I don't see anything here about DACA. Readers should be aware that there is NO statutory authority for the program, which is doomed unless Congress passes, and the President signs, a statute. The Circuit Court decisions will never survive Supreme Court review, because President Obama lacked authority to create the program to begin with absent legialation. The Democrats have missed a golden opportunity to protect Dreamers (childhood arrivals).
4
“There’s no one that said we should put a solid wall across our southern border,” she said.
There actually is such a person.
A person who repeatedly said exactly that on videotape.
I am surprised that Trump hasn't instituted a ban on both audio and videotape at this point...
2
If Amazon can deliver packages by drone, you can be sure that drones are also delivering drugs across the border. What good is a wall?
1
What happened to resolving the DACA crisis?
Have the democrats given up on them?
1
Dear Donald,
We know that in your much-hyped private life, a life full of wonderful scamming, grifting and bankruptcies, involved little to no negotiation with others writing the checks, save for a few investors that were somewhat skittish. The only oversight you experienced were the bankruptcy judges and trustees, and at one time, a state gaming commission and airline regulatory persons. There was no board of directors or external auditors. Basically, you owned the cookie jar and its contents with little interference.
So now, sir, welcome to the world of political negotiation, a world apart from the Trump Tower and your other palatial properties (most of those we commoners could never afford to visit). Welcome a world of oversight, of give and take, a world that your very name evokes laughter at times. A world where you, sir, do not own the cookie jar or its contents-that belongs to us, the people, and we entrust that jar and contents to, hopefully, individuals that have their wits about them-as opposed to you.
So, as you consume a little crow now that you no longer have a rubber-stamp house, remember, the majority of the people do not want your manhood edifice on our soil. We can live with more people and added technology.
One question remains, should you get your sacred wall, will you also militarize it as you buddy, Benjamin, does in Israel, and allow shooting across the wall (appears that is how that wall works).
9
How Republicans can completely spurn proven fact of real crisis to this country, like Global Warming, not willing to allocate a nickel to address the crisis, but spin-up a pseudo-crisis in the border situation that requires billions to address...is unconscionable.
7
Of course Trump has been flexible. WHO was the one making offers to the other side during the shutdown? Mr. 50% approval himself, Donald Trump.
OBTW, you have to be able to admit that even were the crazies to outlaw commercial aviation, the elites in Congress would probably not skip a beat as they criss-cross the country flying in jets.
Not only would the military still need jets but we have to have Presidents able to go anywhere necessary, and you know the Air Force owns all the planes Nancy Pelosi flies on when it is time to go inspect her estates' walls and fences in California.
She insists on those BIG Gulfstreams that don't have to land in Missouri to refuel.
5
Since when has the United States rewarded hostage demands? Extortion should never be encouraged, yet here we are.
1
TSA workers at the major DC airports could quickly end any future shutdown by all calling in sick on the first day thereof.
2
Isn't it ironic that a group named the Freedom Caucus would insist on a wall?
4
One man's "flexibility" is another man's "capitulation."
Trump is crumbling.
3
We have developed the “Bureau Of Motor Vehicles’ in every State and comply eagerly with all restrictions, appreciating the need for such regulation to keep us safe!
We need To transfer our willing allegiance to comply with the “Bureau Of Motor Vehicles”. Let’s put a required question on the BMV application, “Do you own a gun?” Then, Require All Gun Owners To Declare their Mental, Physical, & Performance Competency!
1
flexibilityy... I think that's the same word that Trump used about Stormy Daniels
3
Trump attempts to save face while Americans fall on theirs again. Groundhog Day.
1
Trump has hinted at the same thing in the previous budget fight. Then his favorite TV propagandists started chastising him for giving in and did and he about face and shut down the government! So, we should believe him now?
The current compromise budget must garner enough votes to override any veto to send a message to Trump that the Congress will no longer roll over with his every whim and will start doing the job it is supposed to, represent the American people and not just the extremists.
4
Donald has been confidently tweeting his adoring fans that the wall is under construction. Perhaps he'll now tie his decision to accept whatever money he gets to his lie about the big progress he's already made on the wall. Why not kill two birds with one stone?
I really think his rallies should be open with two songs, since they sum up the whole Donald phenomenon: Chain of Fools and Don't Stop Believing. He's toast if either of those things change.
1
At least we have a President willing to go into sustained multi-party political battle to uphold campaign promises. Al-thou funding can and most likely be repealed after his term. As a caveat to the deal all funding agreed to is to be spent by term end.
3
Why didn’t you refute the claim that nobody ever said it was going to be a physical barrier? The man himself said it explicitly and actively denied any suggestion it was metaphorical. If a source told you vaccines cause cancer, would you just print what they said and leave it there?
1
Finally, we seem to have gathered a few of the more reasonable members of Congress to work out a deal. If no one feels good about what they had to give up, it is probably as good a deal as could be had especially given that a bully sits in the White House. Lets get on with a comprehensive solution to the immigration problem.
1
No wall without DACA.
Trump’s on the ground. It’s time to kick him.
5
It is mindboggling that the Congress has authorized spending over a trillion dollars in the last 15 years for defending some distant countries borders, but would quibble over a petty sum to defend the US border.
3
Americans (including his base of supporters) should by now know that Trump can be trusted about as far as we can throw him. Now there’s a thought.
1
President Trump needs this wall more than the wall needs him - cornered by his supporters the President had no other option but to build it!
The President is so fortunate not to have an opponent on the outside who uses his characteristic presidential rhetoric and language. He won't have to suffer the ignominious accusation of "caving like a dog" to Nancy Pelosi. Maybe he'll learn something?
2
Wow! This wall will do so much! Prevent people from coming in on airplanes, and legal ports of entry. And digging tunnels under the existing walls!
Trump probably wants a wall with his name on it, and perhaps gold-plated edges. Maybe he'll have marble bathrooms for the immigrants who have been staggering for 1000 miles before being separated from their children.
Trump is a guy who has never, ever, known hardship. He got a 200 million loan from Daddy to start his "business."
His nickname of "Cadet Bone Spur" by Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, who lost her legs serving in Iraq, is spot on.
3
The insanity we are witnessing is astonishing. Let’s go back to the beginning. Trump ran for the Presidency as a publicity stunt. He thought it would give him a boost with his real estate deals and future television shows.
He never expected he’d win, so he played with his fans, promising them a ridiculous fantastical wall that would be paid for by Mexico. He enjoyed the cheers and applause that his racist riffs elicited. He loved the rallies. Still does. They feed his narcissism.
Now, he has to make good on promises that he never intended to keep. To save face, Trump has embarrassed the nation, put the whole country through unrelenting stress, ripped families apart, caused financial loss to many government workers and contractors, put actual governing on hold and it just keeps getting worse.
Why should the taxpayers give him one dime for a project whose main purpose is to satisfy his base - people who were conned into believing he was telling them the truth. We would be paying for a pathological liar’s racist fantasy. Yes, we need more border security. Not this, though. Not a wall.
7
Americans got what they voted for. The richest 400 Americans now own more of the nation’s wealth than the bottom 150 million. Part of this is the unlimited flow of immigration which directly impacts the underclasses. Any country with an IQ over 60 has a national identity card which identifies citizens and authorized residents. Without this you cannot make major purchases, get driver's permits or access any government services. You remain a "tourist." But, in the US, the unlimited flow of low wage workers has kept the pathetic minimum wage at the same low level for a decade. Americans cannot afford college education or health care other nations provide free. In other countries there would be talk of a revolution of the underclass. Americans, however, have given up on ideas of freedom or equality.
3
So no DACA of any kind, and he gets wall? What in the world.
1
I don't see the issue as money related but rather as intent oriented. In a world ever more dangerous there are concerns on both sides of the issue.
How this will be matriculated into the mindset of the peoples of the world will be far more telling than any funding arguments. Caution and wisdom is most important. We are still the hope for the world - don't lose it.
3
Thankfully, common sense prevails. Just because arguments against a barrier can be made, doesn't mean they're good ones. Not enforcing one area of contraband entry because it also enters elsewhere is nonsensical. That's just not how law enforcement works.
9
@AACNY
The trouble with "Common Sense" is that it is just common.
1
This is both perplexing and sad; conflating shut downs with national security and reaching compromises that don’t address the core issues. Let’s have an honest, messy, complicated conversation about the country’s very broken immigration system and how to fix it. But such a broad and complex topic had to addressed as a package deal not yet another piecemeal deal cobbled together to achieve some other shortsighted immediate gain. The civil service of the United States and thus the American people should never be held hostage to the executive and legislative branches being incapable of fulfilling their constitutional duties.
8
The heading reads: "Trump Gives Ground on His Wall as Border Deal Comes Into View". As usual this heading is only half truth, but if Trump says it, it would be reported as a lie. Pelosi who promised one dollar and called the wall immoral will be agreeing to the deal as well. So it is a compromise. Trump would have agreed to this deal a month ago, if Pelosi had at least agreed to this outcome after the talk.
8
He’s going to supplement whatever money he needs in an emergency order after this bill is passed.
Since Democrats approved some level of funding, he can make up whatever new emergency he needs to justify his plan.
5
Should a deal be gelling between Mr. Trump and Congress, someone better take Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh on a quick trip to some very remote area of the world where there is no outside communication and they cannot get on their smart phones, computers, or any kind of media to ridicule and deride the very insecure Mr. Trump for compromising and saving the government from another shutdown.
6
So during the SOTU the president talks about a "national emergency" at the southern border, and that was AFTER he refused to pay border patrol agents for more than a month, and now ... there won't be any wall of course, but ... the GOP is STILL not talking about passing Obama's 2013 bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill, which already passed the Senate by 68 votes, but the GOP House refused to even allow a vote on for five years ... ?
How can anybody who's paying attention still believe that INCREASING southern border security is actually a priority for Republicans, when Democrats already managed to pass a bill that would do so five years ago (a bipartisan bill, moreover), and the GOP during all those years did everything it could to weaken the southern border ... ?
The GOP's slogan to "repeal and replace Obamacare" with something at lower cost and that would cover even more Americans, was clearly as hollow as their "strong on border security" slogan.
9
"Faced with limited options and a looming deadline to prevent another government shutdown, President Trump is moving toward accepting a border security deal that would fall well short of his once firm demand"
Just come right out and say it: he's caving. As anyone who has been paying attention knew he would. As he invariably does when unable to intimidate his adversary with bluster, the appearance of money, or third-rate lawyers. Mr. Art of the Deal is all show and no go, big hat and no cattle, clueless about how to close a deal, incapable of nuance or non-binary thinking.
Please don't make it sound as though such an obvious faker and incompetent is "moving" on the basis of any sort of strategy or thought process. He chose the zero-sum approach, as he always does, and he lost. He'll accept what he's told to accept.
10
"Trump shows flexibility"
Is that really the best title? I couldve sworn that the meat of negotiation was always wall vs no wall, not the dollar amount, so the fact that the border wall is possibly included in a deal would more aptly signal that "Pelosi shows flexibility."
4
If the House Democrats let Trump hoodwink them into paying for a wall I will sit out the 2020 election. Let him fulfill his campaign promise to get Mexico to pay for his wall. It’s just a stunt anyway.
3
This picture says everything. The average age of these pols is about 76. Why can’t we have a mandatory retirement age of 72.
4
Nancy Pelosi said zero dollars for the wall, and Democrats should stick to that number. We didn’t endure a 35 day shutdown for a compromise that could have been done on a handshake in December. Trump tried, and failed. He shouldn’t get anything.
Other border security measures are fine. No wall. Not now, not ever.
7
Trump shows flexibility about his wall? Unless he gives you a written promise, do not trust him. And even then beware. He will change his mind at the drop of hat. Between him and McConnell they have created a very dangerous dynamic in the American political system that is changing people's behaviors from kind and decent to cruel and crude. Trump and McConnell are the perhaps the two most poisonous people around at the moment. It will take generations to root out the bad things they are doing.
5
From Art of the Deal to Artless Schlemiel:
how to negotiate wall funding from $25B all the way down to $2B in less than a year.
And Trump had better produce an IOU from Mexico that shows they're paying for it.
3
Neither Trump (nor the U.S.) needs a “wall”. What Trump needs is something he can use to appease his political base with and what the U.S. needs is more immigrants to become Americans, start businesses, earn wages & pay taxes, and have children to maintain the population.
5
"...the President had told him, “I can live with $2 billion."
But the President has likely changed his mind at least a half dozen times since then, while watching Fox News, taking abuse from Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh and cowering every time he sees Nancy Pelosi.
10
To my surprise, at the end of the day, Trump is again the one being flexible. He was the one that allowed the government to reopen the first time without insisting on everything he wanted. Per this story, he appears poised to do it again.
Is it “caving” to the Dems? Let’s not call it that. Calling it that is a barrier to future progress, for us Dems to gloat, and mock Trump for “losing the deal.” In fact, his flexibility allowed forward progress. That is good. That should be encouraged, and lauded. I hope he remains flexible for more bipartisan work.
If this trend can continue, potentially increasing, maybe he and Pelosi can actually get some things done this next 2-year term. I think that would be particularly likely if Trump is allowed to feel like he “made a deal”; we should de-emphasize that he was defeated with regard to his original desire of a contiguous wall.
10
@Doctor
Democrats' refusal to fund a barrier because Trump wants one doesn't really leave a lot of negotiating room. To Trump's credit he opened the government at great political cost to himself and will now compromise on funding. He is certainly behaving more reasonably than Pelosi.
6
@Doctor Maybe Trump is a student of history. He appears to have taken a lesson about being "flexible" from Germany and Japan at the end of WWII.
Let's hope this bipartisan compromise funds government to the end of the fiscal year, offers some immigration benefits to Dreamers & Haitians under TPS, and makes formally raising the debt limit in March unnecessary.
It's time to get back to regular order. Government workers, contractors, immigrants and citizens have suffered enough.
8
Trump will claim victory if the funding is anywhere north of the $1 that Pelosi said she was willing to give.
By the way, has there been updates on the status of DACA program recipients as a result of this negotiation? Again, if permanent immunity for these individuals isn't part of a bill presented to the president, he'll claim victory on this aspect as well.
5
Yes, give the fool a way out.
The very idea that he threatened democrats during his long-winded nothing speech and thinks OUR government is his own little plaything is beyond comprehension.
The Koch brothers and Putin really know how to pick them.
People in power in OUR political, legal, military and secret service complexes must get together and put he, Minister Pence and Traitor Mitch McConnell under citizens' arrest for abuse of power to await trial for treason against OUR democracy.
NOW it the time.
18
@njglea, the Koch Brothers (and ALEC, Chamber of Commerce, etc.) do not support Trump on immigration at all. Koch Brothers are completely opposed to all of Trump's immigration reforms and proposals (most of which are based on the recommendations of President Clinton's Bipartisan Commission on Immigration Reform, led by African-American, Democratic Congresswoman and civil rights icon Barbara Jordan). Speaking of foreign influence in elections, it was the illegal campaign finance donations from the Chinese to the DNC and Clinton for the '96 elections, via John Huang, that allegedly influenced Clinton to withdraw support for the Barbara Jordan-led recommendations.
The Koch Brothers appear to be getting what they want so far. Along with business-first/anti-labor wing of GOP, best embodied by now retired former House Speaker Paul Ryan, the Democrats are delivering exactly what Koch Brothers want for immigration.
8
@njglea
The Koch Brothers?
I hope this is just a Friday night joke.
I'm sure that you're aware that the Koch Brothers do not support Trump.
The Koch Brothers support open borders and the mass migration of low-wage labor and unlimited tariff-free trade with low-wage, low-regulation countries.
6
Given the bipartisan nature of these negotiations, another shutdown would surely signal the end of Trump's credibility (such as there is any). Let's hope the Talk radio pundits stay out of it this time.
5
Considering there is already 600 miles of wall, clearly fundamentally there is no real objection to walls per se, just Trumps, so a compromise is a good result for all.
14
The Dems should have a backbone and do what Mitch would do, shut it down and let Trump to be blamed. Sorry, not in the mood for any bi-partisan cooperation. It all falls by the waste side when GOP is fully in control with their marching orders from Fox and conservative radio.
12
How about the bill require humane treatment of refugees, children and parents, all the vulnerable people seeking what all our ancestors sought in this country. No gassing, no ripping babies from their moms, no incarceration of human beings convicted of no crime.
$2 billion for Trump Inc. Fencing Company might be worth it.
4
Donald, the so-called negotiator should start negotiating with Mexico for funding of his wall or he can fund it himself and put his name on it.
18
We can only hope.
1
The Democrats already put forward budget bills in the House and Senate that include increased spending on border secruity. The wall is a monument to ignorance and stupidity, not border security.
18
We do not need an environmentally devastating, bigoted, racist medieval border wall instantiating Trump's vanity scaring the Southern Border. Not a penny.
21
It is so interesting how short people’s memory is. For instance, this comment above.
I think we can all agree that Obama was not racist, yet large sections of wall were built during his tenure.
A wall, as part of a more comprehensive border strategy, has been used for a long time, has been built in various stages, and is none of the things you say.
I think you mean to say that you think Trump is racist. Yet that does not imply that everything he advocates is necessarily also racist.
5
“Bollard fencing” as the Democrats would like to call it is a tall steel-slatted wall.
6
Why doesn't Trump just lie about this too and tell everyone he got his wall? His supporters will believe him, the taxpayers will save billions, the government will continue operating, and we can use all that money we saved on border security measures that actually work.
25
Never have so many fought for so little in the overall budget negotiations while so many other problems go unaddressed. It seems to me that in some places along the border a physical barrier is needed in addition to augmenting surveillance and apprehension of illegals by using drones, electronic gear, and other technical means. Meanwhile, the vast bulk of illegal narcotics, trafficked humans, and other items passes through legal points of entry. ICE needs more scanners, more personnel, more cooperation, and better equipment to find the vehicles carrying contraband and people. Build a wall through that.
The president’s statements in the SOTU that we face a major invasion on our southern border distort the reality at the border and ignore real threats to our national security. He’s right that we should go after drug mules and people helping illegals to cross the border at places other than legal crossings. These helpers are making millions off the backs of the poorest, most vulnerable would-be asylum-seekers. Meanwhile, his own Trump Organization has employed undocumented workers at his properties, violating U.S. laws. And a jury has still not reached a verdict in the trial of “el Chapo”.
51
@bkbyers caravans of thousands of illegal immigrants that even Mexico does not want to retain is not a distortion to me. There's really nothing wrong with having a wall or "The Wall" except that Trump wants it.
4
Hello Ms. Haberman and Mr. Thrush,
Do we know if the detained children have been returned to their families? If they are still detained can the Red Cross or other charities visit them and make sure they have some verbal contact and story time or prayer time or some knowledge that there is an attempt to return them to family in US or unite them with their parents?
This would be a good follow-up story on how the funds are spent for this border activity. Thanks.
12
I live in California, I would like criminals to have a tougher time profiting off of drug smuggling. That means I would like more surveillance equipment at the border crossings and I would like Opioid and other drug treatment programs funded to reduce the use of illegal drugs.
13
The democrats in the past have called for and shown support for a wall/fence. Indeed, there are border walls/fences in place in many areas, and they have shown to be effective. Most of the USA supports strong borders - as well as legal immigration. The issue at hand is to control illegal immigration and correct immigration laws that encourage illegal immigration. Why is it so hard to address this issue - pure politics...
17
Faced with such an adversary like Nancy Pelosi, supported by the election of 41 House Democrats, Trump has no choice but to compromise.
He’s getting schooled on what it’s like to have a powerful House of Representatives do their constitutional duty to check presidential power.
Trump is weak and Pelosi continues to outsmart him because she knows how to use political power.
25
And not single piece of legislation is going to get by Trumps veto, dems dont have the votes. nice to be strong yet totally ineffective.
4
Trump’s shifting and mutually conflicting narratives about the wall is an excellent example of the totalitarian notions of “gaslighting” and “doublethink.” It is not just bad policy, it is (whether intended or not) a test to see whether United States is ready to become an authoritarian state: whether we will believe Glorious Leader’s words over, as Orwell put it, “the evidence of our own eyes and ears.”
14
Faced with certain victory, Democrats choose to lose, over and over. They have no guts. They have no principles. They have nothing. They're not actually against the racist dreams of Trump and his base. They don't actually care about the wishes of their constituents. They would rather hand Trump the right to declare victory and begin building his wall than to take a stand for anything. The entire leadership of the Democratic party in the Senate needs to go away. They are worthless.
7
No truer words have ever been spoken!
A possible compromise in Washington DC? It’s morning in America...!
2
So, let's get this straight, before the shutdown, the Democrats proposed $1.3 billion fro border security. Trump, and the so called "Freedom Caucus" insisted on $5 billion. No one budged, and the government shutdown costing the economy $11 billion.
Now, the so called "fiscal conservatives", and Trump, want $2 billion. If not, they will shutdown the government again. Which cost the economy roughly $325 million a day.
And why $2 billion, because it is higher than $1.3 billion. And, what number is decided upon, it will not be fro a wall.
So, 800,000 workers, thousands of contractor, and the economy lost $11 billion because Trump, Republicans and Democrats cannot play nice together.
By the way, Mr. Trump, you are not draining the swap, you just built a taller dam (or wall, if you may), to raise the level of the muck in the swap. And, at the same time, made yourself, and this country's government., look like fools both domestically and internationally.
The only good thing that came from this is that Nancy Pelosi showed that she will not be pushed around by Trump, and the GOP. I commend her fro standing her ground then, and now.
31
@Nick Metrowsky
"billion fro border security"
"it will not be fro a wall."
"I commend her fro standing her ground"
I commend you FRO your consistency.
The president is showing signs of strain. His base will turn on him like a wolf on a lamb chop if he is seen to cave in—once again—to Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The president will be seen as betraying his core—bad enough on the right—but far worse, he will be seen as being weak, perhaps even bullied by the hated Democrats, helmed by the Madame Speaker.
Additionally, his vacillating will be interpreted in an even harsher light: his forced 35-day government closure amounted to a tantrum because he could not have his bottle when he demanded it and all future threats will be seen as mere bluster.
The president may be losing his grip on the hard right and any concessions he makes to essentially the “deep state” will be extremely disappointing to those who hungered and thirsted for a prolonged discontinuance of a government they hate with everything at their command. The president represents chaos—anarchy even—and his blind zealots want to see America come down around the ears of everyone not tethered to his weird “stewardship” of state.
133
No sir, no base is changing or turning. We know our President is smart enough ask for double what he really needs to start.
6
no one nj is turning. dems dont have a candidate that would be even close to electable to even moderates
8
@AntiDoxDak Seriously? You believe this?
18
"I can live with $2 billion" - so could I, but the question is where is the money coming from and at what cost? As I say to my family in response to their ideas for spending money on more stuff, "Whatever you can afford." This country cannot afford to spend $2 billion on an ineffective border fence when so many more important issues need our attention and money, like health care, and infrastructure, and gun violence, and the cost of college education and job training and real tax reform. I could go on.
140
@DAK
Speak for yourself.
I can live with far more than $5 billion this year for more immigration control, and another $5billion for each of the next several years.
If not for a wall,
then for other real physical barriers,
plus more border surveillance devices,
plus more border patrol officers,
plus more systems to monitor visa overstays,
plus more ICE officers in the interior,
plus more detention facilities for illegal border crossers and visa overstayers who are apprehended,
and for so-called asylum seekers whose claims have not been proven.
11
@DAK
The sugar program alone is costing us 3 billion a year. Even if the wall is a waste, the amount is not just a drop in the bucket of the federal budget, but a drop in the bucket of federal waste.
Where I have been in the remote areas of the border, the traffic of vehicles, cattle ( moved from Mexico to illegally graze) and people is causing erosion and environmental damage to the US rangeland. They could just take it out of the bloated agricultural subsidy budget and it wouldn’t show.
5
@DAK If you can stop illegal immigrants, you could save all the money we are spending for them for free health care, free housing, welfare, education, etc. Al these people who created problems in their societies will come to this country and may create additional problems and we may be spending more money for law and order. So, a wall may save us many billions. Let us bring to this country people from all over the world who can contribute to this country as Trump wants.
5
“There’s no one that said we should put a solid wall across our southern border,” she (R) said."
Maybe next time, Mr. Trump could save this country a lot of wasted time, energy, conflict, and pain to furloughed workers and government contractors if he would only seek a lot of information first about what he wants to do.
In the case of his Wall, get lots of information first about how smugglers actually get their goods into this country (hint: it is usually through routine ports of entry) & how illegal immigrants tunnel under & climb over concrete border walls.
Second, obtain lots of information from security experts in our and other countries dealing with illegal border crossings, and get on the ground information from border guards, towns that have effective security and towns where more security is needed and how that town wants to handle it.
But we have a president who seeks no input of hard information and wise advice before making a decision, nor does he anticipate the consequences of his possible decisions and their outcomes.
What could possible go wrong?
77
I would take the position that Trump will not get any funds for even a millimeter of a wall until something is done, permanently, about Dreamers.
82
he offered a deal for dreamers to Pelosi. she refused it. I read that as trump is actually willing to compromise, while Pelosi feels she holds the moral high ground and refuses to compromise on anything.
11
@bored critic
A (purposely) misleading comment. Trump offered temporary protection for Dreamers in exchange for permanent wall funding. Pelosi was right to refuse. Any compromise with Trump that involves him following through on promises in the future is a fool's bet for the Dems (or the GOP for that matter).
50
Democrats are blowing an opportunity to get a deal for Dreamers. I don’t get it.
9
And I wouldn't give Trump the billions in a lump sum either. Give it to him in the "installment plan". If we have a fence erected around our house, we don't have to pay for the whole thing before the contractors start working. Neither should the taxpayers.
58
@Will K. "we don't have to pay for the whole thing before the contractors start working"
But you would pay for a fence around your house if you were a billionaire. Government is like a billionaire. It can afford a lump sum.
1
@Will K. And when the lawsuits over property rights come in, he'll experience what contractors and vendors experienced when he wouldn't wouldn't pay his bills.
2
@Will K.
Actually, he was offered $25 billion by Schumer last year. He turned it down because it was over a ten year period.
Give him a lump sum and you’ll wish you see any product for that money.
1
Give him a snow fence, if that will help him save face and avoid another shutdown.
3
Trump is not showing flexibility. He is simply trying to avoid the maximum possible humiliation.
Even if they end up building a pitiful little pile of bricks, he will claim victory and say it's saving us from an onslaught of crime and violence.
68
Can’t be
That onslaught comes from trump himself
2
@Gerry He has already lost and Ms. Pelosi has mad home look as foolish as we all know he is. With the newest revelations of his using illegal immigrants at his places of business, will he provide free passes to those workers and those he wants to exploit in the future? Just curious. ;-)
1
Kay Granger on being ok with intermittent border fencing: “There is no one who said we should put a solid wall along the entire border.” Really? How about the president?
11
I predict, at the last minute, Trump will again refuse to make a deal, so that he can keep the attention on him. It's his M.O.
9
so trump offered a deal for dreamers. Pelosi refused it. trump willing to compromise again. Pelosi, in her fanatical egotistical manner, because she feels she always holds the moral high ground, will not. ok, I get it.
10
@bored critic
Trump’s “deal” for the Dreamers was completely disingenuous. He offered no protections whatsoever, only to kick the can down the road.
5
@bored critic
Sorry if I missed it, but what "deal" was it that Trump offered? Surely it wasn't the one where he wanted a huge amount of money in exchange for temporarily agreeing to suspend his abusive policies. That would be as ridiculous as a kidnapper telling the victim's family that, if they paid up, they wouldn't have to worry about another kidnapping for 3 years.
1
The president will claim victory for this. That's like proclaiming the Los Angeles Rams the Super Bowl champions because they got allowed one touchdown!
1
There's a new word that Trump is going to have to learn and it starts with a C, no it's not collusion although that may be coming, it's compromise something he didn't have to do as head of his own company.
46
I'm taking a poll. are there any people out there who still believe in what I call a "difference of opinion"? that means you think something and I think something else. neither one of us is "right" and neither one of us is "wrong". we just have a different opinion. or do you believe, as I perceive, that your "opinion" is "right" and the other person's "opinion" is just plain "wrong"?
7
@bored critic
I do, as long as people don't confuse opinions and facts. I believe in facts, and as long as we can agree on the facts, I don't mind a difference of opinion on how to deal with the situation. For ex, if we both agree global warming is happening, we can have a difference of opinion on how to deal with it. But if one says it's happening and the other says it's a hoax, then one of us is right and the other is wrong. That's a fact.
13
@ bored critic all opinions should be based on facts not just what one thinks
2
At his campaign rallies Trump turned "Build a Wall" into a symbol of xenophobia and racism. Trump can have money for increased border security; he can repair existing structures, extend barriers, and put up fences; but he should get a dime for "Build a Wall". We don't build monuments to xenophobia and racism.
8
"“There’s no one that said we should put a solid wall across our southern border,” [Kay Granger] said.
Thus putting the final lie to Trump's and his cronies' continual assertions that border patrol people say they want a Wall.
I hope most of the $2 billion, if that's what it turns out to be, isn't for barriers. Or there's more earmarked for technology, personnel, and humane processing facilities.
2
It's one thing to cobble together a compromise. It's going to quite another to get it to pass the House. I for one encourage all Democrats to stick to their guns on this one. I want to see zero funding for walls, fences, or other physical barriers of any sort. $1.3 billion for border security - fine, if we must - but the bill should specify explicitly that none of that money may be used to construct new barriers. NO waste on pointless walls!
5
Not. One. Dime. for. The. Donald.
8
@ProBonoPublico
If only you realized that this also means at least one less vote for democrats. Americans in both their parties want their leaders to compromise.
2
Such a pittance for Trump after extorting it from his own people. 2 Billion Dollars is the same as 2,000 Million dollars.
Each American taxpayer will pay at least 14 dollars for this Wall of Hate.
Democrats; if you continue to be weak with Trump and his Mafia of Congressional Pirates, I'll be too weak to go vote for you any longer.
1
@ Patrick."Democrats......I'll be too weak to go out and vote for you" .......and that will get you/us four more years of trump. Brilliant. Sitting it out and protest votes. That's how we got stuck with with him in the first place!
13
Bob; the Democrats are falling apart here in Congress and especially in Virginia as a Conservative website has made them the biggest Trump Chumps yet. I'm sorry to write something you disagree with, but I was so alarmed at having a Russian White House that I walked to the polling place election day before it opened to vote. That election night I watched as Pelosi stood before the Psychlops camera and said she wanted "Bipartisanship". That pretty much did it for me.
As someone who despises Donald Trump and everything that he stands for, this necessary compromise sounds reasonable to me. It will not, I assure you, sound reasonable to Ann Coulter, Lou Dobbs or Breitbart News. To see these execrable people turning on our execrable president may just well be the political highpoint of the month for me.
15
@James Mazzarella
Agree. Can’t stand Trump. The compromise is reasonable. Conservative air head talk show hosts should not be influencing Trump and his cohorts. Shame on them for letting Federal employees go without a paycheck. The suggestion by our idiot commerce secretary that they borrow money to pay their bills is ludicrous. At 81 years old is good reason for age limits.
8
This piece quotes Evan Hollander, communications director of the House Appropriations Committee: "Democrats have insisted that a border security compromise not be overly reliant on physical barriers." That sounds good to me, but I'm a hopeless lifetime liberal. To self-described moderates, not to mention Republicans, "not be overly reliant on..." sounds so vague and wussy. Why not something along the lines of: "Border security is important to Democrats. Physical barriers are part of border security, but by no means the only part. We need a comprehensive program." Muscularity of diction is important. Well, in politics, at least.
8
Why I do declare, Ms Pelosi, I believe the man has lost this round.
8
Negotiate! Learn from big pharma. Offer $5 billion from the Treasury to the Fund for the Wall, conditional on a $5.5 billion kickback from the Fund for the Wall to the Treasury.
1
the best news here is that both sides are working together towards a compromise
8
With Trump in the mix, there are more than two sides.
1
Totally predictable that Trump would fold....and despite how i feel about it, imperative that the Dems give something...it shows that they stood up the the bully in chief, but can and will govern, which means compromise....taking that more conciliatory approach might lose a few left wingers but will get a Dem President and Senate in 2020....need to show competence....
13
I really love the photo of the six stacked layers of razor wire in Nogales, Arizona. Must have been ‘buy one, get one’ sale. Don’t say DJT doesn’t know a good deal when he sees one.
5
Oh happy day. After giving outrageous tax cuts to corporations and the 1% which have done nothing to benefit ordinary Americans, the deficit has been blown sky-high and future generations will pay for repubican fiscal irresponsibility. But hope is not lost: faced with certain defeat, our so-called president is displaying flexibility on what constitutes a "wall" and what his rabid base would be willing to accept. Yey. Thank goodness for the longest government shutdown in US history as so much was accomplished. Federal workers went without pay, the US economy lost $8 billion and putin and jinping celebrated the dysfunction of the US government etc. I just can't take all of this "winning".
16
Will he stop saying Mexico will pay for it?
18
We cannot suffer any more barriers in the Rio Grande Valley. The economy, environment, relations with our good neighbors in Mexico, and people who own property, wildlife refuges, etc., cannot stand anymore destruction! There are consequences to "wall" building - whether politicians call it "fencing" or "vehicle barriers." And, they are all catastrophic to the people dwelling along the Rio Grande. Walls are not effective and are easily climbed over, tunneled under, and flown over. Stop the hurt, Congress! Otherwise, you and Trump are colluding in destroying us.
45
Wait, the Freedom Caucus wants to spend more? Didn’t they used to care about the deficit?
19
now he will declare victory getting less that he rejected last year. tell him that the figure is zero!
4
Isn't this the deal that Speaker Pelosi offered Trump over a month ago? She needs to write a book. A good title would be "The Real Art of the Deal."
20
This is a bitter pill to swallow, but the Democrats had their chance to negotiate a path for DACA and immigration if they were willing to compromise on the President's #1 campaign promise: The Wall. Unfortunately the Democrat leadership has been outplayed by someone they claim to be a bumbling idiot. They are now scrambling to give him something knowing he can do it under a national emergency anyway, which he broadcasted loud and clear (twitter). 2020 will feature a party that has lowered taxes, moved industry back to the US, increased blue collar wages and built the wall. The Democratic platform of socialism (Green Deal?), illegals over citizens and a failed Russian investigation will be hard to watch.
7
@AntiDoxDak Really ? The WALL is Trumps legacy and now he isn't getting what he promised over and over to his supporters. He should do the National Emergency , then he sets precedent for the new leader in 2020 to do some actual gun control. Now that is a national emergency.
13
@AntiDoxDak
Mexico is paying for the wall remember. Democrats are not going to let him forget that. Why should we pay for something no one but his 30% base wants?
He is the master he needs to make Mexico pay up front for a wall that won't get built any time soon.
5
true, trump offered Pelosi a dreamer deal and Pelosi, in her typical egotistical fashion, believing she holds the moral high ground on everything, refused it.
4
Good... Settle this wall nonsense for now.. and lets all move on to more important things.
3
Once again the shortsighted Republicans act irrationally with hatred and now we will all have to pay ten dollars for Lettuce.
3
so you're saying you think it's ok to bring "non-citizens" across the border to pick your lettuce at a wage well below minimum wage just so you can buy it cheaper?
8
@PATRICK That is because you are content with letting illegals work for you under harsh, life compromising conditions, so that you don't have to pay them a living wage.
3
Once again the party of the weak caved to extortion.
Reality is the President is making legislative demands under threat of government shut down. Caving in to this sets a very dangerous precedent and confirms Trump's view of himself as a successful bully.
1
it takes 2 sides to shut down the govt
2
Trump's acceptance or rejection all hinges on one thing: Will whatever deal is presented to him meets with the approval of his muses: Coulter and Limbaugh. This is what the presidency has been reduced to.
6
@nzierler
keeping 2 people happy over millions of voters who don't want a wall. Coulter & Limbaugh are just pushing his buttons. Like playing a puppet with strings.
2
Democrats should not give Trump any wall money.
If they do, Trump will shut parts of the government down, with every appropriations bill, getting the same amount each time, until he has his $5.7 billion.
3
How about this, give the President $6B for border security and give another $6B for social services to asylum seekers and others fleeing oppression. This $12B to be paid for directly on a wealth tax on people “worth” more than $500M, with an escalating percentage based on the number of times and amount of discharge for each bankruptcy, personnel or corporate, said individuals are involved with.
2
Trump painted himself into a corner that he cannot escape. Whatever deal comes out of this negotiation, it is certain that Nancy Pelosi will extract the maximum political capital from Trump and use it to anger his base. The Democrats will now have excellent material to use against Trump in 2020. He didn't deliver. He promised them a gigantic concrete wall, 2000 miles long that Mexico will pay for. They will get a couple of hundred miles of fencing where needed, which is actually a good solution. I hope it's double chain link, no slats.
I'm all for practical solutions over political maneuvers, but with Trump in the White House, politics must rule until he is gone. He is just too awful.
15
We have to wait for the input from Coulter and Limbaugh before coming to any conclusion about Trump's position.
65
@Jim Don't forget Hannity. I totally agree, it is not about his "base" as much as it is about "HIS NEWS CHANNELS" , the only ones that don't have fake news. I said during the shutdown, "just call Coulter/Hannity/Limbaugh and see what they will accept!"
8
In the style of Trump:
No deal without deal for DACA! No cave!
13
What about a nice, white picket fence? And maybe some mulch and landscaping?
24
@Jeff M
Or, as a co-worker of mine suggested, a border MALL.
Security through shopping!
5
I'm for anything that embodies a defeat for Trump and his base. This boondoggle, premised on racism and sold on vicious lies, would be, if not for Speaker Pelosi's resolve, rising as a monument to bigotry and a permanent scar on the physical and moral face of the United States. We already suffer Confederate statues and praise of Nazis. Let's not add to squalor.
57
No more concertina wire like in Nogales, Texas.!
7
Last I checked Nogales was still in Arizona? Did I miss something?
2
What?!? I'm so frustrated with Democratic leadership. Why should we give him anything? If we give him $2B he'll claim victory, raise more money, and fly through 2020.
6
He’d claim victory even in the face of defeat. Always optics over all else with this one. Who cares? Everyone but his rigid base recognizes him as the charlatan he is.
16
@Dan - I disagree on this point. The "wall" is a sticking point even with his most rabid supporters. As recently as the SOTU, he promised "I'll get it built!".
Unfortunately, I think our best strategy in the next two years is WWTRD (what would the republicans do).
3
@RK
Look at it this way.
Trump is like a spoiled child who hungers for the proverbial bottle of warm milk. If he doesn't get it, we are in for another temper tantrum.
On the other hand, giving this spoiled child a half a bottle isn't exactly what he wanted but when he feels that's all he can get, he will calm down.
Wait a minute ! are we really talking about the tantrums and poor behavior from the president of the United States ?
What a sad picture. How much longer must we endure this nonsense ?
7
It's frustrating that immigration legislation is being hashed out behind closed doors. The public deserves a legitimate debate and substantive policy.
Our bomb-throwing president who has been employing illegal immigrants all along highlights the reality of the situation. American businesses are profiting from the status quo. The government turning a blind eye to this is incentivizing illegal immigration.
Meanwhile, it is extremely difficult to immigrate legally.
Americans should look in the mirror when it comes to illegal drugs, also. We are the market, and the demand is high.
As Mr. Leahy said, "It's the realism that's difficult." The American public and our elected officials need to be grappling with the difficulty of reality.
19
@Evan Meyers
They will debate the final bill in public but if you’re going to have candid discussions and negotiations you can’t do it effectively in public, when every little thing will get pounced on and made an “outraged” point of contention.
6
@George S
That does make sense, but I worry that the substantive issues will be punted yet again. It is pathetic that our public dialogue is so polarized and toxic, that civil debate is next to impossible. We need an informed, involved public for a functioning democracy. Instead of informed citizens, we are enraged, outraged, manipulated consumers being targeted for our dollars and votes.
4
Any deal with a physical barrier (America's Maginot Line) must include legislation that forestalls any future govt shutdown.
24
Congress needs to move forward legislation that would prevent government shutdowns. THAT would be a step forward - Trump will use government employees as hostages again and again if something is not done
29
How 'bout $5.7 billion for whatever, in exchange for Merrick Garland becoming the next member of SCOTUS?
That strikes me as almost fair.
25
How do you negotiate with someone who will say $2 billion is ok today and then tomorrow say only $5 billion will do? Trump is a waste of time. Four years down the drain when we could’ve been making headway on solving real problems.
83
@Tough Call And when the cost of his campaign-styled border wall was estimated at $15-70 billion, it's hard for Trump to claim victory in this. But he will.
7
@Tough Call sorry to correct you, but you meant to say 8 years down the drain.
Build that bollard fencing! Build that bollard fencing! Finally a chant all Americans can comfortably join in on.
8
@Leigh Mexico will pay for bollard fencing
6
Compromise. Let's get this done. In the total scale of the budget who cares. We will spend $85 million/per plane on J35 Strike Force Jet.
Lockheed stated that by 2019, pricing for the fifth-generation aircraft will be less than fourth-generation fighters. An F-35A in 2019 is expected to cost $85 million per unit complete with engines and full mission systems, inflation adjusted from $75 million in December 2013.
4
Which is of course built in the congressional district of Kay Granger (R-TX12), who's mentioned in this article.
1
@Sam, but Vermont's Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy is on the negotiating committee. And he would never agree to cut funding for Lockheed's budget-busting F-35 fighter jets to fund any other priorities unless he is still guaranteed that the F35s he wants based in Vermont's most densely populated area will still be coming to Vermont.
Leahy and "progressive" Senator Bernie Sanders have repeatedly made crystal clear that it is military Keynesianism uber alles, regardless of negative impact on health and home values of their own Vermont constituents. They never miss a photo-op with Vermont Air National Guard and repeatedly refuse to meet with the 1,000's and 1,000's of people in the F35's new "not suitable for residential use" zone. Conveniently, many of these single family neighborhoods, including elementary schools, churches, daycares, etc. are coveted for rezoning to higher-density and more intensive commercial and other uses by real estate developer campaign finance donors, such as Leahy's relative, Vermont developer Ernie Pomerleau.
That the people negatively impacted are mostly US citizens; working poor; working class; elderly, etc. does not matter at all to Patrick Leahy. So I would unfortunately not expect rational appeals regarding the cost of F35 fighter jets to help the Democrats reach compromise here.
1
Have the Republican Senators asked Ann Coulter os 1.2 or 2 billion is ok. Or do we get ground hog day again?
41
Trump, the "dealmaker" shut down the government over demands for $5.7 billion in wall funding and at best will get half a billion less than he could have gotten back in December without a shutdown. Not a great deal for him.
13
Monday, that still gives the President plenty of time to be manipulated by his media or just unravel the proposal on his own volition. I think he'll prolong everybody's agony as long as possible to keep him in the news cycle.
37
So much winning, MAGAs! Now file your taxes for 2018 and let us know if you change your mind about DJT releasing *his* tax returns.
21
@TomJ Yet the GOP was fighting that very same issue this week in Congress.
2
To think that the United States is going to take years to recover from a 30 day shut down of the federal government. all this for 2 billion dollars and a president who does not care about the everyday citizens. What needs to come to light is the deal cut to build 2 air craft carries at the same time.
13
The real deal is apparently with those in Congress used to forging bipartisan deals and not with the now defrocked emperor who practices the dark art of the raw deal. Let's hope this sordid exercise in autocratic rule ends as it always should have in the democratic legislative process of negotiation and compromise.
14
Trump is businessman.
He will do a deal.
He is running the entire Earth - Every Country right now....like a business.
He is running your life too...like a business.
The world needs businessman, not a college professor.
Sorry guys and gals.
2
Who goes bankrupt running a casino? Only a genius businessman like Trump.
32
Yes, he is a business man. And as you know in a business every dollar equals one vote. This is how public companies - at least the public ones - are structured.
But in a democracy by definition every soul is a vote (at least that is the way it should be).
And that is why it is wrong to run the country(ies) as a business. And that is why I do not understand why we we think a business person is good at running a country.
9
@Joe Paper trump is a bankrupt corrupt business man
10
Maybe I missed something in reading this essay, the Democrats give 2 Billion for the wall and in exchange they get nothing? Im a proud centrist and I know that politics is the art of compromise but if that is the deal I'm not any more pleased with the Democrats accepting then anyone farther Left is.
1
@Greg Jones Dems have to be careful not to come off as not offering any money for border security -- mainly for moderates. If they didn't offer any money the GOP, Fox News, and Trump would have then harped on them for being for porous borders yada yada yada. Of course, those on the right will do that anyways. Sigh
The WA Post is reporting that Trump will sign any deal put in front of him now, because he's decided to build his wall without Congress.
"In an interview, Trump’s acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, has said the White House is vetting options for accessing money without congressional approval. Mulvaney has said that such a contingency plan is in the works if Trump isn’t satisfied with what Congress produces, telling Fox News on Wednesday that “we’ll figure out a way to do it with executive authority.”
A national emergency is still on the table, too, though Mulvaney said they’re looking for options that won’t get tangled up in court."
This would be an unprecedented move and some would certainly call it one more step closer to authoritarian rule by a president who believes he answers to no one and can do whatever he wants.
58
There is a disconnect between the headline and the story. Nothing in the story suggests that Trump is being flexible on the funding. The article reports that the Freedom Caucus is wiling to accept a lesser amount. But that's not Trump. Perhaps a more accurate headline would have been "Trump Congressional Base Shoes Flexibility . . . "
3
@av I'm not entirely sure that would be more accurate ;)
Trump could sign this bill and then declare an emergency and take $5+ billion to build a wall. So the dems should not give Trump a partial political victory with this bill.
20
Well, the key semantic breakthrough is that whatever barriers are provided will be "...even better than a wall...".
The key conceptual breakthrough will be that everybody is going to listen to the experts from the Border Patrol about what is needed where.
The key political breakthroughs are that the Dems are, in fact, approving barriers and that Trump will take less than the 5.7B.
And, in fact, both the Dems ans Trump had to move on those respective fronts or be blamed for the next shutdown.
As an added bonus for the Dems- this insulates somewhat against the Open Borders calumny.
1
I fail to see any actual indication from the traitor that "shows flexibility". Are we to accept that the House Freedom Caucus speaks for the man that NO ONE has ever been able to speak for? I remain unconvinced and predict the usual stagecraft "event" when he's presented with a perfectly reasonable bill.
But I love optimism!
11
If $2 billion includes everything--drones, sensors, physical barriers (not concrete), more judges, a way to get kids out of cages--I say go for it. Dems agreed to $1.3 billion last time around. The stump speech wall would cost north of $25 billion. That's never going to happen, and now Trump's base knows it. $2 billion is a humiliating defeat for Trump and enough money to make some actual improvements to border security. Win-win.
14
The Dems should include a requirement that any discussion about more barrier above $2B immediately trigger a set of gun safety regulations that need to be put in effect. After all, which one is the real national emergency?
47
In the past Trump has shown both flexibility and intransigence, in turns.
3
I imagine the President would throw just about anything on the table to get wall funding. The Dems would be foolish not to take advantage of Trumps position. Ask for A LOT and then compromise in the end. Lets move on.
2
Maybe he can be taught. Encouraging.
1
Although I certainly don't want another shutdown, but any money for the wall would give Trump his bully pulpit to tell us "the Democrats caved"!
The Freedom Caucus and Trump's media prostitutes caused the shutdown, but it didn't quite go the way they expected. There will be endless videos of Pelosi saying "not a penny for the wall" if he gets $2 billion.
Trump should be forced to either shut down the government or declare a national emergency, both of which would lead to disastrous consequences for him.
We've been losing too long to let him lie about a win in which he lost.
Congress should unanimously pass a law that workers be paid concurrently during a shutdown. Call it dumb president compassionate leave pay.
14
One had to read this as a Trump 'win' since he'll easily declare that he held firm for a 'wall' and 'won' while Dems 'capitulated even if they gave him a lower price tag than he wanted.
1
@T.J. Pempel. He can say it, but the majority of voters won’t buy it.
2
I am convinced that the only reason DT has to have the $5.7 billion is he has already promised one of his construction buddy's the job. I had heard that one of the mock up builders was exactly that. The only things DT has any interest in are things that benefit him.
107
A Twitter Wall around the Twidiot-In-Chief would be incredibly effective in keeping the government functioning and in helping Americans understand that the border crisis peaked 19 years ago.... in 2000.
And it would cost nothing except Twitter announcing that Individual #1 had violated its terms of service by flaming civil unrest to prop up his failing brand.
Build The Twitter Wall !
137
Great comment, thanks for the morning giggle! I agree!
14
@Socrates
It’s not about and never has been about the cost of a wall or even illegal immigration in general which is extremely lucrative for business. It’s about exploding and destroying the welfare state which cannot possibly survive in the face of ever growing numbers of peasants and job killing automation.
1
As a very interested outside observer with definitely more blue than red sympathies, I'd appreciate being educated about a 'wall factor' that gets very little discussion...or perhaps I don't get the politics. Logistics are rarely mentioned. It's as if once five or six billion dollars is given then the wall is an instant fait accompli. Even with the President's very optimistic total cost estimation, actual total cost are several multiples of 5.7. How will this be obtained? By more drawn out debate? #2. Construction time : Years at best, with full funding, so even accepting the premise that a wall would be an effective preventative, that form of prevention is not even close to being an 'emergency response' . I don't get how a wall placates anyone.
78
@Blue noser--You're so right. Plus, the land for the fence must be acquired, and the landowners with border property are not thrilled to have to give over their property. Getting the property will itself take several years, as the government must first try to reach agreement to buy. If that doesn't work and they attempt eminent domain, the lawsuits will start. There will be no wall until well after Trump is gone from office. So much for dealing with a "crisis."
84
@Blue noser
That's right, you'll never 'get' a Grand Old Psychopath.
You have to be one to understand one.
The only thing you need to know is the political power of the Grand Old Psychopaths rests almost exclusively on their Machiavellian abilities to instill nationwide fear and loathing of imagined non-white bogeymen in the minds of their Whites R Us electorate.
The wall is merely a big, beautiful neo-Confederate monument for Trumpistan.
You're welcome.
82
@Blue noser "I don't get how a wall placates anyone." It's the thought (or lack thereof in this case) that counts.
This is what happens when you have someone who insists lies are truth and "truth isn't truth" (as his liar, uh, lawyer, Giuliani put it...).
21
Trump is obviously signaling that he does not want to again shoot himself in the foot. Give him nothing.
143
Charlie Brown, meet Lucy. She'll hold the football for you, while you kick.
64
Indeed, I would urge - as a Repubican - to take 50 cents on the dollar and move on.
There is going to be more appropriation battles before the election.
And the Congress could conceivably give more money in future than he wants now.
All folks know he is serious about border security.
And if there is a breach in the security - the finger is firmly pointing to the left.
3
@Neil You sound defeated, desperate, and as usual, ready to blame everybody but Trump for his foolish campaign promise he never cared about other than not wanting to back down and looking weak.
19
Neil, Donald isn't serious about border security. The whole "build the wall!" Was one big con! And the $5.7 billion he insists on, will not cover half of it.
There is no emergency at the southern border, it is another con, by the conman in the White House!
BTW didn't Donald say over, and over and over and over "Mexico will pay for the wall" ???!!!
11
@Neil
If he was serious about "border security" he would not ask for a wall. None of our actual border security issues can be solved by a wall. The only thing a wall would do is to slightly reduce the illegal entry into this country by the very small % of current illegal immigrants who could not afford to circumvent a wall (tunnels, ladders, wall-hopper-drones, airline tickets, .....).
3
"...they indicated that any number above $2 billion would satisfy them for now."
Fine...$2,000,000,001.
51
This whole mess is on the US Congress that does nothing year after year to come together on immigration policy. Maybe President Trump has forced their hands!
2
@mjpezzi
You really think so? Is “immigration policy” limited to just the southern border? As I remember, the last time a bipartisan agreement on comprehensive immigration reform came about, it was scuttled by republicans, with Stephen Miller (working for Jeff Sessions at the time) leading the charge. The same Stephen Miller currently whispering in trump’s ear now. What hands are trump forcing. Gm
16
@Albert D'Alligator
That's bad negotiating. You never give them what they Say they want just as you never "split the difference." Especially when the other side has nothing at all and is begging for a deal.
I'd offer $175,000 but only after he did about ten thousand other things (all calculated to stick it to the Republicans).
Trump would take it because he's on the hook for something anything he can sell as a so-called Wall, like a Ditch.
He'd think he was getting something for free if his deal cost the Republicans, but not him. The Democrats should be using Trump to destroy the Republicans but they're naive about power, thinking that it's unseeingly to use it when you have it.
Trump has a history of always making bad deals. He will pay far above market value just to say he's the great dealmaker, especially if other people do the paying. Trump thinks that selling under cost and losing on every deal to get sales volume makes him a top-dog salesman, but that's just order taking, which he then uses to sell himself as a great salesman.
His constant losing does not matter to him because he sells every loss as a win. That's why he can say, "We're gonna win so much people will say we can't take it anymore."
He's the perfect mark!
5
I do not understand why the media ever refers to the wall in any other way except as "The Wall That Trump Said Mexico Would Pay For."
301
@WLK Yes, I believe he might have mentioned that a time or two hundred.
25
@WLK
Perhaps Joaquin " Chapo" Guzman will offer to pay for the border wall in drugs or pesos in exchange for a Trump pardon.
9
@WLK The poorest U.S. citizens and legal immigrants have been paying for the lack of a wall through wage suppression due to plentiful illegal immigrant labor for a very long time. Those better off, like you and me, owe them the barriers and other security measures requested by the DHS, even if we have to pay for it.
2
So the House Freedom Caucus is now saying they will be "satisfied with any number above 2 billion." In other words, they insist on a number higher than what the Democrats offered, but the number doesn't really matter -- as long as it's higher!
The border barriers Trump wants are nothing but physical symbols of the racism and white domination that have sullied our country throughout its history. Can we not find some more progressive ways to spend 2 billion dollars?
186
And yet the media, including The Times, insist partisanship is equal to both parties. This is how we know the media is partisan.
7
@Standup Girl
Apparently it is not a real emergency then.
3
NO. Here's MY offer : Nothing. Let the " billionaire " pay for it. Or accept donations from his Fans. Period.
242
@Phyliss Dalmatian Thank you. The BEST way to get the casino license.
11
@Phyliss Dalmatian Yes, don't give them a freakin' penny for such an absurd waste of taxpayers' money.
11
@Phyliss Dalmatian Having his fans pay for it is a great idea but Mexico was supposed to pay for it and I don't think he has much of a fan base there.
24
Not in favor of any money for physical barriers, but if a compromise is to be, it ought to include an ironclad provision that eliminates government shutdowns once and for all.
217