Negotiators reach deal ‘in principle’ to avert shutdown

White House Considering Executive Action For Wall Even If Trump Signs Deal

The White House is considering using executive action to redirect federal funds for a larger border wall, regardless of whether Trump signs off on the newly reached bipartisan agreement to keep the government open, according to NBC News.

Separately, Trump is keeping the door open to declaring a national emergency to fund the wall.

So, Trump might well sign the budget deal, and then declare a national emergency to redirect funds to complete the wall.

the wall the dims want id one you can flick a switch or cut it's funding and it's gone. I see what they are up to. A wall is permanent and cannot be torn down.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Fox is reporting there is a high-level Cabinet meeting under way right now, supposedly concerning the new bill. If I were a betting man, I'd bet the farm that Trump is making sure his ducks are all lined up and ready to quack in unison.

I'm going to go out on a limb and risk my (imaginary) status as a forecaster of future events: Trump will sign the bill, then take Executive actions to appropriate funds because of the reduction in ICE bed space. He has a Constitutional duty to enforce the laws passed by Congress, so if Congress denies him the funds to do so, Congress is acting unconstitutionally. He would be well within his authority to take direct action to correct that, and have the wall built in the process.

TheRedneck

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

So, Trump might well sign the budget deal, and then declare a national emergency to redirect funds to complete the wall.

he tried
congress sees the need, the president and the legislature just differ on the extent of the need
potus will be well within his constitutional powers to exercise his judgement of an emergency

Is there any "comments" from The Speaker of the House ?

Like maybe The House won't "go for it" ?

😎

LOL Trump just said "Not Happy" 🤣

a reply to: TheRedneck

I agree. With the Democrats wanting to reduce the beds necessary for enforcement of existing laws, they basically handed Trump the rationale for an Emergency Order on a silver platter.

Congress is admitting there is a need for new Barrier plus the limiting of bedspace create ideal conditions for Trump to say "Congress didn't do enough" and presto, we have an Emergency declaration.

People act like Trump doing an Emergency would be a new thing......it's happened lots of times, In fact we are currently under some Presidential Declared Emergencies right now.

I see Trump signing off, so as not to shut down the government again, then issuing his Emergency and shifting funds to get more Barrier going up.

Based on Trumps call of "Finish the Wall" , I expect it to not be finished by 2020 so it can be a defining Campaign issue that year.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Fox is reporting there is a high-level Cabinet meeting under way right now, supposedly concerning the new bill. If I were a betting man, I'd bet the farm that Trump is making sure his ducks are all lined up and ready to quack in unison.

I'm going to go out on a limb and risk my (imaginary) status as a forecaster of future events: Trump will sign the bill, then take Executive actions to appropriate funds because of the reduction in ICE bed space. He has a Constitutional duty to enforce the laws passed by Congress, so if Congress denies him the funds to do so, Congress is acting unconstitutionally. He would be well within his authority to take direct action to correct that, and have the wall built in the process.

TheRedneck

But at his rally last night he said he would "never sign a bill that releases more violent criminals into this country." He'll have a hard time justifying signing this bill after that.

a reply to: network dude

Trump losing and border security are not mutually exclusive. Migrant camps and walls do not do anything to deal with the problem other than waste money.

a reply to: riiver

He could probably use the rationale that because of the declared National Emergency, the bill will not release criminals. I would consider that a dangerous gamble, though, as his signature would still be there even if some Establishment shenanigans were pulled on him.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Aazadan

I'd love to hear your solution to keeping illegal immigrants out.

TheRedneck

Here' s an update from MSN.com

It's what was previously reported, with $1.4 Billion for 55 miles of additional fencing. ICE bed space is kept at current levels. But if you read down to the bottom, it sounds like everyone is expecting Trump to sign the bill, then declare a national emergency and redirect other funds. And Republican leaders seem to be OK with this, as long as it is done legally. Trump tweeted out that they'd identified $23 billion total for border security (which would include more than just the wall).

I predict Trump will make "changes" and Congress will stall.

Hell-O shutdown 👉👈☝️👆👇🤘

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Here's an interesting take on Mitch McConnell's "Decepticon" caucus.

The usual suspects within the Decepticon Caucus (McConnell, Cornyn, Thune, Barasso, Crapo, Portman, Blunt, Gardner, Burr, Romney) and Richard Shelby held a press conference to announce the outcome of their DHS border security funding negotiations.

There are massive numbers of Republicans who view Senate Majority Mitch McConnell as a brilliant strategist and staunch supporter of President Trump. Unfortunately, those voices once again have to reconcile McConnell’s comprehensive failure on a Trump priority.

Yes, McConnell and Shelby successfully negotiated for less border security funding than before the shutdown.

Fortunately, POTUS Trump planned for the intentional failure of McConnell and his veto-proof construct. [Rest assured, thankfully, President Trump knows exactly who McConnell is.]

President Trump had anticipated the result and dispatched Mulvaney to review the granular DHS, DoD and DoS programs throughout fiscal year 2019 appropriations to assemble secondary funding.

Despite McConnell’s opposition; which is directly related to his CoC owner-interest in porous borders; the border security fencing/wall will be built.

Mulvaney Identifies $23 Billion For Use: theconservativetreehouse.com... -159957

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: riiver

He could probably use the rationale that because of the declared National Emergency, the bill will not release criminals. I would consider that a dangerous gamble, though, as his signature would still be there even if some Establishment shenanigans were pulled on him.

TheRedneck

Right. I can't imagine the roasting he'd get from the left if he signed it; even if he took an action that countered its effects, the fact would still be that he actually did sign a bill that released more criminals into the country and he would never, ever live it down. He's savvier than that. Really curious to see what happens next, though.

EDIT: Oops, just read down a couple posts and saw that the latest news is that ICE beds are kept at the same level. He probably will sign it then; he doesn't want another shutdown either. Even more curious to see what happens next now.

a reply to: riiver

Right. Latest word tonight is that President Trump will sign it.

Trump is just being Trump: www.politico.com...

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Aazadan

I'd love to hear your solution to keeping illegal immigrants out.

TheRedneck

Well, first of all you focus on actually keeping them out. Migrants from south of the border are leaving at rates greater than they're entering. Then, you target the areas that actually lead to illegal immigration. Only 1% of all illegal immigration in the US comes from the southern border, through open areas.

Most illegals enter legally on work visas and then overstay. The vast majority of those people fly into the country, those who don't fly mostly drive and go through official border crossings. Out of those who do actually enter illegally, the majority still get smuggled in through border crossings rather than driving across open areas of the border.

If you are actually serious about stopping illegals, you need to do two things:
First - Make it impossible for them to obtain or spend money here.
Second - Incentivize them to stay in their own countries.
Third - Take steps to protect the data of US citizens.

The first is a matter of policy (not sure exactly what area this falls under, economic, monetary, etc). Do away with cash, make all transactions electronic, and require payment for services performed in the US to only be able to be sent to US banks, in accounts where the account holder has been verified to not be illegal. Best of all, since it's all electronic, tax compliance creates a paper trail of who you employed and paid. By doing this, you can make it very hard for illegals to earn any money here which in turn reduces their incentive to stay.

The second is a matter of foreign policy. People often come here because their own countries suck. If we take steps to make their countries more stable and prosperous, they will have less incentive to come here. Take Mexico for example, 1/2 the country is owned by the cartels, and they have huge problems with corruption and violence. If we were to take steps that would weaken the cartels, then over time Mexico would become more stable, and fewer would come here illegally.

The third is domestic policy. Often times illegals are able to be hired, because the systems we use for identification in the US are not secure. SSN's for example are extremely easy to forge (which to be fair, they were never supposed to be used for identification). If we took steps to create cryptographically secure ID's for people, we would be able to cut down on fraud, including the fraud that allows illegals to pretend to be other people that are legal residents or citizens.

A wall, and even more Border Patrol (not that I'm opposed to BP as an agency, but to keep their high standards, mass hiring is simply not an option for them) do basically nothing to solve the problem. It's something tangible, and I get the appeal that has to people, but tangible and useless is still useless. Worse, it causes us to ignore the problem because there's now a physical symbol of it being solved, when the reality is that it was never addressed.

originally posted by: seeker1963
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.

It will be signed...let's go from there.

a reply to: Aazadan

Only 1% of all illegal immigration in the US comes from the southern border, through open areas.

Source on that one please.........

RE: www.thedailybeast.com...

Jimmy Kimmel must get his information solely from FAKE NEWS (Which is 90% of the MSM).

PROOF: www.dhs.gov...