Breaking: NEW bombshell JD Vance video by MSNBC & Rachel Maddow. JD Vance wants to shut down American universities & business using extra constitutional powers. He wants to rip them out like a tumor and install political religion. Vance is following the plans of right-wing blogger Curtis Yarvin who suggests deleting the entire Federal Government and replace it with a dictator | CEO. (Trump, Musk) Maddow has the receipts and video.
This is not breaking news since it was on Maddow's show last night, but the point is valid. Some of Vance's tech bro mentors and friends want a dictatorship.
Trumpists don't want no federal help, so. . . Trump/Vance should not promise trumpists in states any help. Remember REAGAN said: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Is 'dirty words!
Senator Vance for the umpteenth time: Will (Donald) be demonizing and putting immigrant children in camps? No answer (yet). Maybe, just maybe, Vance will find his way back to the question and allow us an answer.
So far this thing is kind of a waste of time. Pure talking points.
Meanwhile Trump had a mental meltdown in Wisconsin today, mispronouncing or misidentifying simple words and confusing the Ayatollah of Iran with Kim Jong Un. Trump said Kim Jong Un was trying to kill him.
Clar-i-fying. That is what the moderator said and she was the judge for the night. Vance was a fool to bring attention to it. Whom effing ever in a debate has a problem with the truth or correcting of the record being told displays a lack of understanding about people and smallness.
JDV: Look, Margaret, first of all, the gross majority of what we need to do at the southern border is just empowering law enforcement to do their job. I've been to the southern border more than our Borders are , Kamala Harris has been. And it's actually heartbreaking because the Border Patrol Agents, they just want to be empowered to do their job. Of course, additional resources would help. But most of this is about the President and the Vice President empowering our law enforcement to say, "If you try to come across the border illegally, you've got to stay in Mexico, you've got to go back through proper channels." Now, Governor Walz brought up the community of Springfield , and he's very worried about the things that I've said in Springfield. Look, in Springfield, Ohio and in communities all across this country, you've got schools that are overwhelmed, you've got hospitals that are overwhelmed, you have got housing that is totally unaffordable because we brought in millions of illegal immigrants to compete with Americans for scarce homes . The people that I'm most worried about in Springfield, Ohio, are the American citizens who have had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris's open border. It is a disgrace, Tim. And I actually think, I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don't think that Kamala Harris does.
MB: Senator, your time is up. Governor, you have 1 minute to respond.
TW: Yeah, well, it is law enforcement that asked for the bill. They helped craft it. They're the ones that supported it. It was… that's because they know we need to do this. Look, this issue of continuing to bring this up, of not dealing with it, of blaming migrants for everything. On housing, we could talk a little bit about Wall Street speculators buying up housing and making them less affordable, but it becomes a blame. Look, this bill also gives the money necessary to adjudicate. I agree. It should not take seven years for an asylum claim to be done. This bill gets it done in 90 days. Then you start to make a difference in this and you start to adhere to what we know. American principles. I don't talk about my faith a lot, but Matthew 25:40 talks about, "To the least amongst us, you do unto me." I think that's true of most Americans. They simply want order to it. This bill does it. It's funded, it's supported by the people who do it, and it lets us keep our dignity about how we treat other people.
MB: Thank you, Governor. And just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status. Temporary protected status. Norah.
JDV: Well, Margaret, Margaret, I think it's important because…
MB: Thank you, senator. We have so much to get to.
NO: We're going to turn out of the economy. Thank you.
JDV: Margaret. The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check, and since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for ten years.
MB: Thank you, Senator.
JDV: That is the facilitation of illegal immigration, Margaret, by our own leadership. And Kamala Harris opened up that pathway.
MB: Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process. We have so much to get to.
TW: Those laws have been in the book since 1990.
MB: Thank you, gentlemen. We want to have -
TW: The CBP app has not been on the books since 1990. It's something that Kamala Harris created, Margaret.
MB: Gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut. We have so much we want to get to. Thank you for explaining the legal process. Norah?
But JD told a blatant lie! Surely you don't think that should be allowed to stand
Of course they do, those are their 'alternative facts' and they don't think anything, not even actual facts, should get in the way of the 'alternative facts' they've spent so much time creating and spreading through their rightwing fake news networks. I'm sure the amount of 'alternative facts', aka complete bullshit, that rightwing conservatives believe is far greater than any of us could ever imagine which is why getting "fact checked" has become an offensive attack on them akin to someone telling a fanatical evangelical that Jesus never existed. Facts and fact checking has become heretical among their ranks as is evidenced by the reaction, even here, of those on the right.
I posted a story in Sinners and buttheads or whatever because I couldn't push it to the front page without a photo which for the life of me I can't figure out how to post the right photo with the story but anyway Jon Stewart did a fantastic segment on their Bizarro World reality version of the former 'president'.
If you all get a chance would you check out the article if you can and vote it up and comment. Thanks
he rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check, and since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for ten years.
So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant,
Not true. Citizen of another country, not yet in the USA is more appropriate.
apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status
After cursory vetting by DHS and certifying the existence and willingness of a certified sponsor, applicants for parole or asylum, if approved the applicants must purchase their own airfare to designated US airports where they are thoroughly vetted prior to being released to their sponsor.
at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand.
100% not true.
That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for ten years.
They can apply for green cards during vetting if they have reasonable prospects for employment, but since most are here on TPS they can only stay as long as their country is approved in 18 month increments. Deportment is more likely than finding a path to permanent residency.
So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a . . .open border wand.
What is the CBP One app and why is it controversial?
Austin Williams
Tue, October 1, 2024 at 7:03 PM PDT
LOS ANGELES - During the vice presidential debate, immigration became a heated topic, leading to a brief microphone muting of both Senator J.D. Vance and Governor Tim Walz.
The back-and-forth focused on the CBP One app, a critical tool in U.S. border policy. Vance criticized the app, describing it as a way for migrants to obtain legal status "at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand."
However, moderator Margaret Brennan fact-checked his claims, pointing out that many immigrants using the app entered the U.S. legally.
"Since you’re fact checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s actually going on. So there’s an application called the CBP One app where you can go on and apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand," he said before having his mic cut off.
What is the CBP One app?
CBP One is a free mobile app launched by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in 2020 . Initially designed for simple travel-related services like scheduling cargo inspections, it has since evolved into a crucial tool for migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Today, asylum seekers must use the app to schedule appointments at U.S. ports of entry and submit their biometric data for processing.
While the app aims to streamline the immigration process, it has faced issues like technical glitches and limited access for migrants in remote areas.
Why is the CBP One app controversial?
The app has stirred debate due to:
Privacy concerns : Critics are wary of the app’s use of biometric data and GPS tracking, fearing misuse of this information.
Racial bias : Reports indicate that the app struggles to recognize darker skin tones during its "liveness" checks.
Access issues : Migrants without smartphones or internet access are at a disadvantage since the app is the only way to schedule asylum appointments.
NOTE : I do not understand the controversy or issues critics of this app have and are making (it is my first time learning of this app/program). Considering that some here may not be familiar with this app and 'situated' like me about it: Better to post the article and 'shred it' as needed.
Thus, this is a rare occasion for such a long posting. And it shall not become my routine .
What Are Some of the Concerns Regarding CBP One?
Issues with Photo Submission Leading to Disparate Outcomes. CBP One requires individuals seeking appointments at ports of entry and CHNV program applicants seeking to apply for travel authorization to submit a photo or “selfie.”
Individuals who try to get appointments at southwest border ports of entry must submit a selfie to ensure the submission is being made by a “live person.” These photos are stored in a “gallery” within the Traveler Verification Service (TVS) system, which is CBP’s matching service for “all biometric entry and exit operations that use facial recognition technology.” CBP added one more liveness check to the process in May 2023, as users who have been offered an appointment need to submit a selfie when logging into CBP One to confirm the appointment. During the inspection appointments at ports of entry, CBP officers will take a new photograph of applicants to “match” the new photo with the selfies applicants submitted through CBP One.
Applicants seeking advance travel authorization for the CHNV programs also submit a selfie with the app to conduct a liveness check. CBP uses the selfie to compare it to applicants’ passport photos and to compare it to other photos accessible by the agency to vet the applicant for law enforcement and national security purposes. The PIA describes the selfies’ uses as follows: CBP uses the selfie image for five distinct purposes: (1) to conduct one-to-one (1:1) facial comparison against the passport photograph previously uploaded to the ATA mobile application from the eChip; (2) to conduct one-to-many (1:n) vetting against derogatory photographic holdings for law enforcement and national security concerns as part of the ATA vetting process; (3) to generate a new gallery of ATA participants for facial comparison when ATA participants arrive at a port of entry; (4) to conduct 1:n identity verification once the participants arrive at the port of entry; and (5) to conduct 1:n vetting against known derogatory photographs for assistance in CBP’s admissibility determination.
CBP One’s photo capture function has proven problematic. Advocates who assist African and Haitian asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border report that CBP One is not recognizing the photos of many people with darker skin tones when the app is carrying out the “liveness” check. This issue, along with the lack of stable internet and modern mobile phones that support CBP One, has kept thousands of immigrants from properly accessing the app.
Additionally, there is the potential that the selfies submitted by applicants may be incorrectly matched to the photos in the CBP galleries and these types of errors disproportionately impact racial minorities, leading to increased screening and potentially negative outcomes should a technical error not be corrected. A December 2019 report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) found that false positive rates—the algorithms’ erroneous match of two photos of different people—were highest when matching photos of west and east African and east Asian people, and lowest when matching eastern European individuals. In a July 2021 report, NIST said that the quality of the camera and the environment in which the picture is taken affect the accuracy of facial recognition. Thus, the availability of CBP officers to check the accuracy of the systems conducting the photos’ comparison is vital to ensure racial minorities are not disproportionately impacted by the technology’s shortcomings.
Privacy Concerns . Advocates have raised concerns about CBP One’s photo submission requirements and the potential for the use of those photographs to surveil individuals. The agency sought to address this issue by stating the use of CBP One is voluntary. An email from a CBP official obtained through a FOIA request shows the agency assured the Office of Management and Budget that people “can still present themselves” directly at a port of entry. The new regulation on circumvention to lawful pathways clarifies that individuals can no longer simply present themselves at a port of entry.
DHS asserts that the app does not store any information locally on the device being used to access it or in the app itself, but that any information entered is stored in agency databases or systems. For example, the photos for some of these functions are sent to the TVS. The PIA confirms that some of this information, and photographs in particular, may be stored in government databases for up to 75 years.
By requiring travelers to submit their photos to access CBP One’s features, CBP is drastically expanding its databases of noncitizens’ photos and other biographic information. The wide collection of photos and corresponding biographic information generates concerns that CBP, other DHS components, and even local law enforcement could use this information for other enforcement purposes. In the PIA, DHS clarifies that the biometric information collected could be shared with other DHS agencies from the systems where the information ultimately resides to vet applicants prior to allowing them to enter the United States, and that such systems are also bound by privacy policies. However, DHS’ PIA fails to alleviate concerns that law enforcement agencies beyond CBP, including local police departments and sheriffs’ offices that may lack policies about limiting the use of such data, would be able to access travelers’ photos and other biographic information.
Further, CBP One’s ability to collect GPS location data is concerning due to the potential for this information to be used by law enforcement to track users. DHS says this risk is fully mitigated because the app captures GPS locations only “at the exact time the user pushes the submit button.” Recently, however, DHS stated that CBP will in fact store this geolocation information for a period of one year.
DHS’ explanation overlooks the inherent dangers of apps that collect GPS location information, a danger identified in a government-issued advisory. Guidance issued by the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2020 warned mobile device users to protect “extremely valuable” location data because it can reveal details about not only the user, but also the number of users in a location, users’ movements and daily routines, and can expose otherwise unknown associations between users and locations. The NSA also advised to avoid using apps related to location because these apps inherently involve the exposure of users’ location data, and further warned that certain apps may collect, aggregate, and transmit information that exposes a user’s location.
Location data from mobile devices is valuable to CBP because it can expose individuals’ private behaviors without their consent or even knowledge. In 2018, CBP purchased location data from commercial sources, as part of the Border Surveillance Systems implementation, which deployed various technologies to help arrest suspects and seize contraband entering the United States. CBP used this location data to track cellphone activity in unusual places, such as remote stretches of desert along the Mexican border, so that officers could arrest individuals after they entered the United States. CBP claims that the GPS location data it purchases is anonymized, but a 2018 New York Times report found that even anonymized GPS location data can easily be utilized to track and find individuals because the data can reveal people’s travel patterns and daily habits, including where individuals live, work, obtain medical care, worship, and attend political events.
CBP One’s “Terms and Conditions,” available after users download the app, informs users of the app’s privacy policy. However, users need to review CBP One’s lengthy PIA to learn that the data only should be collected when users choose to submit their location to CBP, and that this feature requires a “just-in-time” consent before such data is collected.
Users Are Being Forced to Use CBP One. Another major concern about CBP One is that its use is essentially obligatory for those seeking to be processed at the border and applying for humanitarian parole through the Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan (CHNV) program. DHS previously stated that the app’s use is voluntary, and the agency explains that users must consent before accessing several of the app’s features, including “just-in-time” notifications that require consent before the app deploys users’ cellphone’s camera or GPS functions.
A CBP official said in an email that “If someone cannot provide a photo, they can still present themselves to the [port of entry] directly,” but this is no longer the case. For example, the documents describing the Advance Travel Authorization (ATA) process for CHNV state that beneficiaries “must” enter their biographic information into CBP One and provide a photo. The ATA-specific PIA states the ATA process is voluntary, but it also indicates that the only alternatives for people not authorized to travel through the ATA are humanitarian parole or visa processing, both of which have different requirements that may be more difficult to meet for nationals of the selected countries who may be eligible for the special parole program. Additionally, Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian, and Nicaraguans who seek entry at the southwest border will be subject to the new regulation which also requires them to use CBP One. Lacking any other alternatives, CBP One is essentially obligatory for those seeking entry into the United States under the ATA process.
In addition, CBP One is now the only way for asylum seekers who traveled through a third-country and arrived at a southwest border to apply for an appointment at a port of entry and maintain eligibility for asylum in the United States. The new regulation states that people who encountered technical difficulties with CBP One or could not access the app due to illiteracy or language barriers may be able to access asylum at ports of entry without CBP One. But, the rule fails to explain how officers would assess a person’s inability to use CBP One. In response to public comment about these exceptions to the obligatory use of CBP One, DHS suggests that those who seek to invoke the language barrier or illiteracy exceptions may have to meet a steep burden because “individuals may seek assistance, including translation, in using the app.”
Also, applicants may feel undue pressure to provide consent to CBP One’s collection of data. Immigrants seeking asylum often face harrowing journeys that all too often include being turned away from ports of entry into the United States despite expressing fear of returning to their home countries. These rejections by CBP often lead to immigrants being further victimized and persecuted while waiting in Mexico to pursue asylum in the United States. Thus, immigrants may fear that by refusing consent, they could be denied entry into the United States once again.
Available information about CBP One does not explain whether users are giving informed consent for the app’s collection of information. The app currently is available only in English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole. This raises the question whether noncitizens who speak other languages understand the app’s functions or warnings. DHS’ purported solution that users seek assistance navigating CBP One to register for appointments when there is a language barrier fails to consider that translators may not have the acumen to translate terms of use or privacy warnings to potential users.
Consent is also a key component of how CBP plans to use the self-reporting entry and exit feature as it expands to travel company operators. In DHS’ PIA, DHS explains that in the future, representatives of a travel company, such as bus drivers or plane pilots, will be able to use CBP One to submit information to CBP on behalf of “consenting” travelers. A September 18, 2018, report by DHS’ Office of Inspector General discussing a pilot program that CBP conducted to collect travelers’ biometric information noted that, in order to achieve the program’s full operating capability, CBP would rely on airlines to operate cameras and take passengers’ photos. This intended reliance on airlines to increase capacity raises concerns that private transportation companies will mandate the use of CBP One by travelers with virtually no input or opportunity for customers to deny consent.
Finally, questions remain about whether individuals know about alternatives to using CBP One so that their consent is truly voluntary. As the use of CBP One has become a requirement and the agency has failed to provide meaningful alternatives for the app, individuals have little choice but to consent to the app’s privacy risks.
Lack of Transparency About Future Uses . CBP’s webpage with information about CBP One is scant on specifics about how the agency plans to expand the app’s uses.
The future use of CBP One is unclear and various proposals that will expand the reach of CBP One should be consistently shared with the public if they materialize. The DHS Appropriations Bill published on July 28, 2022, for example, called upon CBP to work with USCIS and the U.S. Department of State to utilize CBP One for noncitizens to apply for asylum “from their home countries.” A prior version of the DHS PIA said that “CBP plans to eventually make the advance information submission functionality available to all individuals, including U.S. citizens, who intend to arrive at a land [port of entry].”
Similarly, DHS has failed to clearly communicate plans for future uses of CBP One in a single location on its website. For example, the agency only updated CBP One’s public-facing webpage to include information about the app’s use for the country-specific parole programs on January 6, 2023, despite the fact that the app was required for the Venezuelan parole program announced in October 2022. The information about this new use of CBP One, however, was shared in a distinct PIA that DHS published on the Advance Travel Authorization program and the federal register, which requires users to sift through complex government documents to learn details about how the app will function.
CBP One allows travelers to access certain functions of CBP more efficiently. Some CBP One functions may expedite processing of individuals at ports of entry. However, tools employed by CBP One may expose users to inherent risks, such as the potential for surveillance or the possibility that they may be disparately treated due to the inherent flaws within the app’s functions. In spite of previous assertions that users could opt out of using CBP One, the app has become essentially mandatory for individuals to access certain immigration processes with limited exceptions, creating certain exposure to these risks.
Unfortunately, official information about the app fails to fully address these concerns. The agency has not communicated clearly how it is expanding the use of CBP One and its functions, particularly as it relates to U.S. citizens. The need for clearer information is also imminent as the list of country-specific parole programs grows and more people are required to use CBP One. A clear description of how CBP One functions and in what contexts the agency is using the app is critical for a full public assessment of the app.
DAMN!!! Same as the Harris/Trump debate I can't get a live broadcast, although I had no problem with the DNC convention. I'll just have to wait for the commentary. The debates are not blocked by China, but by the American sources like CBS and ABC that limit the viewing to the USA, so even Canada's CTV cannot show it.
It may be that experienced people such as ourselves who are heavy into politics are not the 'first' audience needing to be reached. I don't know.
But, I have to be consistent. . .I wish for facts and intelligence - I don't need the baring of teeth all the time.
(To be clear, though I put my 'thoughts' here in this manner. . .they are not directed at you, my friend!)
(As I write this, I am listening to Tim Miller - calling out J. D. Vance for being an "extremist,' 'liar,' and 'bad person" and overall he thought Walz should have engaged him on those points. I can see that point of view too.) BTW, I did see this in the debate, but the discussion just did not have time to get that 'low-down.'
Vance just destroyed the democratic moderators so badly they had to turn his mic off. What a win for him. The pretense of moderators being anything but Democratic stooges was blown up.
I'll say this for him, Vance is, by far, the smartest person in the room. He's embarrassed the moderators and made Walz look like a chimp comparatively.
He's also much, much better than Trump at laying out Trump's own policies.
I just saw this tweet. It summed up my impression exactly.
CBS doesn’t think anyone sees this? When they ask Vance to respond, they load the question to shield Walz’s last answer. When they ask Walz to respond, it’s “however you want to respond, big guy.” And still Vance is in command.
I dont think Walz is that good of a debater , but the idea that Vance is "destroying " him is preposterous. Neither of them have melted down or made a faux pas.
but the idea that Vance is "destroying " him is preposterous.
Many Trumpites are still claiming Trump won the last debate against Harris so is it any wonder they're over the moon that Vance didn't completely embarrass himself. Personally, I thought Walz clearly won the debate but left a lot of opportunities to slam Vance for his lies and evasions on the table unused which was I think Walz's biggest mistake in this debate.
Walz said his people know him.. The district he represented voted against him both times he ran for Governor and shifted 20 points away from him by 2022 as he reached the final bat shit crazy stage of progressivism.
People arent going to be talking about this debate tomorrow, they are going to be talking about Trump's bizarre and disturbing appearance in Wisconsin today, or do you think, as he said, that Kim Jong Un is trying to kill him? He was going to say the leader of Iran is trying to kill him and had a brain fog. Later he said American soldiers traumatic brain injuries were "headaches". Even if he thinks that is true, what kind of lunatic would say that to a group of reporters?
People arent going to be talking about this debate tomorrow, they are going to be talking about Trump's bizarre and disturbing appearance in Wisconsin today,
If by people you mean CNN and MSNBC you are probably correct. The rest of America, not so much.
I would never trust my 'private parts' to trumpists! They lie and are untrustworthy! Don't want an abortion - Don't have one! Want a abortion - use the freedom to do so! (If you got that specific freedom)!
I don't wear eyeliner, but then again if I did trumpists would have not way of knowing. But, I don't. It would clash with my massive muscles. and body frame. 'Believe me."
So, 'nobody' knows whether or not the one-term Marine is wearing 'liner' or not! I really don't know. . . but it looks. . . like. . . something is going on up there!
The moderators was entitled to 'clar-i-fy' a point. And besides, it is chickenshit for a qualified member to want to squash facts and the correcting of how he answered. It's just whiny and listeners will heard and will continue in the future to hear it that way across the board! Look below. Crooked Donald won't be doing 60 minutes interview (Harris will do it on Monday next) because WHINY, MANIPULATOR CROOKED DONALD won't be able to con a national audience on 60 minutes air!
60 Minutes
@60Minutes
A Programming Note: 60 Minutes is scheduled to air a primetime election special on a Monday edition of the broadcast on October 7 at 8 PM. For over half a century, 60 Minutes has invited the Democratic and Republican tickets to appear on our broadcast as Americans head to the polls. This year, both the Harris and Trump campaigns agreed to sit down with 60 Minutes. Vice President Harris will speak with correspondent Bill Whitaker. After initially accepting 60 Minutes’ request for an interview with Scott Pelley, former President Trump’s campaign has decided not to participate. Pelley will address this Monday evening. Our election special will broadcast the Harris interview on Monday as planned. Our original invitation to former President Donald Trump to be interviewed on 60 Minutes stands.
Steven Cheung
@TheStevenCheung
Fake News. 60 Minutes begged for an interview, even after they were caught lying about Hunter Biden’s laptop back in 2020. There were initial discussions, but nothing was ever scheduled or locked in. They also insisted on doing live fact checking, which is unprecedented.
Given the stakes in this election, a lot of the discussion tonight seems pretty off point. Building houses on federal lands? Great. But will American democracy survive a candidate who refuses to accept the results of the election? Probably more important.
Walz, said at the Capital police were beat with American flags poles (while the flags were waving)!!!! Oh, say it isn't so! (Clutching my pearls and swooning to my cushions!)
Please Donald (Peacekeeper) Trump shake hands and be 'on-board'. . . and bring Vance along with you after November 5!
Goodness! It over already? It was a very fast debate. . .because it was so good! Credit to the participants for being grown-ups. I am sure the youth of America love this!
I loved it! It went quickly, I was on the edge of my seat really. Y'all saw me commenting throughout even though I had several real-world distractions. Walz was in the zone and electrifying!
It may have been refreshing that these two were polite to each other, but so what? Is anyone in their right mind going to predicate their vote in this election on the civility of the VP candidates?
It may have been refreshing that these two were polite to each other, but so what?
It shows that civil discourse is still possible - even desirable. I find it particularly telling that Vance made the effort when he could have emulated Trump’s schoolyard bully style. Clearly even he understands how off-putting that is for many voters.
So what? Well, I don't need figurative blood on the floor and may be the voting public (like me) doesn't need 'spillage' either. We often talk about the vitriol and the 'going too far' by this one or that one. . . well, this time a mic required shut off only once (J.D. Vance was trying to 'loud-talk' over the mods and got 'capped').
S/he whom would wish for civility should extend grace when it is staring us right in the face.
S/he whom would wish for civility should extend grace when it is staring us right in the face.
If this election is bothsidesed into civility Trump will be your president. His only chance is if he is normalized by the media, and that is what was happening tonight.
I disagree. Sorry, brother. We need civility. Or this nation is going 'bust.' We have to return to some normalcy as red/blue states are we are doomed to eat out of garbage cans when we succeed in recklessly dividing ourselves into two irreconcilable countries!
if this is a small start to that (above) so be it I say!
I am not normalizing Crooked Donald Trump; I am remarking on decency. And to that end, we were told Walz was nervous about this national debate so the first thing he had to do (will all that was on his mind) was not to eff it up. Second, to leave a good impression. Third to not have a 'clean up on aisle > >>. I am relieved he did so.
Even you said that he was "so-so" ( I thought the first question he was all nerves, but immediately got going to tearing afterwards) until the last 20 or so minutes. Also, I think Walz did a yeoman's job with his answers. He was not 'soft' on Vance, what he was - was himself! And I can appreciate that he did not fall or fail.
Brother JR, if Donald gets back in to the White House. . .it won't be because of any failure on Walz's part. As some talking heads are 'fond' of saying: V. P. picks/debates do not decide the top of the ticket!
Crooked Donald won nothing in my book. Not a damn thing. Of course, by the AM he will have written and said he did because that is what he does. But, that would be a lie. Walz did a tremendous service and in his own way Vance helped out by letting this one be decent. We need decency.
I will confide one thing: I thought Vance was going to attack the military record of Walz "live" and that was going to rehash and divide (create a spectacle) I was not wanting to see between vets. I really did not want to see that and was relieved that it did not occur.
So, it was a win.
Veterans arguing over what constitutes military service is well, 'bad' for servicemembers (we are a bonded together through overall experiences). Just imagine if someone decided it is. . .proper to divide Arlington Cemetery (segregate) buried servicemembers based on what s/he 'did' while servicing in the Armed Forces or whether s/he was combat or not. It cheapens 'everything.'
His only chance is if he is normalized by the media
Don’t worry, that will never happen. They might not be as bad as the typical rabid, triggered leftist, but Trump will never get a break from the media big brother.
I admit my twitter feed is left leaning, but a lot of people there hit the nail on the head, imo.
This debate talked about a lot of policies. Anyone who thinks this election should hinge on policies is way off course. This election is about Donald Trump's fitness for office first and foremost. Any debate that isnt illuminating on that topic isnt worth watching.
Anyone who thinks this election should hinge on policies is way off course. This election is about Donald Trump's fitness for office first and foremost.
Sure, but given Trump’s age, a vote for Trump may well be a vote for Vance for president. So, he still needs to find a way to be appealing on a personal level, as well as on policy. Currently, I think he has the worst favorability rating of any VP nominee, so he has work to do.
Ah! Now that is an interesting statement-observation: favorability. May be Vance was up to something there with the 'make-nice.' Hmmm. The chyrons keep referring to the civilly of the debate. . . so it worked!
On the real, I like and respect decency more than stupid entertainment!
"Anyone who thinks this election should hinge on policies is way off course. This election is about Donald Trump's fitness for office first and foremost."
Nonsense!
Policies are the most important thing of all. It's not about Trump's personality or his alleged fitness for office. He's already had a productive and positive presidency, so he is perfectly fit to serve a second term.
It is perfectly sensible. Trump is unfit for office and a pathological liar. It does not matter what he promises as policies, he should never be given access to the power of the presidency.
When faced with a normal, presidential, grounded, rational, patriotic team (Harris-Walz) vs. someone who is demonstrably unfit for office, policy differences are NOT the top priority.
When faced with a normal, presidential, grounded, rational, patriotic team (Harris-Walz)
That is an opinion with an I hate Trump chaser.
policy differences are NOT the top priority.
And yet they ARE for millions of Americans, including many independents. Many Americans are not one issue voters and the issue of Trump will be considered but not the only thing that matters.
Reading these comments makes it seem like some of you are watching different debates, the main indicator that Vance dominated is John saying “What are you watching? Neither one of them is "kicking ass".”
Agree 100% it was a good policy debate, couple of missed opportunities by both candidates. And I like how they stuck around and allowed the spouses to meet and interact.
It's a good debate. Walz did what he needed to and that to find the zone and run it. He did and reached the end-zone for a score. Rumor had it Vance was going to 'own' this lib. . . didn't happen. Indeed, Vance got 'schooled' on Obamacare by a 'coach' who was in congress during the processing of the Affordable Care Act (if I heard right that is) and 'creamed' on the proper "care and treatment" use of federal lands.
Both tried hard to be polite and likable which was nice, it's been a while.
Vance rarely answered a question and even when the moderators pointed that out, he still evaded or pivoted to "looking to the future". At one rough point, he said the moderators were fact checking him against the rules and said so out loud before they turned his mike off. Not a winning strategy.
Walz's answer about China dates was embarrassing for him.
Walz finally pinned JD down about the ACH facts vs the fiction that Trump somehow saved Obamacare.
Vance never supported a national abortion ban, ever, except when he was running for the Senate and published all those policy papers...
Walz had Vance in a headlock when Vance refused to admit that Trump lost and instead insisted Trump somehow participated in the peaceful transfer of power. /S
Walz said Vance's non answer (looking to the future) was damning. Walz's best moment.
While the debate was a slick show by JD and full of his lies, the debate will probably be judged a tie as a VP debate,
but the night belonged to Marcus.
Marcus was in a student focus group interviewed after the debate and questioned
just how many times JD Vance blamed America's woes ( real or imagined ) on Kamala Harris' failed policies of three and a half years.
Marcus pointed out correctly that per his HS US Civics classes, the VP has no executive authority to set policy, period. VPs get pet assignments and get to tag along sometimes.
Blaming Harris repeatedly in his closing statement was JD's version of ripping defeat from the jaws of victory.
They (did) indeed fact check him, he called them out for it, and they cut the mic.
I did not say otherwise, but complaining about his own blatant lying being fact checked was indeed proof that he was debating not on the truth but on his and Trumps wishes.
"He never offers details for how these plans will work, because he can’t. Trump’s promises are the needle in America’s collective vein ... Trump is cultural heroin. He makes some feel better for a bit. But he cannot fix what ails them, and one day they’ll realize it." JD Vance
This debate was refreshingly cordial, which will piss Trump off since it serves to illustrate what a cretinous manchild he is in comparison. The fact is, if you haven’t made up your mind on who would be a better President then you’re probably too stupid for this conversation amongst adults to have an impact. Those still struggling with this decision are more likely to make it based on who wore the nicest suit.
Was Jesus beseeching the government or his neighbors?
He's a shillbilly
If you don't have government you won't have a(ny) communities!
That's sacrilege!
[✘]
Vance will clean Walz’s clock. Gonna be fun to watch.
I'm thinking: eyeliner makes those blue eyes' pop! They're just gorgeous!
I used to think that it was maybe his lower lashes that created that effect. But then I saw him last nite and he wasn't sporting that "look".
lol
Not gonna happen. Not possible.
Already did..............
He did and now comes the attacks, excuses and justifications from our friends on the left.
Sore loser those folks ….
On the left is Vance 's actual Senate portrait. On the right is what the MAGA incels made him look like.
video of Vance pronouncing Haiti (Hate-ee) "hay-shuh".
Thicker hair, thinner face, higher cheek bones....hmmmm.....
We should critique the debate moderators too!
Walz, I am with you 'buddy.' Sending you 'plenty' calm, cool, and connectiveness!
Walz is already a clown and NOT answering the fucking question
Vance is failing already...
JD Vance is dressed like a Trump mini me.
"Kamala Harris Administration" - does not exist! Vance is a LIAR!
And now, Vance has stated "Harris Administration" for a second time. He is a twice LIAR!
She’s part of it FFS
The thing speaks for itself. She properly does not have an administration! FFS!
OMG....which policies did she put forward? You do know that a VP is there to fill in, right? They don't make any decisions
She has said multiple times she was the last person in the room. She had a hand in everything Dementia Joe did.
Yeah...I wish Walz had reminded him that there never was a Harris Administration. It's Biden's administration
It’s nuclear you dumbass not nucular
[deleted][✘]
Projection plus who are you talking to???????
Trumpists don't want no federal help, so. . . Trump/Vance should not promise trumpists in states any help. Remember REAGAN said: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Is 'dirty words!
Sad. Weird. But true.
I love that Walz is an 'easy' speaker! He looks 'collected.' More importantly, he seems to want to 'own' this!
Speak on: Mr. Walz. Weatherproofing? Interesting. (We have plenty lines buried under ground here in California - it works!)
Vice-presidents do not write Executive Orders! A candidate for V.P (Vance) apparently does not know this? Wow! Unfit.
To be fair to both men: They look relatively clean-cut and the colors are 'popping.'
Senator Vance for the umpteenth time: Will (Donald) be demonizing and putting immigrant children in camps? No answer (yet). Maybe, just maybe, Vance will find his way back to the question and allow us an answer.
Walz is Presidential. J D Vance has the vice part covered...
Vance 'read' the mods for fact-checking (or is that "clarifying?). Go figure (by Vance) so he thinks to try to fact check the mods.
So far this thing is kind of a waste of time. Pure talking points.
Meanwhile Trump had a mental meltdown in Wisconsin today, mispronouncing or misidentifying simple words and confusing the Ayatollah of Iran with Kim Jong Un. Trump said Kim Jong Un was trying to kill him.
video
'Brother' John we are 'working' here. Come on in!
Walz is having himself a 'ball'!
You don’t think he is? OMFG
Vance just schooled the moderators on immigration and called their bullshit fact check out.
So there was no fact checking? Well that just got the piss blown out of it!! Not unexpected.
It was 'clar-i-fy-ing'.
Bullshit
Spin it however you want, they fact checked him.
Clar-i-fying. That is what the moderator said and she was the judge for the night. Vance was a fool to bring attention to it. Whom effing ever in a debate has a problem with the truth or correcting of the record being told displays a lack of understanding about people and smallness.
I will call that s-it out every time.
V. P. Debate transcript : Excerpt.
JDV: Look, Margaret, first of all, the gross majority of what we need to do at the southern border is just empowering law enforcement to do their job. I've been to the southern border more than our Borders are , Kamala Harris has been. And it's actually heartbreaking because the Border Patrol Agents, they just want to be empowered to do their job. Of course, additional resources would help. But most of this is about the President and the Vice President empowering our law enforcement to say, "If you try to come across the border illegally, you've got to stay in Mexico, you've got to go back through proper channels." Now, Governor Walz brought up the community of Springfield , and he's very worried about the things that I've said in Springfield. Look, in Springfield, Ohio and in communities all across this country, you've got schools that are overwhelmed, you've got hospitals that are overwhelmed, you have got housing that is totally unaffordable because we brought in millions of illegal immigrants to compete with Americans for scarce homes . The people that I'm most worried about in Springfield, Ohio, are the American citizens who have had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris's open border. It is a disgrace, Tim. And I actually think, I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don't think that Kamala Harris does.
MB: Senator, your time is up. Governor, you have 1 minute to respond.
TW: Yeah, well, it is law enforcement that asked for the bill. They helped craft it. They're the ones that supported it. It was… that's because they know we need to do this. Look, this issue of continuing to bring this up, of not dealing with it, of blaming migrants for everything. On housing, we could talk a little bit about Wall Street speculators buying up housing and making them less affordable, but it becomes a blame. Look, this bill also gives the money necessary to adjudicate. I agree. It should not take seven years for an asylum claim to be done. This bill gets it done in 90 days. Then you start to make a difference in this and you start to adhere to what we know. American principles. I don't talk about my faith a lot, but Matthew 25:40 talks about, "To the least amongst us, you do unto me." I think that's true of most Americans. They simply want order to it. This bill does it. It's funded, it's supported by the people who do it, and it lets us keep our dignity about how we treat other people.
MB: Thank you, Governor. And just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status. Temporary protected status. Norah.
JDV: Well, Margaret, Margaret, I think it's important because…
MB: Thank you, senator. We have so much to get to.
NO: We're going to turn out of the economy. Thank you.
JDV: Margaret. The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact check, and since you're fact checking me, I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the CBP One app where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand. That is not a person coming in, applying for a green card and waiting for ten years.
MB: Thank you, Senator.
JDV: That is the facilitation of illegal immigration, Margaret, by our own leadership. And Kamala Harris opened up that pathway.
MB: Thank you, Senator, for describing the legal process. We have so much to get to.
TW: Those laws have been in the book since 1990.
MB: Thank you, gentlemen. We want to have -
TW: The CBP app has not been on the books since 1990. It's something that Kamala Harris created, Margaret.
MB: Gentlemen, the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut. We have so much we want to get to. Thank you for explaining the legal process. Norah?
You answered your own question. They weren't to fact check.
But JD told a blatant lie! Surely you don't think that should be allowed to stand
She fact checked him. Plain and simple.
Of course they do, those are their 'alternative facts' and they don't think anything, not even actual facts, should get in the way of the 'alternative facts' they've spent so much time creating and spreading through their rightwing fake news networks. I'm sure the amount of 'alternative facts', aka complete bullshit, that rightwing conservatives believe is far greater than any of us could ever imagine which is why getting "fact checked" has become an offensive attack on them akin to someone telling a fanatical evangelical that Jesus never existed. Facts and fact checking has become heretical among their ranks as is evidenced by the reaction, even here, of those on the right.
I posted a story in Sinners and buttheads or whatever because I couldn't push it to the front page without a photo which for the life of me I can't figure out how to post the right photo with the story but anyway Jon Stewart did a fantastic segment on their Bizarro World reality version of the former 'president'.
If you all get a chance would you check out the article if you can and vote it up and comment. Thanks
100% true.
Not true. Citizen of another country, not yet in the USA is more appropriate.
After cursory vetting by DHS and certifying the existence and willingness of a certified sponsor, applicants for parole or asylum, if approved the applicants must purchase their own airfare to designated US airports where they are thoroughly vetted prior to being released to their sponsor.
100% not true.
They can apply for green cards during vetting if they have reasonable prospects for employment, but since most are here on TPS they can only stay as long as their country is approved in 18 month increments. Deportment is more likely than finding a path to permanent residency.
What is the CBP One app and why is it controversial?
LOS ANGELES - During the vice presidential debate, immigration became a heated topic, leading to a brief microphone muting of both Senator J.D. Vance and Governor Tim Walz.
The back-and-forth focused on the CBP One app, a critical tool in U.S. border policy. Vance criticized the app, describing it as a way for migrants to obtain legal status "at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand."
However, moderator Margaret Brennan fact-checked his claims, pointing out that many immigrants using the app entered the U.S. legally.
"Since you’re fact checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s actually going on. So there’s an application called the CBP One app where you can go on and apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand," he said before having his mic cut off.
What is the CBP One app?
CBP One is a free mobile app launched by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in 2020 . Initially designed for simple travel-related services like scheduling cargo inspections, it has since evolved into a crucial tool for migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Today, asylum seekers must use the app to schedule appointments at U.S. ports of entry and submit their biometric data for processing.
While the app aims to streamline the immigration process, it has faced issues like technical glitches and limited access for migrants in remote areas.
Why is the CBP One app controversial?
The app has stirred debate due to:
Privacy concerns : Critics are wary of the app’s use of biometric data and GPS tracking, fearing misuse of this information.
Racial bias : Reports indicate that the app struggles to recognize darker skin tones during its "liveness" checks.
Access issues : Migrants without smartphones or internet access are at a disadvantage since the app is the only way to schedule asylum appointments.
NOTE : I do not understand the controversy or issues critics of this app have and are making (it is my first time learning of this app/program). Considering that some here may not be familiar with this app and 'situated' like me about it: Better to post the article and 'shred it' as needed.
Thus, this is a rare occasion for such a long posting. And it shall not become my routine .
What Are Some of the Concerns Regarding CBP One?
Issues with Photo Submission Leading to Disparate Outcomes. CBP One requires individuals seeking appointments at ports of entry and CHNV program applicants seeking to apply for travel authorization to submit a photo or “selfie.”
Individuals who try to get appointments at southwest border ports of entry must submit a selfie to ensure the submission is being made by a “live person.” These photos are stored in a “gallery” within the Traveler Verification Service (TVS) system, which is CBP’s matching service for “all biometric entry and exit operations that use facial recognition technology.” CBP added one more liveness check to the process in May 2023, as users who have been offered an appointment need to submit a selfie when logging into CBP One to confirm the appointment. During the inspection appointments at ports of entry, CBP officers will take a new photograph of applicants to “match” the new photo with the selfies applicants submitted through CBP One.
Applicants seeking advance travel authorization for the CHNV programs also submit a selfie with the app to conduct a liveness check. CBP uses the selfie to compare it to applicants’ passport photos and to compare it to other photos accessible by the agency to vet the applicant for law enforcement and national security purposes. The PIA describes the selfies’ uses as follows: CBP uses the selfie image for five distinct purposes: (1) to conduct one-to-one (1:1) facial comparison against the passport photograph previously uploaded to the ATA mobile application from the eChip; (2) to conduct one-to-many (1:n) vetting against derogatory photographic holdings for law enforcement and national security concerns as part of the ATA vetting process; (3) to generate a new gallery of ATA participants for facial comparison when ATA participants arrive at a port of entry; (4) to conduct 1:n identity verification once the participants arrive at the port of entry; and (5) to conduct 1:n vetting against known derogatory photographs for assistance in CBP’s admissibility determination.
CBP One’s photo capture function has proven problematic. Advocates who assist African and Haitian asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border report that CBP One is not recognizing the photos of many people with darker skin tones when the app is carrying out the “liveness” check. This issue, along with the lack of stable internet and modern mobile phones that support CBP One, has kept thousands of immigrants from properly accessing the app.
Additionally, there is the potential that the selfies submitted by applicants may be incorrectly matched to the photos in the CBP galleries and these types of errors disproportionately impact racial minorities, leading to increased screening and potentially negative outcomes should a technical error not be corrected. A December 2019 report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) found that false positive rates—the algorithms’ erroneous match of two photos of different people—were highest when matching photos of west and east African and east Asian people, and lowest when matching eastern European individuals. In a July 2021 report, NIST said that the quality of the camera and the environment in which the picture is taken affect the accuracy of facial recognition. Thus, the availability of CBP officers to check the accuracy of the systems conducting the photos’ comparison is vital to ensure racial minorities are not disproportionately impacted by the technology’s shortcomings.
Privacy Concerns . Advocates have raised concerns about CBP One’s photo submission requirements and the potential for the use of those photographs to surveil individuals. The agency sought to address this issue by stating the use of CBP One is voluntary. An email from a CBP official obtained through a FOIA request shows the agency assured the Office of Management and Budget that people “can still present themselves” directly at a port of entry. The new regulation on circumvention to lawful pathways clarifies that individuals can no longer simply present themselves at a port of entry.
DHS asserts that the app does not store any information locally on the device being used to access it or in the app itself, but that any information entered is stored in agency databases or systems. For example, the photos for some of these functions are sent to the TVS. The PIA confirms that some of this information, and photographs in particular, may be stored in government databases for up to 75 years.
By requiring travelers to submit their photos to access CBP One’s features, CBP is drastically expanding its databases of noncitizens’ photos and other biographic information. The wide collection of photos and corresponding biographic information generates concerns that CBP, other DHS components, and even local law enforcement could use this information for other enforcement purposes. In the PIA, DHS clarifies that the biometric information collected could be shared with other DHS agencies from the systems where the information ultimately resides to vet applicants prior to allowing them to enter the United States, and that such systems are also bound by privacy policies. However, DHS’ PIA fails to alleviate concerns that law enforcement agencies beyond CBP, including local police departments and sheriffs’ offices that may lack policies about limiting the use of such data, would be able to access travelers’ photos and other biographic information.
Further, CBP One’s ability to collect GPS location data is concerning due to the potential for this information to be used by law enforcement to track users. DHS says this risk is fully mitigated because the app captures GPS locations only “at the exact time the user pushes the submit button.” Recently, however, DHS stated that CBP will in fact store this geolocation information for a period of one year.
DHS’ explanation overlooks the inherent dangers of apps that collect GPS location information, a danger identified in a government-issued advisory. Guidance issued by the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2020 warned mobile device users to protect “extremely valuable” location data because it can reveal details about not only the user, but also the number of users in a location, users’ movements and daily routines, and can expose otherwise unknown associations between users and locations. The NSA also advised to avoid using apps related to location because these apps inherently involve the exposure of users’ location data, and further warned that certain apps may collect, aggregate, and transmit information that exposes a user’s location.
Location data from mobile devices is valuable to CBP because it can expose individuals’ private behaviors without their consent or even knowledge. In 2018, CBP purchased location data from commercial sources, as part of the Border Surveillance Systems implementation, which deployed various technologies to help arrest suspects and seize contraband entering the United States. CBP used this location data to track cellphone activity in unusual places, such as remote stretches of desert along the Mexican border, so that officers could arrest individuals after they entered the United States. CBP claims that the GPS location data it purchases is anonymized, but a 2018 New York Times report found that even anonymized GPS location data can easily be utilized to track and find individuals because the data can reveal people’s travel patterns and daily habits, including where individuals live, work, obtain medical care, worship, and attend political events.
CBP One’s “Terms and Conditions,” available after users download the app, informs users of the app’s privacy policy. However, users need to review CBP One’s lengthy PIA to learn that the data only should be collected when users choose to submit their location to CBP, and that this feature requires a “just-in-time” consent before such data is collected.
Users Are Being Forced to Use CBP One. Another major concern about CBP One is that its use is essentially obligatory for those seeking to be processed at the border and applying for humanitarian parole through the Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan (CHNV) program. DHS previously stated that the app’s use is voluntary, and the agency explains that users must consent before accessing several of the app’s features, including “just-in-time” notifications that require consent before the app deploys users’ cellphone’s camera or GPS functions.
A CBP official said in an email that “If someone cannot provide a photo, they can still present themselves to the [port of entry] directly,” but this is no longer the case. For example, the documents describing the Advance Travel Authorization (ATA) process for CHNV state that beneficiaries “must” enter their biographic information into CBP One and provide a photo. The ATA-specific PIA states the ATA process is voluntary, but it also indicates that the only alternatives for people not authorized to travel through the ATA are humanitarian parole or visa processing, both of which have different requirements that may be more difficult to meet for nationals of the selected countries who may be eligible for the special parole program. Additionally, Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian, and Nicaraguans who seek entry at the southwest border will be subject to the new regulation which also requires them to use CBP One. Lacking any other alternatives, CBP One is essentially obligatory for those seeking entry into the United States under the ATA process.
In addition, CBP One is now the only way for asylum seekers who traveled through a third-country and arrived at a southwest border to apply for an appointment at a port of entry and maintain eligibility for asylum in the United States. The new regulation states that people who encountered technical difficulties with CBP One or could not access the app due to illiteracy or language barriers may be able to access asylum at ports of entry without CBP One. But, the rule fails to explain how officers would assess a person’s inability to use CBP One. In response to public comment about these exceptions to the obligatory use of CBP One, DHS suggests that those who seek to invoke the language barrier or illiteracy exceptions may have to meet a steep burden because “individuals may seek assistance, including translation, in using the app.”
Also, applicants may feel undue pressure to provide consent to CBP One’s collection of data. Immigrants seeking asylum often face harrowing journeys that all too often include being turned away from ports of entry into the United States despite expressing fear of returning to their home countries. These rejections by CBP often lead to immigrants being further victimized and persecuted while waiting in Mexico to pursue asylum in the United States. Thus, immigrants may fear that by refusing consent, they could be denied entry into the United States once again.
Available information about CBP One does not explain whether users are giving informed consent for the app’s collection of information. The app currently is available only in English, Spanish, and Haitian Creole. This raises the question whether noncitizens who speak other languages understand the app’s functions or warnings. DHS’ purported solution that users seek assistance navigating CBP One to register for appointments when there is a language barrier fails to consider that translators may not have the acumen to translate terms of use or privacy warnings to potential users.
Consent is also a key component of how CBP plans to use the self-reporting entry and exit feature as it expands to travel company operators. In DHS’ PIA, DHS explains that in the future, representatives of a travel company, such as bus drivers or plane pilots, will be able to use CBP One to submit information to CBP on behalf of “consenting” travelers. A September 18, 2018, report by DHS’ Office of Inspector General discussing a pilot program that CBP conducted to collect travelers’ biometric information noted that, in order to achieve the program’s full operating capability, CBP would rely on airlines to operate cameras and take passengers’ photos. This intended reliance on airlines to increase capacity raises concerns that private transportation companies will mandate the use of CBP One by travelers with virtually no input or opportunity for customers to deny consent.
Finally, questions remain about whether individuals know about alternatives to using CBP One so that their consent is truly voluntary. As the use of CBP One has become a requirement and the agency has failed to provide meaningful alternatives for the app, individuals have little choice but to consent to the app’s privacy risks.
Lack of Transparency About Future Uses . CBP’s webpage with information about CBP One is scant on specifics about how the agency plans to expand the app’s uses.
The future use of CBP One is unclear and various proposals that will expand the reach of CBP One should be consistently shared with the public if they materialize. The DHS Appropriations Bill published on July 28, 2022, for example, called upon CBP to work with USCIS and the U.S. Department of State to utilize CBP One for noncitizens to apply for asylum “from their home countries.” A prior version of the DHS PIA said that “CBP plans to eventually make the advance information submission functionality available to all individuals, including U.S. citizens, who intend to arrive at a land [port of entry].”
Similarly, DHS has failed to clearly communicate plans for future uses of CBP One in a single location on its website. For example, the agency only updated CBP One’s public-facing webpage to include information about the app’s use for the country-specific parole programs on January 6, 2023, despite the fact that the app was required for the Venezuelan parole program announced in October 2022. The information about this new use of CBP One, however, was shared in a distinct PIA that DHS published on the Advance Travel Authorization program and the federal register, which requires users to sift through complex government documents to learn details about how the app will function.
CBP One allows travelers to access certain functions of CBP more efficiently. Some CBP One functions may expedite processing of individuals at ports of entry. However, tools employed by CBP One may expose users to inherent risks, such as the potential for surveillance or the possibility that they may be disparately treated due to the inherent flaws within the app’s functions. In spite of previous assertions that users could opt out of using CBP One, the app has become essentially mandatory for individuals to access certain immigration processes with limited exceptions, creating certain exposure to these risks.
Unfortunately, official information about the app fails to fully address these concerns. The agency has not communicated clearly how it is expanding the use of CBP One and its functions, particularly as it relates to U.S. citizens. The need for clearer information is also imminent as the list of country-specific parole programs grows and more people are required to use CBP One. A clear description of how CBP One functions and in what contexts the agency is using the app is critical for a full public assessment of the app.
Oh goodness, Crooked Donald has commonsense, Vance says. He can't believe that!
DAMN!!! Same as the Harris/Trump debate I can't get a live broadcast, although I had no problem with the DNC convention. I'll just have to wait for the commentary. The debates are not blocked by China, but by the American sources like CBS and ABC that limit the viewing to the USA, so even Canada's CTV cannot show it.
You aren’t missing much my friend, bloviating and exaggerating.
From the commentary I've seen I'd venture that this debate won't have much effect upon the election.
I agree. This will not move the needle either way. Pretty much the same effect as prior VP debates.
It may be that experienced people such as ourselves who are heavy into politics are not the 'first' audience needing to be reached. I don't know.
But, I have to be consistent. . .I wish for facts and intelligence - I don't need the baring of teeth all the time.
(To be clear, though I put my 'thoughts' here in this manner. . .they are not directed at you, my friend!)
(As I write this, I am listening to Tim Miller - calling out J. D. Vance for being an "extremist,' 'liar,' and 'bad person" and overall he thought Walz should have engaged him on those points. I can see that point of view too.) BTW, I did see this in the debate, but the discussion just did not have time to get that 'low-down.'
Where are Trump's tax returns? America wants to know (more)! Vance does not care about tax returns!
Vance just destroyed the democratic moderators so badly they had to turn his mic off. What a win for him. The pretense of moderators being anything but Democratic stooges was blown up.
That comment is spin. Mics are off when talkers won't let the audience reasonably hear. We, collectively, should not be petty.
Actually no, that's not true. The rules for the VP debate left the mics active but could be turned off by the moderators at their discretion.
Look at the smirk on Brennans face when she said America can’t hear you your mics were cut. It says it all.
As moderator she’s a joke. Just like Muir-cat.
Walz is 'versed' in the topics so far. It sounds 'regional' to him.
I'll say this for him, Vance is, by far, the smartest person in the room. He's embarrassed the moderators and made Walz look like a chimp comparatively.
He's also much, much better than Trump at laying out Trump's own policies.
Absolutely and knew it was going to be like this
That comment is 'small.' Men are not 'chimps.'
LOL. Both of them are doing boiler plate talking points. Vance is a little bit smoother talker, BFD. This debate will be judged a tie.
Walz is going bug eyed fucking crazy. And it’s fucking glorious
Vance is openly LYING about the media quoting his statement: 'Donald Trump is Hitler.' He said it. Now he flip-flops and LIES on the media.
Vance is killing it as expected.
I just saw this tweet. It summed up my impression exactly.
The bias is so over the top.
It's fair. But Vance's team wants special pleading (to LIE)! WHINERS ARE UNFIT TO LEAD.
I dont think Walz is that good of a debater , but the idea that Vance is "destroying " him is preposterous. Neither of them have melted down or made a faux pas.
but he's going bug eyed fucking crazy
the maga cult are fucking weird
Many Trumpites are still claiming Trump won the last debate against Harris so is it any wonder they're over the moon that Vance didn't completely embarrass himself. Personally, I thought Walz clearly won the debate but left a lot of opportunities to slam Vance for his lies and evasions on the table unused which was I think Walz's biggest mistake in this debate.
First question. What’s a Trumpite. Is that anything like a Kamalamadingdong?
Last question, how were the CNN moderators the best of the bunch?
If Green Bay supporters are cheeseheads, are Walz supporters now Knuckleheads?
lol …. Works for me
Walz said his people know him.. The district he represented voted against him both times he ran for Governor and shifted 20 points away from him by 2022 as he reached the final bat shit crazy stage of progressivism.
People arent going to be talking about this debate tomorrow, they are going to be talking about Trump's bizarre and disturbing appearance in Wisconsin today, or do you think, as he said, that Kim Jong Un is trying to kill him? He was going to say the leader of Iran is trying to kill him and had a brain fog. Later he said American soldiers traumatic brain injuries were "headaches". Even if he thinks that is true, what kind of lunatic would say that to a group of reporters?
"I'm a knucklehead" as an excuse when caught lying is going to have legs...
Trump is not mentally fit to hold office. Vance, who was mentored by people who want a dictatorship, could be president. Truly scary.
If by people you mean CNN and MSNBC you are probably correct. The rest of America, not so much.
[deleted][✘]
I love that there is no sitting audience. I hope all presidential debates cut-out audiences!
You dumb ass. Project 2025 is dead bullshit
It's their boogyman.
Heritage Foundation is the dumbasses for penning it. But, we won't belabor that point
I would never trust my 'private parts' to trumpists! They lie and are untrustworthy! Don't want an abortion - Don't have one! Want a abortion - use the freedom to do so! (If you got that specific freedom)!
Walz is good at this stuff!
Uhhhh no. Vance is chewing him up and spitting him out
I didn't think Vance had much of a future if Trump loses, but I think he'll be a contender in 2028 if Trump loses after this.
Vance couldn't bring himself to say Trump lost the last election. I'll give him this - he's got real MAGA street cred.
Walz: 'Pro-women. Pro-freedom."
Fun question: Is J. D. Vance wearing eye-liner (for real)? I don't know. But there is something there.
Only you would recognize that I guess.
Ms. Paul does wear eye-liner and 'mas.' It's a fair question. When Vance turns to the side the camera is catching natural beauty or 'Maybelline'!
What's that supposed to mean?
only orange spray tan is acceptable ...
I don't wear eyeliner, but then again if I did trumpists would have not way of knowing. But, I don't. It would clash with my massive muscles. and body frame. 'Believe me."
Jealous of what? All you have is your stupid insulting memes.
So, 'nobody' knows whether or not the one-term Marine is wearing 'liner' or not! I really don't know. . . but it looks. . . like. . . something is going on up there!
Perhaps it's because of the side by side with the old white guy with all the grey?....
It's a yes or no question, GregTx. Nothing other will do!
In that case, I have no answer. Apologies..
One “term” Marine?
Hilarious!
Actually, quite typical.
We have schizophrenic state and federal legislators is it any wonder that our society is cray-cray?!
The truly odd thing is how polite both debaters have been, neither is taking personal shots at the others. Been a while since that has happened.
Good. That is the adult way to talk. I can only wonder if Trump will be pissed. . . . But there remains time for s-it to occur.
That said, Vance might want Walz to run for president! Walz is wide-awake and I love it! The energy is good!
Yeah, that was quite nice wasn’t it? Kudos to both of them for that.
And there goes the fucking promised “no fact check” bullshit. A FUCKING GAIN
As said. Vance is kicking his ass
That comment is untrue.
No it isn’t.
What are you watching? Neither one of them is "kicking ass".
Neither is kicking either's arse, they're too intent on kissing ass.
They are being rather polite, aren't they?
Not only did he kick ass he overcame two blatantly biased moderators.
One noteworthy part was when Vance called out the moderators for lying to the audience, and CBS immediately muted him.
The first things the mods told us was there would be no "fact checking," then they tried fact checking Vance.
More on this in the morning.
The moderators was entitled to 'clar-i-fy' a point. And besides, it is chickenshit for a qualified member to want to squash facts and the correcting of how he answered. It's just whiny and listeners will heard and will continue in the future to hear it that way across the board! Look below. Crooked Donald won't be doing 60 minutes interview (Harris will do it on Monday next) because WHINY, MANIPULATOR CROOKED DONALD won't be able to con a national audience on 60 minutes air!
Walz is all the way "Live" up to this point! (7:21 PST!)
Awww....
Now Vance touts Kennedy and Gabbard. . . bring in the republicans who have been told they are RINOs. . . by Crooked Donald.
Walz, said at the Capital police were beat with American flags poles (while the flags were waving)!!!! Oh, say it isn't so! (Clutching my pearls and swooning to my cushions!)
Please Donald (Peacekeeper) Trump shake hands and be 'on-board'. . . and bring Vance along with you after November 5!
Pathetic....
Agreed!
Ya lost it Harris/Walz supporters
That comment is untrue, too.
Denial at play
Vance refusing to admit Trump lost was when Vance lost and was the moment that captured the notion Trump is a loser!
In your opinion, did Waltz lose anything in that debate?
Goodness! It over already? It was a very fast debate. . .because it was so good! Credit to the participants for being grown-ups. I am sure the youth of America love this!
That's what's called nailing it down....
That was honestly refreshing. They both behaved like gentlemen.
I loved it! It went quickly, I was on the edge of my seat really. Y'all saw me commenting throughout even though I had several real-world distractions. Walz was in the zone and electrifying!
It may have been refreshing that these two were polite to each other, but so what? Is anyone in their right mind going to predicate their vote in this election on the civility of the VP candidates?
CBS coverage of this is disgusting.
It shows that civil discourse is still possible - even desirable. I find it particularly telling that Vance made the effort when he could have emulated Trump’s schoolyard bully style. Clearly even he understands how off-putting that is for many voters.
So what? Well, I don't need figurative blood on the floor and may be the voting public (like me) doesn't need 'spillage' either. We often talk about the vitriol and the 'going too far' by this one or that one. . . well, this time a mic required shut off only once (J.D. Vance was trying to 'loud-talk' over the mods and got 'capped').
S/he whom would wish for civility should extend grace when it is staring us right in the face.
Brother JR, you are the Man!
in the big picture that is completely immaterial.
Well, crooked Donald may have to 'spank' his errand child over civilly. Waiting for the 'beast' to "growl in."
If this election is bothsidesed into civility Trump will be your president. His only chance is if he is normalized by the media, and that is what was happening tonight.
I disagree. Sorry, brother. We need civility. Or this nation is going 'bust.' We have to return to some normalcy as red/blue states are we are doomed to eat out of garbage cans when we succeed in recklessly dividing ourselves into two irreconcilable countries!
if this is a small start to that (above) so be it I say!
Now is not the time to normalize Trump. Talking about how "civil" this was does that.
Trump was the winner tonight because very little of it was about his fitness for office.
People who dont understand that need to rethink how they are looking at this election.
For posterity...
Why would it be? It was the VP debates
LOL
I am not normalizing Crooked Donald Trump; I am remarking on decency. And to that end, we were told Walz was nervous about this national debate so the first thing he had to do (will all that was on his mind) was not to eff it up. Second, to leave a good impression. Third to not have a 'clean up on aisle > >>. I am relieved he did so.
Even you said that he was "so-so" ( I thought the first question he was all nerves, but immediately got going to tearing afterwards) until the last 20 or so minutes. Also, I think Walz did a yeoman's job with his answers. He was not 'soft' on Vance, what he was - was himself! And I can appreciate that he did not fall or fail.
Brother JR, if Donald gets back in to the White House. . .it won't be because of any failure on Walz's part. As some talking heads are 'fond' of saying: V. P. picks/debates do not decide the top of the ticket!
Crooked Donald won nothing in my book. Not a damn thing. Of course, by the AM he will have written and said he did because that is what he does. But, that would be a lie. Walz did a tremendous service and in his own way Vance helped out by letting this one be decent. We need decency.
I will confide one thing: I thought Vance was going to attack the military record of Walz "live" and that was going to rehash and divide (create a spectacle) I was not wanting to see between vets. I really did not want to see that and was relieved that it did not occur.
So, it was a win.
Veterans arguing over what constitutes military service is well, 'bad' for servicemembers (we are a bonded together through overall experiences). Just imagine if someone decided it is. . .proper to divide Arlington Cemetery (segregate) buried servicemembers based on what s/he 'did' while servicing in the Armed Forces or whether s/he was combat or not. It cheapens 'everything.'
Don’t worry, that will never happen. They might not be as bad as the typical rabid, triggered leftist, but Trump will never get a break from the media big brother.
Never happen.
I admit my twitter feed is left leaning, but a lot of people there hit the nail on the head, imo.
This debate talked about a lot of policies. Anyone who thinks this election should hinge on policies is way off course. This election is about Donald Trump's fitness for office first and foremost. Any debate that isnt illuminating on that topic isnt worth watching.
Sure, but given Trump’s age, a vote for Trump may well be a vote for Vance for president. So, he still needs to find a way to be appealing on a personal level, as well as on policy. Currently, I think he has the worst favorability rating of any VP nominee, so he has work to do.
Ah! Now that is an interesting statement-observation: favorability. May be Vance was up to something there with the 'make-nice.' Hmmm. The chyrons keep referring to the civilly of the debate. . . so it worked!
On the real, I like and respect decency more than stupid entertainment!
Don't forget 34 felonies convictions...
That is a ridiculous statement
It is perfectly sensible. Trump is unfit for office and a pathological liar. It does not matter what he promises as policies, he should never be given access to the power of the presidency.
When faced with a normal, presidential, grounded, rational, patriotic team (Harris-Walz) vs. someone who is demonstrably unfit for office, policy differences are NOT the top priority.
That is an opinion with an I hate Trump chaser.
And yet they ARE for millions of Americans, including many independents. Many Americans are not one issue voters and the issue of Trump will be considered but not the only thing that matters.
The retort 'that is an opinion' is pointless. Almost every comment is opinion. Instead of stating the obvious, show why you think I am wrong.
The sky is blue. Water is wet. Offer something beyond a platitude.
I will comment as I see fit.
Offer something besides going after the poster.
And I will criticize the comment as I see fit.
As will I
This debate was pretty much a snooze fest, but Walz did come alive in the last 15 or 20 minutes.
Do you think his eyes widened to the appropriate amount? Or was it because his forehead wrinkled enough? Perhaps a combination of both.....
I was listening to the words and applied meaning from them and not looking for 'moments' to mock so petty. . . .
Reading these comments makes it seem like some of you are watching different debates, the main indicator that Vance dominated is John saying “What are you watching? Neither one of them is "kicking ass".”
I think they both did very well. I wouldn’t say either one of them “dominated.”
Agree 100% it was a good policy debate, couple of missed opportunities by both candidates. And I like how they stuck around and allowed the spouses to meet and interact.
It's a good debate. Walz did what he needed to and that to find the zone and run it. He did and reached the end-zone for a score. Rumor had it Vance was going to 'own' this lib. . . didn't happen. Indeed, Vance got 'schooled' on Obamacare by a 'coach' who was in congress during the processing of the Affordable Care Act (if I heard right that is) and 'creamed' on the proper "care and treatment" use of federal lands.
A few thoughts on the debate.
Both tried hard to be polite and likable which was nice, it's been a while.
Vance rarely answered a question and even when the moderators pointed that out, he still evaded or pivoted to "looking to the future". At one rough point, he said the moderators were fact checking him against the rules and said so out loud before they turned his mike off. Not a winning strategy.
Walz's answer about China dates was embarrassing for him.
Walz finally pinned JD down about the ACH facts vs the fiction that Trump somehow saved Obamacare.
Vance never supported a national abortion ban, ever, except when he was running for the Senate and published all those policy papers...
Walz had Vance in a headlock when Vance refused to admit that Trump lost and instead insisted Trump somehow participated in the peaceful transfer of power. /S
Walz said Vance's non answer (looking to the future) was damning. Walz's best moment.
While the debate was a slick show by JD and full of his lies, the debate will probably be judged a tie as a VP debate,
but the night belonged to Marcus.
Marcus was in a student focus group interviewed after the debate and questioned
just how many times JD Vance blamed America's woes ( real or imagined ) on Kamala Harris' failed policies of three and a half years.
Marcus pointed out correctly that per his HS US Civics classes, the VP has no executive authority to set policy, period. VPs get pet assignments and get to tag along sometimes.
Blaming Harris repeatedly in his closing statement was JD's version of ripping defeat from the jaws of victory.
Vance proved beyond question that he is a slick and accomplished liar. Trump wishes he could lie as convincingly as Vance.
You're right about Marcus. He was an All Star.
They indeed fact check him, he called them out for it, and they cut the mic. Bad moderating move.
I did not say otherwise, but complaining about his own blatant lying being fact checked was indeed proof that he was debating not on the truth but on his and Trumps wishes.
Opinion.
The sad thing is that JD Vance used to be normal.
Somehow, despite two horrible years of a pandemic which caused global supply chain issues
Vance now remembers those four years as the greatest economy the world has ever seen with zero inflation,
thinks Trump saved Obamacare and has now bought into all of Trump's plans, no details.
CMTSU
This debate was refreshingly cordial, which will piss Trump off since it serves to illustrate what a cretinous manchild he is in comparison. The fact is, if you haven’t made up your mind on who would be a better President then you’re probably too stupid for this conversation amongst adults to have an impact. Those still struggling with this decision are more likely to make it based on who wore the nicest suit.