegal immigrants. He made no indication of that. A single extra word would have made it more accurate and appropriate.

 

I don't really care that much either way but this is a trend of his. He speaks about specific people but his words suggest it applies much more broadly.

 

He likely does it intentionally because it makes the problem seem bigger than it is.

[jg121783 3,921]

4 minutes ago, bcking said:

Say what you will.

 

I wouldn't have made a news story about it but the fact is his actual words did not specify that he was speaking about only SOME illegal immigrants. He made no indication of that. A single extra word would have made it more accurate and appropriate.

 

I don't really care that much either way but this is a trend of his. He speaks about specific people but his words suggest it applies much more broadly.

 

He likely does it intentionally because it makes the problem seem bigger than it is.

He was clearly speaking to someone about MS13 and replying to their concerns. As much as some want there to be a controversy here there is none.

Edited May 18, 2018 by jg121783

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, jg121783 said:

He was clearly speaking to someone talking to someone about MS13 and replying to their concerns. As much as some want there to be a controversy here there is none.

She was speaking about MS13 gang members

 

He then replied with a statement about people crossing our border. Not SOME people crossing, just generally people crossing our border.

 

That includes MS13 but it also includes many more people.

 

He continues to speak like this because his supporters don't get the nuance and it can effectively make the problem seem larger than it is. 

[jg121783 3,921]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

She was speaking about MS13 gang members

 

He then replied with a statement about people crossing our border. Not SOME people crossing, just generally people crossing our border.

 

That includes MS13 but it also includes many more people.

 

He continues to speak like this because his supporters don't get the nuance and it can effectively make the problem seem larger than it is. 

He didn't use the word immigrant or illegal either so by your logic he is talking about anyone crossing the border including us citizens.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, jg121783 said:

He didn't use the word immigrant or illegal either so by your logic he is talking about anyone crossing the border including us citizens.

Well the entire topic of the panel was on illegal immigration so there is a much stronger case for that subject matter being implied.

 

But you're right. He could have been more specific.

[bcking 3,157]

Probably the best way he could have said it was something like:

 

"those people who enter our country....etc"

 

By using those he would be directly referring to the specific subject that the woman had established prior (MS13). 

 

Since he didn't use a pronoun and instead made his statement broadly just about "people", he created ambiguity. In a real conversation when you reply to someone about the subject they are referring to, you would probably use a pronoun to reference the subject.

 

If you said something like "Muslims who are terrorists are evil bastards" I would probably reply "yes those guys are bastards".

 

If I said "yes Muslims are bastards" you wouldn't fault people for thinking I wasn't clear that I was talking about your specific subject (Muslim terrorists).

 

Same deal - she basically said "We have a problem with MS13 gang member illegal immigrants and I want it stopped" to which he replied "yes people who enter the country are bad, they are animals".

[jg121783 3,921]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

Well the entire topic of the panel was on illegal immigration so there is a much stronger case for that subject matter being implied.

 

But you're right. He could have been more specific.

And the topic being discussed at that moment was MS13. You claim that because he didn't mention MS13 by name that isn't what he was talking about. At the same time you claim he was talking about illegal aliens when he didn't name them specifically either. You can't have it both ways. Either he was talking about the topic of discussion at the moment which was MS13 (which logic and common sense would lead most people to believe) or he could have been talking about anyone including green aliens from the planet poptart if we go with your argument.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

And the topic being discussed at that moment was MS13. You claim that because he didn't mention MS13 by name that isn't what he was talking about. At the same time you claim he was talking about illegal aliens when he didn't name them specifically either. You can't have it both ways. Either he was talking about the topic of discussion at the moment which was MS13 (which logic and common sense would lead most people to believe) or he could have been talking about anyone including green aliens from the planet poptart if we go with your argument.

I've already clarified. You are absolutely right he could have been talking about literally anyone entering the country.

 

He was replying to someone's comment. He should have used a pronoun to refer to the population she was discussing. Instead he opened it up to a much broader category of "people entering the country".

 

As I said at the beginning I wouldn't have made a big deal about it. It wouldn't have been news to me but since you linked to it I decided to read the transcript. I'm merely giving you my opinion on how he phrased his comment. It could have been better and as President he should try as hard as he can to be as clear as he can because people will continue to nit pick and take things out of context. They did it with Obama, they do it to Trump, and they'll do it to the next guy (or girl?).

[Dashinka 24,765]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

I've already clarified. You are absolutely right he could have been talking about literally anyone entering the country.

 

He was replying to someone's comment. He should have used a pronoun to refer to the population she was discussing. Instead he opened it up to a much broader category of "people entering the country".

 

As I said at the beginning I wouldn't have made a big deal about it. It wouldn't have been news to me but since you linked to it I decided to read the transcript. I'm merely giving you my opinion on how he phrased his comment. It could have been better and as President he should try as hard as he can to be as clear as he can because people will continue to nit pick and take things out of context. They did it with Obama, they do it to Trump, and they'll do it to the next guy (or girl?).

Yep, when someone asks you “What do you think about John?” And you reply, “He is a hard worker.”  Were you talking about John or someone else?

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Yep, when someone asks you “What do you think about John?” And you reply, “He is a hard worker.”  Were you talking about John or someone else?

He didn't use a pronoun, like "he".

 

He just said people. Not "those people", which would have referenced the woman's prior point.

 

A better example would be:

 

"I think John and Mary are really great people"

 

To which you respond "People can be really nice some time"

 

You would probably be talking about John and Mary, but you aren't really responding. You're making a vague general statement after I made a specific one.

Edited May 18, 2018 by bcking