It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Negotiators reach deal ‘in principle’ to avert shutdown

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 07:59 PM
link   


UPDATE

Democratic and Republican negotiators have reached "an agreement in principle" on a spending bill that would avert a government shutdown.

"We reached an agreement in principle between us on all the homeland security and the other six bills," said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).

PREVIOUS

Democratic and Republican negotiators said they were optimistic about striking a broad spending deal as soon as Monday night as congressional dealmakers sought to avoid revisiting another government shutdown at the end of this week.

Amid a breakneck series of meetings aimed at funding a quarter of the government and providing a bipartisan border security deal, the top spending committee lawmakers said they would reconvene late into the night to try

Negotiators reach deal ‘in principle’ to avert shutdown

It looks like a deal has been reached to keep the Federal Government open for business. Details of the agreement are not yet revealed and likely will not be in total until after the vote. However, word is that the ICE detention centers will receive either reduced funding or will lose occupancy space and that Trump will get a portion of the wall funding.

This does two things:

1) It allows the Dems to claim they have worked to release some of "Trump's prisoners" and...

2) Trump gets his wall funding

Is this a deal you can live with?




posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter


Would need to see the specifics to make an informed decision...

However to reduce occupancy space to house foriegn invadors suggests the Progs just want to allow them to run free. So hoping NO DEAL.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Is there a provision in there that puts traitorous politicians in Guantanamo?
edit on 11-2-2019 by Assassin82 because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:08 PM
link   
No deal.

I am happy to help the DACA kids, but no way should we release these illegal invaders into the country. Why is it Dems always want to release criminals into society?



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

only mention i saw of "funding for the wall" is 1.3 billion near the bottom of the article

The two sides are also still far apart on Trump’s demands for a border wall, with Democrats resisting efforts to fund new fencing but open to fixing existing barriers. The numbers discussed for border funding range from $1-2 billion, far short of Trump’s ask of $5.7 billion. House Democrats have begun preparing a stopgap spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security that could last all the way until September. Democrats discussed the idea on a conference call on Sunday afternoon, though no final decisions have been made, according to two aides briefed on the discussion. Speaker Nancy Pelosi was also on the call. But even a continuing resolution for DHS could be thorny, as Democrats consider trying to block efforts from the Trump administration to shift money around within the federal government to fund Trump’s border wall. A January Democratic proposal included new restrictions on the administration’s ability to build the border wall with money in existing accounts. Without any changes though, Democrats fear that any status-quo spending bill could still fail in the House. The new Democratic majority would be approving another $1.3 billion for fencing without any reduction in detention beds — which the White House has been pushing. “It’s a tough sell,” another Democratic aide briefed on the talks said. The other government departments that need funding are less contentious and could be approved more easily.
bad at math but that seems like a 5th of what he wanted ,we will possibly hear a response to this from his rally in Elpaso tonight , it would also need to pass the house and be signed by trump



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Logic.....

There are two villains, Trump and Pelosi. The first to "Work" with America will look the Champion and workable "For" the American people.

His bending to avoid a shutdown replay only benefits his cause and position. Pelosi gains nothing except her immortal hand clap.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Devil is in the details......not much info on actual things discussed.

I still see Trump declaring an emergency to continue building new border barriers/Walls/Peaches. There isn't enough money being discussed for him not to.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:00 PM
link   
going by his comments at the rally i dont think hes gonna go for the deal,and thats if it passes the house



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Yeah from his comments on the Dems wanting to reduce ICE beds, he doesn't sound like he has any interest in making that deal. He's really pushing the "criminal elements" idea.

EDIT: He just said, "I will never sign a bill that forces the mass release of violent criminals into this country." There ya have it. No deal. Dems, you're fired.

edit on 11-2-2019 by riiver because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

This does two things:

1) It allows the Dems to claim they have worked to release some of "Trump's prisoners" and...

2) Trump gets his wall funding

Is this a deal you can live with?


Nope.

/comment



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
going by his comments at the rally i dont think hes gonna go for the deal,and thats if it passes the house


He might go for it, but still declare emergency to build wall. I'm sure such an emergency declaration would eliminate any bed limitation as well.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

One of the news sources said it was the same 1.3 Billion dollar offer that has been declined multiple times.
Awesome the way the Donald is working that crowd in Texas!



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:38 PM
link   
At this point I hope he just says screw it and uses defense spending, and dump money in. Not just the 25 he wanted, but allocate like 100M at it.

Nobody is "changing sides" at this point. The lines are drawn and people are in their camps.

ETA: Shut down all border crossings for a month while he's at it, and put pressure on mexico to stop ferrying on these people from their poorly policed southern border.
edit on 11-2-2019 by MisterSpock because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock
At this point I hope he just says screw it and uses defense spending, and dump money in. Not just the 25 he wanted, but allocate like 100M at it.

Nobody is "changing sides" at this point. The lines are drawn and people are in their camps.

ETA: Shut down all border crossings for a month while he's at it, and put pressure on mexico to stop ferrying on these people from their poorly policed southern border.


Amen. If we quit letting them cross, that would be one hell of an incentive for Mexico to deal with them before they get here.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 09:54 PM
link   
It appears He is now saying "Were going to build the wall anyway" latest headline.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Plotus
It appears He is now saying "Were going to build the wall anyway" latest headline.


As he said : Finish the Wall.

Why Democrats even brought up the bed issue is silly. They have to know it's a losing proposition. I can't see Most Americans wanting fewer beds as a way of dealing with immigration and border security.

From reading articles, even the Senate Dems know it's not something they really care about.



posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

they just want the optics of when ice keeps arresting people but dont have enough beds.

and in a random tangential thought i propose a compromise,don't build a wall i know i know republicans mad at that mere statement but stick with me here . build a frigging canal instead from gulf of Mexico to California sure it may cost more money but it could make money!

power it with solar and wind and what ever and split the labor force 50/50 between us and Mexico and offer easier pathway to citizenship for any one who works on it illegal or otherwise

it would provide faster deployment time for our navy not having to sail down to panama, jobs and even throw in some green tech to make the hippies happy. charge tolls like panama does but less and then we get a frigging moat with added economic benefits,free up alot of border control funds to go to coast guard so then ICE can focus on actually removing illegals with reduced budget .

im sure the navy would love it,it would increase trade income via tariffs and what ever they charge to use said canal and we get a moat and it would fulfill one of trumps promises to increase infrastructure spending while countering illegal immigration and drug smuggling

other then cost any major flaws with the plan>?



posted on Feb, 12 2019 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I think the Democrats are playing into Trump's hand. Those beds are to house the criminals that broke the laws Congress passed. If the deal is accepted, that's $1.3 billion into the border economy, and a perfectly legitimate reason to call for a National Emergency when not doing so would release dangerous criminals into society. Then Trump can get all the beds he needs and the wall to boot, and the DNC looks like the pro-crime party going into 2020.

Oh, and I haven't heard anything about DACA in it... did the DNC leave them out in the cold again?

Check... and Mate.

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 12 2019 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

It's literally the exact same deal the Democrats offered back in early January, with the wall funding stipulating that it can only be for fences, just like last years funding, and the amount was reduced from the $1.6 billion originally offered last year (of which, 94% still hasn't been spent, and 50% hasn't even been allocated) down to $1.3 billion. And a reduction in funds given for detention centers.

So yes, I'm fine with it. It's literally no money for a wall, and all the controversial things Trump is doing are getting less funding. It's a total loss for him, and I am more than happy with that.



posted on Feb, 12 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan


So yes, I'm fine with it. It's literally no money for a wall, and all the controversial things Trump is doing are getting less funding. It's a total loss for him, and I am more than happy with that.


I wonder if you realize the stance you have taken here. You aren't at all concerned with any facets of the border safety, or lack thereof, you are only concerned with Trump not winning. I wonder if that attitude is more widespread??????




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join