Now that Trump is gone, shamed, posibly indicted in the near future, who defends him?

@Gambitzer

There is, and has been for quite a long time, a humanitarian crisis at the border, wall or no wall (or partial wall and fences, as have been in place for many years). People who want to enter and apply for asylum go to the major checkpoints and submit themselves to US authorities, while those who want to sneak in go over or under or around walls, or simply enter temporarily legitimately (by air or land) and then don't leave when they're supposed to. A wall is among the least cost-effective tools that could be brought to bear.

Your second point makes use of a so-called "Straw Man" argument: you set up a false and weak premise to argue against. No public figure said the ban on some travel from China was racist. (Although Trump said that Joe Biden said that, Trump is not a reliable reporter).

Biden referred to Xenephobic travel bans but not specifically to the china ban. He was completely against all Trumps best moves, and now tries to act like the vaccine had something to do with him, because he sits in his office while others roll out the results of Trump's accomplishment.

The border crisis is horrible TODAY and it wasn't bad at all 2 yrs ago under Trump. Biden's bad messaging encouraged kids to make the trip and be used by the cartels as prop children so people don't get deported. Remember Sandy Cortez at the border? Crying? Kids in cages? Yeah... well there's 10 times the number of "kids in cages" today and nobody is crying. Why?

@Gambitzer
I invite you to provide some links to reputable news sources corroborating your claims. But honestly, we could go around on this forever. Your news sources appear to be the Fox commentary shows, NewsMax, OANN, and possibly Breitbart, Daily Caller, and Russia Today. Mine are -- well, everything else in the world. And I am going to give more credence to the massive body of research, writing, and reporting that goes on around the world than to a handful of "news" entities devoted to the theory that Biden didn't win the election and that he's part of a cabal of cannibalistic pedophiles; that's just the way I see things.

I am not a fan of Trump and Biden and any 70 year old president. I wish Congress and Senate enact a bill that presidential candidate cannot exceed 65.

Yeah actually THE DAY AFTER the china travel ban, China Joe himself tweeted "Xenophobic" and yeah it happend and OF COURSE i have the reciepts.

www.nationalreview.com/corner/yes-biden-called-trumps-travel-restrictions-xenophobic/

you see, you're the one who is misinformed, as you can now see... I have the sources, you have nothing.

@Gambitzer
Biden had called Trump's policies in general xenophobic, on that and several other prior occasions. I had already read the National Review article, which is essentially a long-winded claim that all the other media reports and analyses that say "Biden didn't call Trump racist" and "Biden wasn't referring specifically to the travel ban" are all wrong. Again, I'm going to go with the vast majority of opinion, rather than the outlier insisting everybody else is wrong. I also remind you that your original claim was that Biden had called the travel ban racist; you then shifted to the term "xenophobic", which is not the same thing.

Regarding the border crisis: No one is disputing that things are bad at the border. I am saying that a wall was not and is not a useful tool for dealing with it. The wall dissuaded virtually no one from trying to cross. Where Trump did have success in dissuasion was by adopting the policy that children -- even infants -- would be forcibly separated from their families if families tried to cross together. Attorney General (at that time) Sessions even stated that that was the point of such a cruel policy. I'm not willing to countenance such cruelty for the purpose of reducing illegal immigration (nor for any other purpose). Minor children are now arriving alone at the border because of that policy, which says something about how desperate their families are. I favor finding humane solutions, and now that that policy has been rescinded, we will begin to see change. But it will take time; it's always easier to break things than to fix them.

Now I'm done with this discussion. I have noted that some folks have energy to continue debates like these forever, seemingly in the belief that whoever answers last "wins." I'm not of such a mind.

You seem rather reasonable. I have no doubt you'd be a Trump supporter too if you saw things from a slightly different perspective, as I might oppose him if I did the same. I have changed my mind politically many times, as it's apparent things are not always what they seem, and are much more complex than they appear.

Good chat, thanks. (bye)