Davin News Server

On 2025-08-21 03:53, NoBody wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 09:41:51 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2025-08-20 03:54, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:12:39 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2025-08-19 03:57, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 09:22:19 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2025-08-18 03:56, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2025 13:05:26 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-17 07:25, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 08:23:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-16 07:32, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 10:14:55 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-08-15 10:00, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WASHINGTON (AP) — Mexico sent 26 high-ranking cartel figures to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> United States Tuesday in the latest major deal with the Trump
>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration as American authorities ratchet up pressure on criminal
>>>>>>>>>>>>> networks smuggling drugs across the border.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Those handed over to U.S. custody include Abigael González Valencia, a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> leader of “Los Cuinis,” a group closely aligned with notorious cartel
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jalisco New Generation or CJNG. Another defendant, Roberto Salazar, is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted in connection to the 2008 killing of a Los Angeles County
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sheriff’s deputy. Other prominent figures have ties to the Sinaloa
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cartel and other violent drug trafficking groups.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://apnews.com/article/cartels-trump-administration-bondi-justice-department-712bdb8f99522ee72ec357492cfa393b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you libs pay no mind to helping reduce unwanted deaths and family
>>>>>>>>>>>>> destruction from drugs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They're certainly pulling out all the stops so you'll "pay no mind" to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the Epstein files.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Can you address to the topic please?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This was political theatre.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'll ask you a question:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do you think this will change the flow of drugs into the US?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes or no.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes I do and the previous efforts have paid off:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Both the number of migrants detected by United States authorities
>>>>>>>>> after illegally crossing the Mexico-U.S. border and the quantity of
>>>>>>>>> fentanyl seized at the border have significantly decreased this year.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Neither of which is in any way impacted by who is running the cartels,
>>>>>>>> and you cannot figure out how much illegal drugs are getting INTO the
>>>>>>>> country by how much is seized at the borders.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Laughter!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How much is siezed is a direct indicator of how much gets in.  And
>>>>>>> somehow in your head, removing drug cartel heads doesn't effect drug
>>>>>>> cartel heads....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the cartels come up with a perfect way of smuggling drugs into the
>>>>>> country, seizures would drop to zero... ...right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Laughter!
>>>>>
>>>>> Assumes facts not in evidence.  You'd best get to work showing us how
>>>>> they're getting more drugs are getting past the authorities.
>>>>
>>>> No. It assumes the logical extension of your claim that lower seizures
>>>> automatically correlate to lower amounts making it through.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You put out a hypothetical that doesn't exist.
>>>
>>> Duh.
>>>
>>> If you have a problem with the method of measure, make sure you call
>>> the AP to correct them.
>>>
>>> Laughter!
>>>
>>
>> AP didn't say a word about seizures and how they relate to how much
>> contraband got into the country, doofus. When it comes to seizures,
>> you're thinking about the link you provided (now snipped; imagine that!)
>>from Mexico News Daily.
>>
>> https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/fact-check-border-crossings-and-drug-seizures-plummet-statistics-dont-align/
> 
> You are correct and I erred in attributing that to the AP.  Oddly, now
> your theory is that I deliberately snipped an article that supports my
> position?
> 
> Laughter!

You snipped it because it presented two contradictory statements about 
what represents success in seizures.

> 
>>
>> And the fact that they draw erroneous conclusions by assuming a
>> correlation without proof really isn't my problem.
> 
> If you have an issue with their conclusion go talk to them.  Be sure
> to let us know what they say about your opinion.

They drew no such conclusion.

> 
> 
>>
>> But let's put back the situation you snipped:
>>
>> If less seized drugs prove less drugs are making it into the country...
> 
> The word you're looking for is "fewer".

Play grammar games!

> 
>>
>> ...then doesn't more seized ammunition and weapons parts prove more
>> ammunition and weapons are making it into the country?
> 
> It may or may not but since we're discussing drugs in this thread, I
> don't care.
I can see why you want to run away to grammar games.